I have a friend who lives in PA. She is just finishing her RN (ADN/ASN) and is telling me something about a degree/certificate that would allow her to basically do what a NP does.
Does anybody know what this is? Its my understanding that you have to have a year of work expeirence, and after that you spend a year or so in some sort of training... then pooof. You get to hit the road. I'm thinking that they don't get to write prescriptions, but are about to be able to... or might already be able to. I don't know think they can actually "dx" anything w/o MD supervision. My thinking is that these people are some sort of major physician extenders.
Has my friend heard tale of some Earth shatter joke, or is there actually a way that you can assume a clinical role one year outside of an ADN?
If anyone has any information on this... if they exist, what their titles are (ANP, RNP PretendNP? :) ) and what their scope of practice is... please let me know.
It's really confusing to the public what a nurse does and what it takes to be nurse, because of the fact that there isn't a standardization of education. Until there is a standardization, until a person can see a nurse and have an idea of what her education was like (such as a Doctor), then I think the public will have a hard time respecting nurses. I'm in the camp that thinks BSN should be entry level and certainly MSN should be the entry level for NP!
More on my thoughts about the subject of nursing advancing itself as a profession here at my website.
I am taking pre-reqs to enter and Entry Level NP program next year. It seems like the controversy is much the same. I really understand it. A lot of the info on these programs are vaugue and confusing, but at least with the case of the Entry Level NP programs, there is also a lot of misinformation. There are some differences from the traditional route in the level of experience (Most Entry Level Programs DO expect you to work as an RN while finishing your degree so you are not completely green) but in terms of education, the main difference seems to be order. I am wondering if the case could be the same with these ADN-NP programs. Perhaps there is a misunderstanding about the level of education eventually involved. I could be totally wrong, but I am just putting out the possibility. I think it is appropriate to regularize the educational and training requirements to become an NP, but does that mean that there can be only one way to enter and only one order in which you can get your education and training? Would it help the concerns and anger to put some standard in place that could go across the board for different pathways to becoming an NP?
It's really confusing to the public what a nurse does and what it takes to be nurse, because of the fact that there isn't a standardization of education. Until there is a standardization, until a person can see a nurse and have an idea of what her education was like (such as a Doctor), then I think the public will have a hard time respecting nurses. I'm in the camp that thinks BSN should be entry level and certainly MSN should be the entry level for NP!
More on my thoughts about the subject of nursing advancing itself as a profession here at my website.
I agree that entry level to nursing should be BSN and entry level for advanced practice should be MSN. How to do this and be fair to the scores of experienced ADN's and Diploma RN's out there is the big question. I would support a mandate with grandfathering.
I myself have some strong feelings against all these fast track RN programs now....where if someone has a bachelors degree in ANYTHING they can go to school for a year and ...voila...they are a BSN. I don't understand...this seems to me that they value the generic college degree more than the nursing education and experience. As a 27 yr Diploma RN, this saddens me. So much devaluation in our profession...no wonder we have little solidarity.
This is kind of what I meant about misinformation. I have done a lot of research on accelereted programs. They are not 1 year long as many people think. They are 15-18 months long. The same as ADNs, only no summers off. The students are awarded BSNs because they already have already completed non-nursing requirements in English, Math, Science, History, Social Science etc. They complete the same number and types of classes as traditional ADNs and BSNs. I am confused about why this is no okay? I am trying to enter an accelerated MSN. I have looked at the curriculum and I have to complete the same classes as traditional students, just not in the same order. I will also work as an RN for two years by the time I am done with the MSN portion of the program.
I agree that entry level to nursing should be BSN and entry level for advanced practice should be MSN. How to do this and be fair to the scores of experienced ADN's and Diploma RN's out there is the big question. I would support a mandate with grandfathering.
I myself have some strong feelings against all these fast track RN programs now....where if someone has a bachelors degree in ANYTHING they can go to school for a year and ...voila...they are a BSN. I don't understand...this seems to me that they value the generic college degree more than the nursing education and experience. As a 27 yr Diploma RN, this saddens me. So much devaluation in our profession...no wonder we have little solidarity.
This is kind of what I meant about misinformation. I have done a lot of research on accelereted programs. They are not 1 year long as many people think. They are 15-18 months long. The same as ADNs, only no summers off. The students are awarded BSNs because they already have already completed non-nursing requirements in English, Math, Science, History, Social Science etc. They complete the same number and types of classes as traditional ADNs and BSNs. I am confused about why this is no okay? I am trying to enter an accelerated MSN. I have looked at the curriculum and I have to complete the same classes as traditional students, just not in the same order. I will also work as an RN for two years by the time I am done with the MSN portion of the program.
I agree that entry level to nursing should be BSN and entry level for advanced practice should be MSN. How to do this and be fair to the scores of experienced ADN's and Diploma RN's out there is the big question. I would support a mandate with grandfathering.
