Latest Likes For 777RN

Latest Likes For 777RN

777RN 6,444 Views

Joined Mar 12, '09 - from 'Detroit, MI, US'. She has '2+' year(s) of experience and specializes in 'Geriatrics, dementia, hospice'. Posts: 292 (18% Liked) Likes: 97

Sorted By Last Like Received (Max 500)
  • Feb 5

    Hi there!

    We're not allowed to refer to instructors by name on these forums. However, I did have a gentleman with five characters in his last name and a PhD, if that helps.

    Dr. 12345 was great!

  • Dec 16 '15

    Hi Windynurse!

    I am in the same boat with a previous bachelor's. Selecting an RN-BSN program is daunting, isn't it? So many programs exist. At first, I was dead set on attending Western Governors University, despite the flat 3.0 GPA, as the price and format are great! However, after further deliberation, I have decided I would prefer my GPA to more accurately reflect my specific individual performance, in order to be competitive for future studies.

    Have you looked at Southern New Hampshire University or Granite State College (GSC)? Both are in New Hampshire and require only nursing classes to award a BSN to nurses with a previous bachelor's degree. The SNHU program consists of five 6-credit courses, which is great and is similar to the University of Massachusetts–Boston online RN-BSN program (it requires recommendations and a clinical rotation in Boston, though everything else is online). GSC requires 7 nursing courses. However, neither program is yet CCNE accredited, being too new to have achieved such accreditation.

    I am also considering Ohio University and Notre Dame College, both in Ohio.

  • Sep 6 '15

    I appreciate your thoughts on this and agree with this line of thinking.

    However, I have heard that some employers, such as the Veterans' Administration and other federal entities, absolutely require a BSN. I read a story about someone who had to obtain a BSN after an MSN to satisfy VA requirements. While I never plan to work for the VA or the federal government, I also want to keep as many options open as possible.

    Still, though, the idea of getting another bachelor's doesn't sit well with me. I want to get the most bang for my educational buck.

    Thoughts?

  • Jul 24 '15

    Hello!

    My reply is not likely going to be very popular. It may be completely ignored and dismissed as nonsense by those not willing to look into the opposing viewpoint. Or, my post may incite, though it is not intended to do so. Nevertheless, I am writing to share another perspective ... one that you won't hear in the mainstream media.

    Whatever the case, I hope those who do take the time to read this will do so with an open mind. Please, use your critical thinking skills and good old-fashioned common sense. And, please verify everything I share here. Do you own research!

    So, with that said, I find the passing of the California law extremely disturbing at best and wholeheartedly sinister at worst. Why?

    Leaving vaccines out of the equation for a moment, it seems that everyone should be disturbed by the government mandating any kind of medical procedure upon its citizens. Whether one is for or against vaccines, I think we can all agree that any medical procedure carries at least some risk. So, if the government forces vaccines upon its citizens, who will be liable when something goes wrong? As nurses, we know that every vaccine vial insert comes with a long list of potential side effects (some of which can be life threatening). And, speaking of labels, a number of ingredients in a variety of vaccines are toxic, such as mercury and aluminum. Similar to the disguising of high-fructose corn syrup on food labels as simply “fructose,” vaccine manufacturers disguise mercury as “thimerosal.”

    If the government can force vaccines, what else can it force upon its people? Where will government intervention end? While this seem may like a radical example, what if the government, for whatever reason, decided to mandate that all people take arsenic or mercury? Did you know that, historically, arsenic and mercury were once first-line drugs used in allopathic medicine? In fact, President George Washington, who had the world’s best physicians at the time, died of mercury poisoning. Today, the prescription of arsenic or mercury would be considered barbaric (yet mercury is in many vaccines).

    The point is that evidence, scientific or otherwise, changes; also, it can and often is manipulated and controlled by the powers that be. For example, nutrition advice and evidence are constantly flip-flopping. At one time margarine was recommended over butter; today, the reverse is true. Similarly, ancient astronomers and the world’s greatest scholarly minds once believed the Earth was flat.

