BSN as entry into practice; why we decided against it.

Nursing Students ADN/BSN

Published

While hopefully avoiding stoking the ADN - BSN debate unnecessarily, I thought I'd share my experience with my state's consideration of BSN as entry into practice, as well as the BSN-in-10 initiative.

About 3 years ago I sat on a council charged with evaluating and making recommendations on the educational requirements for Nursing. We worked closely with both employers and schools of Nursing to evaluate needs and capabilities and to coordinate the two.

We initially reviewed the evidence, most notably Linda Aiken's work on the relationship between educational level and quality of Nursing care. On the surface her work seems to clearly support the BSN model, however upon closer inspection we could not show that improved Nursing specific outcomes were due to higher proportions of BSN nurses, at least in terms of a BSN being causative rather than just correlative. While her studies did show a relationship between better outcomes and Hospitals with a higher proportion of BSN Nurses, she failed to adequately account for the fact that Hospitals with higher proportions of BSN nurses also have many factors that would be likely to contribute to better outcomes. For instance, predominately BSN hospitals (teaching hospitals) tend to have better staffing ratios, better support systems, better funding, and are more likely to be "early adopters" of practice improvements. Aiken's accounting for the effects of these differences were grossly inadequate. When her data was properly corrected for these differences, there was no clear difference between ADN and BSN prepared Nurses in areas examined.

We then looked at differences in curriculum between ADN and BSN programs and found surprisingly few differences. Pre-requisites varied among both ADN and BSN programs, with the only consistent difference being that BSN programs required a Nutrition class. We had assumed that the Statistics requirement was also a universal difference, but what we found was that this was only different in older ADN programs, newer ADN programs carried the same statistics requirement with some requiring a higher level of statistics than even the top BSN program in the state. In the program itself, the curriculum is closely regulated by both accreditation groups and the State Board, both of which hold the curriculum of both types of program to the same standards, minus the BSN program's additional leadership and community health classes.

Considering the minimal differences between ADN and BSN curriculum, we questioned whether there might be differences related to the 'caliber' of student admitted to each type of program, we were particularly surprised by what we found. Two of the ADN programs in the state required a previous bachelor's degree to even apply, more were considering this. The typical minimum GPA in core prerequisites for competitive entry ADN programs was 3.8, for BSN programs it was 3.6.

The biggest factor was what we would need to do to move to only BSN programs. Our current BSN programs already have a shortage of clinical spots, so expanding our current BSN programs was not an option. The only viable option was to take our ADN programs and simply start calling them BSN programs by adding community health and leadership classes and requiring the additional "general" credits needed to fulfill the credit requirements of a bachelors. To do this, community colleges would have to partner with Universities who would then grant BSN's for a (large) fee. This would essentially mean the only difference between an ADN and BSN would be 8 core credits, about 35 general credits, and about $18,000.

The other concern with limiting RN education opportunities to BSN programs by expanding BSN programs was the demographic makeup of Nursing students. More than half of those currently going into Nursing are "second career" students. These students typically are not in positions where attending a direct BSN program is feasible. In my state, BSN programs are only available in two urban areas. It's much easier for an 18 year old to drop everything and move to one of these two areas than it is for someone who has kids in school, owns a home, has a spouse with an immovable job, etc. As a result we were concerned about the effect such a drastic change in Nursing student demographics might have.

A survey of employers found no glaring preference for BSN prepared Nurses in my state, in fact we were surprised at the number of Hospitals that expressed a preference for ADN new grads as they found their bedside training requirements were less, this was likely due to the limitations in clinical experience in BSN programs. Only one hospital in the state expressed a preference for BSN graduates, although they did not require a BSN, this was the Hospital associated with the state's largest BSN program. They did express that their preference for BSN's was somewhat self-serving; when part of the job market is "BSN-only", it helps maintain demand for a degree that's fairly similar yet typically 400% more expensive than the ADN option. This would seem to shed some light on why "BSN-only" employers are primarily hospitals associated with Universities.