I myself have some strong feelings against all these fast track RN programs now....where if someone has a bachelors degree in ANYTHING they can go to school for a year and ...voila...they are a BSN. I don't understand...this seems to me that they value the generic college degree more than the nursing education and experience. As a 27 yr Diploma RN, this saddens me. So much devaluation in our profession...no wonder we have little solidarity.
I guess some people think that you need years and years of experience before even attempting to pursue a nurse practitioner program. I on the other think that while it may be helpful, I don't think one has to have over 10 years experience working as a staff nurse to become a good nurse practitioner. When I was in school for my master's/nurse practitioner program, I had classmates who graduated from their BSN program in June and then started the master's program right away in September of the same year. They seemed okay by the time graduation rolled along. By the time I finished the MSN program, I only had 4 1/4 years of staff nursing experience (2.5 years full-time, 1 3/4 years per diem). Try looking for quality nursing experience in big hospitals with highly acute patients. Just try to remember it's quality not quantity. Good luck in all of your endeavors.
This is kind of what I meant about misinformation. I have done a lot of research on accelereted programs. They are not 1 year long as many people think. They are 15-18 months long. The same as ADNs, only no summers off. The students are awarded BSNs because they already have already completed non-nursing requirements in English, Math, Science, History, Social Science etc. They complete the same number and types of classes as traditional ADNs and BSNs. I am confused about why this is no okay? I am trying to enter an accelerated MSN. I have looked at the curriculum and I have to complete the same classes as traditional students, just not in the same order. I will also work as an RN for two years by the time I am done with the MSN portion of the program.
I guess some people think that you need years and years of experience before even attempting to pursue a nurse practitioner program. I on the other think that while it may be helpful, I don't think one has to have over 10 years experience working as a staff nurse to become a good nurse practitioner. When I was in school for my master's/nurse practitioner program, I had classmates who graduated from their BSN program in June and then started the master's program right away in September of the same year. They seemed okay by the time graduation rolled along. By the time I finished the MSN program, I only had 4 1/4 years of staff nursing experience (2.5 years full-time, 1 3/4 years per diem). Try looking for quality nursing experience in big hospitals with highly acute patients. Just try to remember it's quality not quantity. Good luck in all of your endeavors.
This is kind of what I meant about misinformation. I have done a lot of research on accelereted programs. They are not 1 year long as many people think. They are 15-18 months long. The same as ADNs, only no summers off. The students are awarded BSNs because they already have already completed non-nursing requirements in English, Math, Science, History, Social Science etc. They complete the same number and types of classes as traditional ADNs and BSNs. I am confused about why this is no okay? I am trying to enter an accelerated MSN. I have looked at the curriculum and I have to complete the same classes as traditional students, just not in the same order. I will also work as an RN for two years by the time I am done with the MSN portion of the program.
Thanks, I really appreciate the encouragement. I also appreciate reading everyone's perspectives and concern. It is helping make more careful and informed educational choices
I guess some people think that you need years and years of experience before even attempting to pursue a nurse practitioner program. I on the other think that while it may be helpful, I don't think one has to have over 10 years experience working as a staff nurse to become a good nurse practitioner. When I was in school for my master's/nurse practitioner program, I had classmates who graduated from their BSN program in June and then started the master's program right away in September of the same year. They seemed okay by the time graduation rolled along. By the time I finished the MSN program, I only had 4 1/4 years of staff nursing experience (2.5 years full-time, 1 3/4 years per diem). Try looking for quality nursing experience in big hospitals with highly acute patients. Just try to remember it's quality not quantity. Good luck in all of your endeavors.
Thanks, I really appreciate the encouragement. I also appreciate reading everyone's perspectives and concern. It is helping make more careful and informed educational choices
I guess some people think that you need years and years of experience before even attempting to pursue a nurse practitioner program. I on the other think that while it may be helpful, I don't think one has to have over 10 years experience working as a staff nurse to become a good nurse practitioner. When I was in school for my master's/nurse practitioner program, I had classmates who graduated from their BSN program in June and then started the master's program right away in September of the same year. They seemed okay by the time graduation rolled along. By the time I finished the MSN program, I only had 4 1/4 years of staff nursing experience (2.5 years full-time, 1 3/4 years per diem). Try looking for quality nursing experience in big hospitals with highly acute patients. Just try to remember it's quality not quantity. Good luck in all of your endeavors.
December716
82 Posts
It's really confusing to the public what a nurse does and what it takes to be nurse, because of the fact that there isn't a standardization of education. Until there is a standardization, until a person can see a nurse and have an idea of what her education was like (such as a Doctor), then I think the public will have a hard time respecting nurses. I'm in the camp that thinks BSN should be entry level and certainly MSN should be the entry level for NP!
More on my thoughts about the subject of nursing advancing itself as a profession here at my website.