    We are constantly barraged with misinformation that serves a financial purpose for powerful interests, industries, and lobbying groups. (Does milk really help to prevent osteoporosis or does it actually contribute to it? Does sunscreen really help to prevent skin cancer or do the toxic chemicals it contains contribute to it? This list could go on and on ….)

    Did you know that as a result of years of lobbying and political influence, pharmaceutical companies cannot be sued for vaccine injuries? This liability shield has even been reported in the mainstream media. Yet, the VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) database is full of records and the VICP (Vaccine Injury Compensation Program) has paid out billions of dollars to families whose loved ones were harmed. And from where does this money come? Taxpayers. Families who pursue compensation and are awarded damages are paid by VICP, which is funded by taxpayers. Furthermore, the government has recently removed some VICP statistics from public view.

    Despite the complete indoctrination physicians and nurses receive in their education, training, and workplace regarding vaccines, a growing number of them (including pediatricians) are shunning vaccines and actively speaking out against them. Why would this be? There is certainly no money in fighting the trillion-dollar Big Pharma industry. Fighting the pharmaceutical companies is an uphill battle at best. No big-money funding exists on the antivaccine side. Yet, it is a growing, fervent movement of physicians, nurses, parents, pharmacists, etc. who have done their own independent research and have decided that vaccines are dangerous, ineffective, or both. The International Medical Council on Vaccination and Nurses Against Mandatory Vaccines are two of several organizations comprised of healthcare professionals who are speaking out against vaccines. Please, ask yourself why a physician or nurse would go against everything they have been taught to support such a cause when there’s no money in it for them? Some even risk their licenses.

    Having studied vaccines for decades, I could go on and on and on about specifics regarding why they may be dangerous, ineffective, or both. Instead, I’ll share some resources that provide such information in a much more engaging and eloquent way.

    Even if you only take a peek to know more about the opposing side in an effort to bolster an opposing argument, please consider the following:


    Thank you for your time.

  • Jul 21 '15

    Hello!

    Regarding the previous post, Aspen University is a for-profit school, most of which have bad reputations for good reason. Also, despite Aspen's CCNE accreditation for its RN-BSN nursing program, the school is not regionally accredited.

    Many erroneously believe that national accreditation is of superior status than regional accreditation. However, when it comes to higher education, regional institution-wide accreditation is what matters most. Ivy League, Big 10 institutions, and other prestigious schools are regionally accredited, not nationally accredited. Just to clarify, national accreditation, such as CCNE or NAAB (for architecture), is important at the program (not the institutional) level. Nevertheless, as a for-profit institution, Aspen seems far less expensive than most of its competitors.

    As others have said, WGU's pricing is hard to beat, especially if you work quickly and keep your enrollment to one year or less. However, Southern New Hampshire University (SNHU) is another really good option. As a previous bachelor's degree holder, all prerequisites are waived, so you'd only have to take five 6-credit, upper-division nursing classes to complete the program. I love, love, love SNHU's streamlined, no-BS approach. The University of Massachusetts–Boston has basically the same program structure, but it is more expensive. Also, at one time, it required local clinicals, though I am not sure if that's still the case. Your profile says you are from Massachusetts/New Hampshire, so the UMass clinical requirement, if still in extant, may not be a problem for you.

    At one time or another, I think I've researched nearly every online RN-BSN program in the country. I plan to enroll in an RN-BSN or RN-MSN program by January 2016. For me, it'll be WGU or SNHU. I like WGU primarily for the cost and the possibility of finishing very quickly (if I put my nose to the grindstone). However, I love the idea of only taking SNHU's 5 classes (and it is still reasonably priced at around $10K)! Both schools are regionally and CCNE accredited.

    Best wishes!

  • Jul 8 '15

    Hello!

    My reply is not likely going to be very popular. It may be completely ignored and dismissed as nonsense by those not willing to look into the opposing viewpoint. Or, my post may incite, though it is not intended to do so. Nevertheless, I am writing to share another perspective ... one that you won't hear in the mainstream media.

