Nursing is Not a Science
- 0Jul 6, '12 by UserGIs nursing a science? The second letter in the degree on my wall seems to think so.
However, I have been expanding my horizons and have found those that don't seem to believe the same. I am currently applying to higher degree programs, including a few osteopathy schools.
For those of you that don't know, both allopathic and osteopathic doctorate schools use their own centralized application process for almost all schools in the US. During the application, a potential student has to enter every course taken at an accredited college or university. This can take hours, depending on the number of degrees earned. Each class requires a school, year, term, credit hours, catalog code, course name, and grade.
This is where I found out something I didn't know about our profession. AACOMAS (the centralized application for osteopathic schools) also requires a classification of the class. They have a limited number of choices, but a handy guide to know which class goes into which general category. For example, psychology goes under "Behavioral Science", organic chemistry goes under "Organic Chemistry", oceanography goes under "Bio/Zoology", and physical education goes under "Other Non-Science".
I can't hyperlink the list because you have to login to their website and begin an application to view the entire boring instructions on placing each class in each general category.
Imagine my surprise when I was entering my classes from my BSN program to find "Nursing" under the listing for "Other Non-Science"!
Apparently, the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine doesn't consider our classes to be as scientific as "Chiropractic", "Electronics", "Nutrition", and "Geology". I don't want to imply that those studies aren't scientific, but nursing is at least as scientific, if not more than, many on that list (c'mon... "Geology"?).
Since approximately 20% of physicians have a DO instead of a MD, this means that 1 in 5 of the people giving us orders are being taught that nursing is as scientific as "Theater", "Religion", "Public Speaking", and "Cultural Geography". In their eyes, I guess the nurse practitioners they are trusting haven't really taken any science classes either (although, physician assistant classes are counted as a science...).
Since the weighting system on the AACOMAS application applies different calculations for GPA based on whether or not it is a science class, it appears that I will be at a disadvantage when submitting my application. Is it as possible that practicing our "art" has led others to view us as lacking a practice in "science"? How do we assert ourselves better and is there anything I can really do to solve this immediate bias?
- 3,204 Visits
- 6Jul 7, '12 by MN-NurseWell, as long as "Disturbed Energy Field" remains a Nursing Diagnosis, anyone saying "Nursing is not a science" sure has a good freaking point.
I don't think nursing classes in general should be listed under the same heading as science classes like chemistry. They are quite different. And yes, geology is certainly a science class.
I doubt that 20% of working physicians are actually osteopaths as you claim. I think the statistic is that 20% of medical students in school now are in DO programs.
As far as the "bias" you mention goes, I could give a rip if DO schools consider nursing program classes as sciences. The inferences you are making from the distinction are false anyway.
- 3Jul 7, '12 by MunoRNI don't think it's any secret that Nursing is a pseudo-science and not a true science. Most of our graduate and post-graduate curriculum is based on "theory" that doesn't meet the basic definitions of scientific theory, rather it's "theory" in the same way that something that starts with "Dude, did you ever notice" following a bong hit is a "theory".
While I agree that Nursing is a fairly "soft" science, it's interesting that this criticism comes from a school of osteopathy, which teaches chelation therapy and homeopathy. And BTW, osteopath's make up more like 6-7% of Physicians, not 20.
- 0Jul 7, '12 by netglowI get your point OP. Nursing can be a very limiting when it comes to wanting to use those credits to do something else - other than nursing.
This is why especially in this economy, it would be ridiculous to get your only bachelor's degree in nursing. Best to have a good foundation that will allow you do pursue other things should you ever want to, or need to, without having to start from square one financially.
- 1Jul 7, '12 by hiddencatRNI've taken science classes (including Geology, which is actually fascinating) and I've taken nursing classes. Nursing definitely relies on science but I'd compare our education more to psychology than biology.I don't think nursing always wants to be a science anyway. Instead of scientific theory, we have evidence based practice, because we have to rename well-established concepts to make them more nursey. It's a pretty big logical leap to go from what categories your application has to what DOs are taught in school.
- 1Jul 7, '12 by UserGQuote from juan de la cruzMe too!I literally LOL'd at that statement.
Come to think of it, I did have a tough internal struggle justifying my nursing leadership course being in any category. I had a professor who taught the merits of non-contact therapeutic touch therapy. Ugh!
But, have you ever looked at a chiropractor's education? "Disturbed Energy Field" is something I could hear coming out of one of their mouths as well.
- 1Aug 21, '12 by jema427I was just trying to figure this question out for myself! so does this mean that the "science" prerequisites such as Bio, chem, anatomy, micro etc are considered NON-SCIENCE as well? I tranfered from a prenursing major to a biology major and my new school refused to accept my nursing prereqs as actual biology requirements. I was really shocked to hear that because I didnt think they were any different from bio prereqs.