In the end we determined that we could not support the goal of BSN as entry to practice at this time. We did however endorse the concept of BSN-in-10 through ADN to BSN programs. Although we didn't go so far as to advocate BSN-in-10 as a requirement. This was partly due to reviewing North Dakota's failed BSN-in-10 attempt, as well as the demographics involved in the Nursing workforce. The number of experienced Nurses who leave the workforce is a real problem. This attrition often occurs between 5 and 10 years. Adding a requirement that will take additional time as well as cost, in many cases, up to half of their yearly salary would too often serve as the primary factor in a decision to leave Nursing. There are huge advantages to additional schooling after a period of time in the workforce, one could argue advantages that exceed that of direct BSN programs, however it was not felt that the loss of experienced Nurses outweighed those advantages. But when feasible, all ADN Nurses should be actively encouraged to pursue an ADN to BSN.

As a BSN prepared Nurse, I was expecting confirmation that my money was spell spent, and I'm not saying it necessarily wasn't, however many of the assumptions I held may have been overstated or just incorrect. For many, direct BSN programs are worth the expense, for other's it's not. What's most important is that students can make an informed decision.

Specializes in Critical Care.
Two things:

1. The aiken study is one of three major studies on the topic. Each of which conclusively correlated a BSN prepared staff with better patient outcomes. One of the studies was done in Canada which has a universal coverage system so I don't you can argue payor mix for outcomes.

You hit the nail on the head there, Aiken correlated BSN prepared staff with better patient outcomes, she did not show causation. If causation exists then we should be able to what specific factors produce better outcomes, which she has not shown.

2. There is a definitive reason hospital managers don't like to hire BSNs. The fact is that hospitals certainly do not want to pay more money for a better trained staff (after all, what motivates that? Better pt outcomes and they aren't being paid for that) and BSN nurses are just that much closer to being able to go to grad school.

Our review was based only in our state, and very well may not translate to other states, but in my state increased pay is not the reason for reluctance to hire BSNs. For the most part, BSNs make the same as ADNs. Some hospitals pay an additional $1 per hour, although that additional dollar can be obtained through other means as well such as specialty certifications.

The reluctance to hire BSN's is cost related however. New Grad training is extremely costly. Hospitals have experienced a shorter orientation period for ADNs as a higher percentage of ADNs finish school having taken a full load of patients for the majority of their preceptorship. This will likely be different in areas where BSN programs have sufficient access to clinical spots, however in my state our BSN programs are too concentrated to allow for the same amount of clinical experience that the more dispersed ADN programs can provide.

Our ICU managers actually had to be forced into hiring BSN grads when the hospital considered a magnet status. Too many BSNs were doing their two years and going to grad school.

As for conversion, its my experience that ADN programs train their students a certain way. Focusing on skills more than critical thinking and as a result, the nurse's practice is corrupt from the get go. Getting some online BSN so they can bypass "difficult" courses like statistics and college algebra doesn't improve their level of practice.

At one time this was the case, however except for two "old school" ADN programs that were being phased out, we found no difference in critical thinking emphasis. Even the "old school" ADN programs required college level algebra, and they were the only two that did not require statistics. Most of the ADN and BSN programs required pre-calc and statistics (typically psych dept statistics), however there were ADN programs that required calculus and statistics for math majors.

Sorry but a finding that disavows the findings of several large studies is unfortunate for our patients and the future of nursing.

I don't think the current situations is as unfortunate as you would suggest. Since the ANA made it's recommendation on BSN education 40 years ago, ADN programs have essentially become BSN programs, just without the name. So clearly everyone agrees that in large part the BSN model is the better model, it's just not as accurate as it was 40 years ago to claim that ADN and BSN programs are significantly different.

Specializes in Certified Med/Surg tele, and other stuff.
Two things:

1. The aiken study is one of three major studies on the topic. Each of which conclusively correlated a BSN prepared staff with better patient outcomes. One of the studies was done in Canada which has a universal coverage system so I don't you can argue payor mix for outcomes.

2. There is a definitive reason hospital managers don't like to hire BSNs. The fact is that hospitals certainly do not want to pay more money for a better trained staff (after all, what motivates that? Better pt outcomes and they aren't being paid for that) and BSN nurses are just that much closer to being able to go to grad school.

Our ICU managers actually had to be forced into hiring BSN grads when the hospital considered a magnet status. Too many BSNs were doing their two years and going to grad school.