    Whatever the case, I hope those who do take the time to read this will do so with an open mind. Please, use your critical thinking skills and good old-fashioned common sense. And, please verify everything I share here. Do you own research!

    So, with that said, I find the passing of the California law extremely disturbing at best and wholeheartedly sinister at worst. Why?

    Leaving vaccines out of the equation for a moment, it seems that everyone should be disturbed by the government mandating any kind of medical procedure upon its citizens. Whether one is for or against vaccines, I think we can all agree that any medical procedure carries at least some risk. So, if the government forces vaccines upon its citizens, who will be liable when something goes wrong? As nurses, we know that every vaccine vial insert comes with a long list of potential side effects (some of which can be life threatening). And, speaking of labels, a number of ingredients in a variety of vaccines are toxic, such as mercury and aluminum. Similar to the disguising of high-fructose corn syrup on food labels as simply “fructose,” vaccine manufacturers disguise mercury as “thimerosal.”

    If the government can force vaccines, what else can it force upon its people? Where will government intervention end? While this seem may like a radical example, what if the government, for whatever reason, decided to mandate that all people take arsenic or mercury? Did you know that, historically, arsenic and mercury were once first-line drugs used in allopathic medicine? In fact, President George Washington, who had the world’s best physicians at the time, died of mercury poisoning. Today, the prescription of arsenic or mercury would be considered barbaric (yet mercury is in many vaccines).

    The point is that evidence, scientific or otherwise, changes; also, it can and often is manipulated and controlled by the powers that be. For example, nutrition advice and evidence are constantly flip-flopping. At one time margarine was recommended over butter; today, the reverse is true. Similarly, ancient astronomers and the world’s greatest scholarly minds once believed the Earth was flat.

    We are constantly barraged with misinformation that serves a financial purpose for powerful interests, industries, and lobbying groups. (Does milk really help to prevent osteoporosis or does it actually contribute to it? Does sunscreen really help to prevent skin cancer or do the toxic chemicals it contains contribute to it? This list could go on and on ….)

    Did you know that as a result of years of lobbying and political influence, pharmaceutical companies cannot be sued for vaccine injuries? This liability shield has even been reported in the mainstream media. Yet, the VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) database is full of records and the VICP (Vaccine Injury Compensation Program) has paid out billions of dollars to families whose loved ones were harmed. And from where does this money come? Taxpayers. Families who pursue compensation and are awarded damages are paid by VICP, which is funded by taxpayers. Furthermore, the government has recently removed some VICP statistics from public view.

    Despite the complete indoctrination physicians and nurses receive in their education, training, and workplace regarding vaccines, a growing number of them (including pediatricians) are shunning vaccines and actively speaking out against them. Why would this be? There is certainly no money in fighting the trillion-dollar Big Pharma industry. Fighting the pharmaceutical companies is an uphill battle at best. No big-money funding exists on the antivaccine side. Yet, it is a growing, fervent movement of physicians, nurses, parents, pharmacists, etc. who have done their own independent research and have decided that vaccines are dangerous, ineffective, or both. The International Medical Council on Vaccination and Nurses Against Mandatory Vaccines are two of several organizations comprised of healthcare professionals who are speaking out against vaccines. Please, ask yourself why a physician or nurse would go against everything they have been taught to support such a cause when there’s no money in it for them? Some even risk their licenses.

    Having studied vaccines for decades, I could go on and on and on about specifics regarding why they may be dangerous, ineffective, or both. Instead, I’ll share some resources that provide such information in a much more engaging and eloquent way.

    Even if you only take a peek to know more about the opposing side in an effort to bolster an opposing argument, please consider the following:


    Thank you for your time.

  • Jul 6 '15

    After I finish the ADN program in which I'm currently enrolled, I'm seriously looking at attending this school for the RN-BSN or RN-MSN program, as I love the competency-based/test-out format.

    That said, does anyone know how WGU evaluates CLEP credit? I have obtained MANY college credits via CLEP. Would I have to retake WGU assessments for all of my CLEP credit or do they accept CLEP credit outright?

