10 months vs 4 years

I was under the impression that the BSN for Registered Nurse qualification didn't start until 2005?

Can someone direct me to more information regarding this change that is supposedly due to happen in 2005? Who's behind this and what will happen to the ADN program graduates?

It's happening in Canada. Entry level for nursing, in 2005, will be degree only.

But that's *entry level*. Those of us who are real old diploma nurses are "grandfathered" in the system, and will not be required to get a degree.

Most of the students I know, and who do their clinicals in my LTC facility, are in the university program now, and our local college has an agreement with the university to combine the courses.

http://www.possibilitiesproject.com/...1/nursing.html

Is that not professional suicide with the already severe nursing shortage?

They have plenty of planning time, so existing programs should be able to find and affiliate with colleges who either have nursing programs or are willing to develop nursing programs. And then, of course, they will need to modify their curricula accordingly.

I live in a rural state (KS) where we virtually have one BSN program in the western 3/5s of the state. We have a profusion of ADN programs in the west that train nurses for that end of the state. Those ADN programs would offer better mobility to their grads if they were BSN programs BUT I think the limitation is faculty. I haven't seen stats on the distribution of MSN and Phd's but it would be obvious to me, in our state, that they would be concentrated on the eastern half of the state. But that same school that offers a BSN has a very strong MSN program and so the problem is really Phd's.

In America, I believe two "restraining factors" against the BSN as the level of entry is the preponderance of federal funding for vocational programs (of which ADN programs are considered part) and the ability to have sufficient numbers of MSN and Phd prepared nurses to teach in and administrate those programs.

The idea that I would someday be "grandfathered in" didn't set well for me and was one reason I sought a BSN. But at this point, it is STILL a moot point.

I don't think that there is any doubt that unifying the entry level is a gutsy move but one that can have positive effects for the profession over time. I think states that make the move will have to use ITV and other technology to bring BSN programs to the localities so that small rural areas like those in my state can train their nurses locally without sending them "away" to the big city. (Although, I think personally for nurses, going away to the big city can give you a learning experience of greater depth and breadth. It is just not practical for everyone.) One of my biggest complaints about distance learning is that you still need access to a decent library and net based info still tends to be brief, superficial and of highly variable quality. So I think there is truly a need for "real" on line libraries that aren't just the card catalog.

I'm thrilled to see Ontario (is it?) go to the BSN level of entry. We can only hope it will evoke a little American competitiveness.

Actually most colleges are implementing the BSN program this year in collaboration with a partner university. Two year of college then two at the university.

-The Ontario College of Nurses is responsible for this change.

-The changes in curriculum are being made now, because if you think about it...new students this year will be graduating in the year 2005. At which point you'll need the BSN.

I know this because I'll be a new student this year!

Susie