As for conversion, its my experience that ADN programs train their students a certain way. Focusing on skills more than critical thinking and as a result, the nurse's practice is corrupt from the get go. Getting some online BSN so they can bypass "difficult" courses like statistics and college algebra doesn't improve their level of practice.

Sorry but a finding that disavows the findings of several large studies is unfortunate for our patients and the future of nursing.

Oh yes, let's not forget the "My brick and mortar school is better than your online school argument" :sarcastic:

Specializes in Critical Care.

To put it another way VICEDRN, if we were to take an ADN program that is essentially identical to an BSN program except for 8 credits of community health and leadership, and simply change the name on the degree from "ADN" to "BSN", could we expect to see in improvement in patient outcomes? Most likely there are other factors than what we call the degree, so what are they?

Specializes in Critical Care.
The hospital I just signed on with requires a bachelors in 5 years. At their tuition reimbursement rate per year, it may take me 5 years to complete the one year program. After paying for my LPN and LPN to ADN programs out of pocket, I am very interested in having the rest of my education sponsored.

Any chance your new employer is affiliated with a BSN granting university?

I actually researched and wrote a paper about this controversy in school. The issue is complex and multifaceted, with several competing interests at play. Surprisingly, whether BSN nurses are better prepared than ADN nurses is not the main point. The biggest issue are the community colleges. They are the biggest players in nursing education and have considerable political cloud. Nursing degrees are their premier "crown jewel" academic program, almost often their most sought after degree. A nursing program grants community colleges huge prestige and access to all kings local, state and federal funding. It is source of pride for them and they WILL NOT let go of that bone! As such, any realistic BSN requirement debate has to include them. Simply requiring a BSN for entry level and thus removing them out of the game is a non-starter. Thus the BSN in 10 idea, which allows the community colleges to keep their nursing degree programs. Any future discussion has to include the community colleges interests in mind. I heard that some of them are offering BSN degrees. I think that only when the community colleges get on board - by offering BSN degrees for instace - will we see BSN requirement adopted by state legislators and board of nursing.

Specializes in NICU, PICU, PCVICU and peds oncology.

Entry to practice in Canada is the BSN. Period. The last province to eliminate diploma programs was Alberta at the end of 2010. Some universities do a very good job in preparing graduates for the "real world" of nursing and others don't. The basic curricula are virtually identical; major differences are seen in the way courses are delivered. The "problem-based" or "context-based" learning model used by some schools has been decried by students and employers alike as being ineffective at preparing nurses for the degree of responsibility they face on the job. (And who wants to pay the big bucks for an education then discover that much of it will be self-taught?) The ultimate determinant of the quality of nursing care provided, in my opinion, relates to personal factors and not where or how a person was educated. Some people are just naturally better at some things than other people are. I work in an area that hires many new graduates from our local universities. Over the years I've seen many of them start their careers; some have flourished from Day One and others have floundered. To credit or blame the source of their basic nursing education is simplistic and unsupportable. Of note, on my high-acuity critical care unit, it's virtually impossible to distinguish the diploma nurses from the BSN nurses after the first year or so.

About 12 years ago I compiled a head-to-head comparison of the diploma education at a community college with the BSN education at a university in the same city. In terms of hours of didactic preparation it was a dead heat. In terms of clinical practice, the community college came out ahead. The major differences were how long it took to complete the programs, liberal arts content, the number of formal papers and tuition. There was no difference in the pass/fail ratio on the Canadian Registered Nurse Exam. When published, my analysis met with a great deal of consternation and criticism from those nurses whose credentials contained more letters than their names; they were however unable to dispute my conclusions.

The critical thinking argument is an interesting one. When I applied to a highly-regarded hospital-based diploma program in 1991, I was initially rejected because I was a mature student out of the formal education system for 15 years. The reason I was given was that without upgrading my basic education I wasn't likely to meet the acid test of critical thinking required to be successful in the program. I was able to demonstrate to them that in my case, experience was the best teacher and that critical thinking was part of my day-to-day life. And here we are. I still don't have a degree of any stripe, nor am I interested in one. I prefer focused continuing education in my specialty. That model has served me well for nearly 20 years.