    Thanks in advance?

  • Jul 6 '15

    Hello!

    My reply is not likely going to be very popular. It may be completely ignored and dismissed as nonsense by those not willing to look into the opposing viewpoint. Or, my post may incite, though it is not intended to do so. Nevertheless, I am writing to share another perspective ... one that you won't hear in the mainstream media.

    Whatever the case, I hope those who do take the time to read this will do so with an open mind. Please, use your critical thinking skills and good old-fashioned common sense. And, please verify everything I share here. Do you own research!

    So, with that said, I find the passing of the California law extremely disturbing at best and wholeheartedly sinister at worst. Why?

    Leaving vaccines out of the equation for a moment, it seems that everyone should be disturbed by the government mandating any kind of medical procedure upon its citizens. Whether one is for or against vaccines, I think we can all agree that any medical procedure carries at least some risk. So, if the government forces vaccines upon its citizens, who will be liable when something goes wrong? As nurses, we know that every vaccine vial insert comes with a long list of potential side effects (some of which can be life threatening). And, speaking of labels, a number of ingredients in a variety of vaccines are toxic, such as mercury and aluminum. Similar to the disguising of high-fructose corn syrup on food labels as simply “fructose,” vaccine manufacturers disguise mercury as “thimerosal.”

    If the government can force vaccines, what else can it force upon its people? Where will government intervention end? While this seem may like a radical example, what if the government, for whatever reason, decided to mandate that all people take arsenic or mercury? Did you know that, historically, arsenic and mercury were once first-line drugs used in allopathic medicine? In fact, President George Washington, who had the world’s best physicians at the time, died of mercury poisoning. Today, the prescription of arsenic or mercury would be considered barbaric (yet mercury is in many vaccines).

    The point is that evidence, scientific or otherwise, changes; also, it can and often is manipulated and controlled by the powers that be. For example, nutrition advice and evidence are constantly flip-flopping. At one time margarine was recommended over butter; today, the reverse is true. Similarly, ancient astronomers and the world’s greatest scholarly minds once believed the Earth was flat.

    We are constantly barraged with misinformation that serves a financial purpose for powerful interests, industries, and lobbying groups. (Does milk really help to prevent osteoporosis or does it actually contribute to it? Does sunscreen really help to prevent skin cancer or do the toxic chemicals it contains contribute to it? This list could go on and on ….)

    Did you know that as a result of years of lobbying and political influence, pharmaceutical companies cannot be sued for vaccine injuries? This liability shield has even been reported in the mainstream media. Yet, the VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) database is full of records and the VICP (Vaccine Injury Compensation Program) has paid out billions of dollars to families whose loved ones were harmed. And from where does this money come? Taxpayers. Families who pursue compensation and are awarded damages are paid by VICP, which is funded by taxpayers. Furthermore, the government has recently removed some VICP statistics from public view.

    Despite the complete indoctrination physicians and nurses receive in their education, training, and workplace regarding vaccines, a growing number of them (including pediatricians) are shunning vaccines and actively speaking out against them. Why would this be? There is certainly no money in fighting the trillion-dollar Big Pharma industry. Fighting the pharmaceutical companies is an uphill battle at best. No big-money funding exists on the antivaccine side. Yet, it is a growing, fervent movement of physicians, nurses, parents, pharmacists, etc. who have done their own independent research and have decided that vaccines are dangerous, ineffective, or both. The International Medical Council on Vaccination and Nurses Against Mandatory Vaccines are two of several organizations comprised of healthcare professionals who are speaking out against vaccines. Please, ask yourself why a physician or nurse would go against everything they have been taught to support such a cause when there’s no money in it for them? Some even risk their licenses.

    Having studied vaccines for decades, I could go on and on and on about specifics regarding why they may be dangerous, ineffective, or both. Instead, I’ll share some resources that provide such information in a much more engaging and eloquent way.

    Even if you only take a peek to know more about the opposing side in an effort to bolster an opposing argument, please consider the following:


    Thank you for your time.

  • Jul 5 '15

    Hello!

    My reply is not likely going to be very popular. It may be completely ignored and dismissed as nonsense by those not willing to look into the opposing viewpoint. Or, my post may incite, though it is not intended to do so. Nevertheless, I am writing to share another perspective ... one that you won't hear in the mainstream media.

    Whatever the case, I hope those who do take the time to read this will do so with an open mind. Please, use your critical thinking skills and good old-fashioned common sense. And, please verify everything I share here. Do you own research!

    So, with that said, I find the passing of the California law extremely disturbing at best and wholeheartedly sinister at worst. Why?

    Leaving vaccines out of the equation for a moment, it seems that everyone should be disturbed by the government mandating any kind of medical procedure upon its citizens. Whether one is for or against vaccines, I think we can all agree that any medical procedure carries at least some risk. So, if the government forces vaccines upon its citizens, who will be liable when something goes wrong? As nurses, we know that every vaccine vial insert comes with a long list of potential side effects (some of which can be life threatening). And, speaking of labels, a number of ingredients in a variety of vaccines are toxic, such as mercury and aluminum. Similar to the disguising of high-fructose corn syrup on food labels as simply “fructose,” vaccine manufacturers disguise mercury as “thimerosal.”

    If the government can force vaccines, what else can it force upon its people? Where will government intervention end? While this seem may like a radical example, what if the government, for whatever reason, decided to mandate that all people take arsenic or mercury? Did you know that, historically, arsenic and mercury were once first-line drugs used in allopathic medicine? In fact, President George Washington, who had the world’s best physicians at the time, died of mercury poisoning. Today, the prescription of arsenic or mercury would be considered barbaric (yet mercury is in many vaccines).

    The point is that evidence, scientific or otherwise, changes; also, it can and often is manipulated and controlled by the powers that be. For example, nutrition advice and evidence are constantly flip-flopping. At one time margarine was recommended over butter; today, the reverse is true. Similarly, ancient astronomers and the world’s greatest scholarly minds once believed the Earth was flat.

    We are constantly barraged with misinformation that serves a financial purpose for powerful interests, industries, and lobbying groups. (Does milk really help to prevent osteoporosis or does it actually contribute to it? Does sunscreen really help to prevent skin cancer or do the toxic chemicals it contains contribute to it? This list could go on and on ….)

    Did you know that as a result of years of lobbying and political influence, pharmaceutical companies cannot be sued for vaccine injuries? This liability shield has even been reported in the mainstream media. Yet, the VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) database is full of records and the VICP (Vaccine Injury Compensation Program) has paid out billions of dollars to families whose loved ones were harmed. And from where does this money come? Taxpayers. Families who pursue compensation and are awarded damages are paid by VICP, which is funded by taxpayers. Furthermore, the government has recently removed some VICP statistics from public view.

    Despite the complete indoctrination physicians and nurses receive in their education, training, and workplace regarding vaccines, a growing number of them (including pediatricians) are shunning vaccines and actively speaking out against them. Why would this be? There is certainly no money in fighting the trillion-dollar Big Pharma industry. Fighting the pharmaceutical companies is an uphill battle at best. No big-money funding exists on the antivaccine side. Yet, it is a growing, fervent movement of physicians, nurses, parents, pharmacists, etc. who have done their own independent research and have decided that vaccines are dangerous, ineffective, or both. The International Medical Council on Vaccination and Nurses Against Mandatory Vaccines are two of several organizations comprised of healthcare professionals who are speaking out against vaccines. Please, ask yourself why a physician or nurse would go against everything they have been taught to support such a cause when there’s no money in it for them? Some even risk their licenses.

    Having studied vaccines for decades, I could go on and on and on about specifics regarding why they may be dangerous, ineffective, or both. Instead, I’ll share some resources that provide such information in a much more engaging and eloquent way.

    Even if you only take a peek to know more about the opposing side in an effort to bolster an opposing argument, please consider the following:


    Thank you for your time.

  • Jul 5 '15

    Hello!