Specializes in CRNA, Finally retired.

Just sayin' but there is a 10/30/12 article on Medscape describing lower mortality rates for surgical patients in Magnet hospitals. What other "profession" whines about the cost of schooling as much as we do? Just because we're married with kids and have OTHER OBLIGATIONS, we should put our education on the back burner? There is a reply several posts up in which the poster argues for the adequacy of ADN education with spelling errors that make me embarrassed for us. As long as the CC's keep cranking the grads out, nurse's salaries will lag behind other "professions" with similar responsibilities and staff satisfaction will be poor. I don't understand why your kid's piano teacher must have a degree in music but the nurse that cares for your intubated newborn can come from an RN with a CC education. I wish that the CC's could provide the pre-nursing courses while we did something more akin to a diploma program for the last two years to keep tuition costs down while the students provided labor for the hospital.

Specializes in Med Surg.
The biggest advantage of a BSN requirement in my opinion would be higher wages and a higher degree of respect for nurses as professionals. Nurses are the least educated of the health care workers if you think about it. I think this a big reason why we are treated like crap by physicians, administration and patients. A two-year junior college degree will never command the wages, recognition and respect we deserve.

That's the problem right there. At this point, a BSN degree doesn't provide a significant wage increase over an ASN, therefore making it an unattractive option for nurses. I am an ASN prepared nurse and the reason I'm currently working on a BSN (at one of those substandard online programs ;) ) is that it will provide me more money down the road. There has to be a tangible benefit to spending more time and money on essentially the same degree, as evidenced by the fact that we take the same boards.

I think you make a brilliant point about community colleges' role in all of this. Why would they want to give up the money and prestige associated with nursing programs?

Specializes in Med/surg, Quality & Risk.
I cant stand this type of argument. Why is it always assumed that BSN's DONT know what they are doing?!?

Uh, because no one said that? The woman said exactly what she meant, which was that she'd rather have a nurse that knew what they were doing. She never at any time specified which degree the person who "knew what they were doing" had. It's really simply stated: she doesn't care what degree her nurses have as long as they know what they're doing.

I think it is fruitless to argue the I'm better than you stand. Nursing needs to start think(critically thiking that is) about practicality and reality- gived the nurse a job before you demand she make a "sofie's choices" decision which will impact her/his family's wellbeing. Isn't that the business nursing is supposed to be in Health and Well being"/

I have always been concerned about who stays at the bedside. Why would someone pay 40 - 60 - 80 thousand dollars for a BSN to stay at the bedside working shifts, weekends, holidays? How many people are staying in 24/7 positions 10 years out?

Salaries have not kept pace with the cost of a quality education, and some nurses are finding their salaries are topped out at less than what they paid for their education. In other words, they may not ever make a yearly base salary of 60 grand even though they paid that or more for their education.

after years of nursing, and with the yearly hourly wage increase, then things start to look better... meaning after 5 to 7 years in nursing, you should be i would hope making at least 60 grand a year. in nursing, the money takes time to come in... but after years of experience, it usually pays off

I have my BSN. I think it varies across state boards and accreditation requirements but where I live all one needs is college level A&P courses (just 8 hours) and a good ACT score before entry into an ADN program. I personally feel like these schools focus more on building nursing skills while BSN programs focus more on the WHY we use these skills and evidence-based practices. The level of critical thinking is different. Both extremely difficult and both produce great nurses. The people in my class all passed NCLEX the first time, but a test has nothing to do with what kind of nurse a person will be. Honestly I would have gotten my ADN first if I would have decided on nursing as a career straight out of high school, but a higher degree is a personal choice. My facility pays just a dollar more per hour for a BSN..that's not much comparing the cost of education. Anyone can go back to school through online programs (my school offers a RN TO MSN PROGRAM no Bachelor's required) and can work while learning. Earning my BSN was expensive. I lived on student loans and a pt on campus job that was more stress than what it was worth. It would have been nice to have a good paying PRN job that actually enhanced my nursing education. There's nothing wrong with either program as entry level. One is not better than the other. They're different paths to the same end. The sky is the limit in this field for anyone starting out. I personally don't feel either superior or inferior to an ADN nurse.

+ Add a Comment