    My reply is not likely going to be very popular. It may be completely ignored and dismissed as nonsense by those not willing to look into the opposing viewpoint. Or, my post may incite, though it is not intended to do so. Nevertheless, I am writing to share another perspective ... one that you won't hear in the mainstream media.

    Whatever the case, I hope those who do take the time to read this will do so with an open mind. Please, use your critical thinking skills and good old-fashioned common sense. And, please verify everything I share here. Do you own research!

    So, with that said, I find the passing of the California law extremely disturbing at best and wholeheartedly sinister at worst. Why?

    Leaving vaccines out of the equation for a moment, it seems that everyone should be disturbed by the government mandating any kind of medical procedure upon its citizens. Whether one is for or against vaccines, I think we can all agree that any medical procedure carries at least some risk. So, if the government forces vaccines upon its citizens, who will be liable when something goes wrong? As nurses, we know that every vaccine vial insert comes with a long list of potential side effects (some of which can be life threatening). And, speaking of labels, a number of ingredients in a variety of vaccines are toxic, such as mercury and aluminum. Similar to the disguising of high-fructose corn syrup on food labels as simply “fructose,” vaccine manufacturers disguise mercury as “thimerosal.”

    If the government can force vaccines, what else can it force upon its people? Where will government intervention end? While this seem may like a radical example, what if the government, for whatever reason, decided to mandate that all people take arsenic or mercury? Did you know that, historically, arsenic and mercury were once first-line drugs used in allopathic medicine? In fact, President George Washington, who had the world’s best physicians at the time, died of mercury poisoning. Today, the prescription of arsenic or mercury would be considered barbaric (yet mercury is in many vaccines).

    The point is that evidence, scientific or otherwise, changes; also, it can and often is manipulated and controlled by the powers that be. For example, nutrition advice and evidence are constantly flip-flopping. At one time margarine was recommended over butter; today, the reverse is true. Similarly, ancient astronomers and the world’s greatest scholarly minds once believed the Earth was flat.

    We are constantly barraged with misinformation that serves a financial purpose for powerful interests, industries, and lobbying groups. (Does milk really help to prevent osteoporosis or does it actually contribute to it? Does sunscreen really help to prevent skin cancer or do the toxic chemicals it contains contribute to it? This list could go on and on ….)

    Did you know that as a result of years of lobbying and political influence, pharmaceutical companies cannot be sued for vaccine injuries? This liability shield has even been reported in the mainstream media. Yet, the VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) database is full of records and the VICP (Vaccine Injury Compensation Program) has paid out billions of dollars to families whose loved ones were harmed. And from where does this money come? Taxpayers. Families who pursue compensation and are awarded damages are paid by VICP, which is funded by taxpayers. Furthermore, the government has recently removed some VICP statistics from public view.

    Despite the complete indoctrination physicians and nurses receive in their education, training, and workplace regarding vaccines, a growing number of them (including pediatricians) are shunning vaccines and actively speaking out against them. Why would this be? There is certainly no money in fighting the trillion-dollar Big Pharma industry. Fighting the pharmaceutical companies is an uphill battle at best. No big-money funding exists on the antivaccine side. Yet, it is a growing, fervent movement of physicians, nurses, parents, pharmacists, etc. who have done their own independent research and have decided that vaccines are dangerous, ineffective, or both. The International Medical Council on Vaccination and Nurses Against Mandatory Vaccines are two of several organizations comprised of healthcare professionals who are speaking out against vaccines. Please, ask yourself why a physician or nurse would go against everything they have been taught to support such a cause when there’s no money in it for them? Some even risk their licenses.

    Having studied vaccines for decades, I could go on and on and on about specifics regarding why they may be dangerous, ineffective, or both. Instead, I’ll share some resources that provide such information in a much more engaging and eloquent way.

    Even if you only take a peek to know more about the opposing side in an effort to bolster an opposing argument, please consider the following:


    Thank you for your time.

  • May 27 '15

    I agree with everything TheCommuter said.

    However, to add, College Network study guides are in no way necessary to pass Excelsior College or Indiana State University exams. Such exams can be passed with any number of textbooks, study guides, and free information on the Internet. Surely, some study guides are well organized and make the search for information easier. However, for self-driven students--as are most EC and ISU students--such organization is often not necessary and certainly not worth paying extortionate fees.

    For what it's worth, here's a link to a number of free, well-organized, online textbooks. Common nursing prerequisites courses are represented including psychology, sociology, biology, chemistry, A&P, microbiology, and statistics.

  • May 20 '15

    Hello!

    Regarding the previous post, Aspen University is a for-profit school, most of which have bad reputations for good reason. Also, despite Aspen's CCNE accreditation for its RN-BSN nursing program, the school is not regionally accredited.

    Many erroneously believe that national accreditation is of superior status than regional accreditation. However, when it comes to higher education, regional institution-wide accreditation is what matters most. Ivy League, Big 10 institutions, and other prestigious schools are regionally accredited, not nationally accredited. Just to clarify, national accreditation, such as CCNE or NAAB (for architecture), is important at the program (not the institutional) level. Nevertheless, as a for-profit institution, Aspen seems far less expensive than most of its competitors.

    As others have said, WGU's pricing is hard to beat, especially if you work quickly and keep your enrollment to one year or less. However, Southern New Hampshire University (SNHU) is another really good option. As a previous bachelor's degree holder, all prerequisites are waived, so you'd only have to take five 6-credit, upper-division nursing classes to complete the program. I love, love, love SNHU's streamlined, no-BS approach. The University of Massachusetts–Boston has basically the same program structure, but it is more expensive. Also, at one time, it required local clinicals, though I am not sure if that's still the case. Your profile says you are from Massachusetts/New Hampshire, so the UMass clinical requirement, if still in extant, may not be a problem for you.

    At one time or another, I think I've researched nearly every online RN-BSN program in the country. I plan to enroll in an RN-BSN or RN-MSN program by January 2016. For me, it'll be WGU or SNHU. I like WGU primarily for the cost and the possibility of finishing very quickly (if I put my nose to the grindstone). However, I love the idea of only taking SNHU's 5 classes (and it is still reasonably priced at around $10K)! Both schools are regionally and CCNE accredited.

    Best wishes!

  • May 12 '15

    Hello!

    Regarding the previous post, Aspen University is a for-profit school, most of which have bad reputations for good reason. Also, despite Aspen's CCNE accreditation for its RN-BSN nursing program, the school is not regionally accredited.

    Many erroneously believe that national accreditation is of superior status than regional accreditation. However, when it comes to higher education, regional institution-wide accreditation is what matters most. Ivy League, Big 10 institutions, and other prestigious schools are regionally accredited, not nationally accredited. Just to clarify, national accreditation, such as CCNE or NAAB (for architecture), is important at the program (not the institutional) level. Nevertheless, as a for-profit institution, Aspen seems far less expensive than most of its competitors.

    As others have said, WGU's pricing is hard to beat, especially if you work quickly and keep your enrollment to one year or less. However, Southern New Hampshire University (SNHU) is another really good option. As a previous bachelor's degree holder, all prerequisites are waived, so you'd only have to take five 6-credit, upper-division nursing classes to complete the program. I love, love, love SNHU's streamlined, no-BS approach. The University of Massachusetts–Boston has basically the same program structure, but it is more expensive. Also, at one time, it required local clinicals, though I am not sure if that's still the case. Your profile says you are from Massachusetts/New Hampshire, so the UMass clinical requirement, if still in extant, may not be a problem for you.

    At one time or another, I think I've researched nearly every online RN-BSN program in the country. I plan to enroll in an RN-BSN or RN-MSN program by January 2016. For me, it'll be WGU or SNHU. I like WGU primarily for the cost and the possibility of finishing very quickly (if I put my nose to the grindstone). However, I love the idea of only taking SNHU's 5 classes (and it is still reasonably priced at around $10K)! Both schools are regionally and CCNE accredited.

    Best wishes!



close
close