I've noticed that schools have different selection processes to determine who will be admitted into nursing programs because there are too few openings to accommodate all that apply. So far I've heard of a lottery system, a lottery system with a minimum point requirement and TEAS score, and also I've heard of straight competitive based systems.
What do you think is the most fair and what do you think is the best for the nursing profession?
I've often thought that it must be very hard to sit on a selection committee.
It may or may not be appropriate to drop him from the program, but I think it's definitely appropriate to drop him from this thread:yeah:
(speaking of dropping, maybe he was dropped on his h....oh never mind).
I mentioned in an earlier post that NS itself is a kind of screening process. It sounds like that process may become applicable in this case.
But, back on topic, of all the criteria for admission i've read about in this thread, it seems to me the point system is the most fair since it allows those who excel in a particular area to be rewarded for it, and those who mess up in a particular area to compensate for it.
Thus, it is BACK to my original point, that just because you can excel academically, doesn't mean that you are capable of being a nurse.
There are "tell tale" signs that my study partner and I picked out, just from knowing these people outside of the program, and our predictions have so far, rung true.
If we can notice it, then other instructors can notice it.
We have about 6 students in our class that also, would rather watch than do. They don't have to "do" to pass the class...they just have to know how to do it in theory.
Those people that won't do in school, I can tell you now, won't "do" in a hospital.
...and that can probably start a whole other thread of nurses who are really, really good at "delegating" so they won't have to do anything...and every RN/LPN knows who those people are at their facility.
...just because you can excel academically, doesn't mean that you are capable of being a nurse.
There are "tell tale" signs that my study partner and I picked out, just from knowing these people outside of the program, and our predictions have so far, rung true.
If we can notice it, then other instructors can notice it.
But can your method really be applied to the screening process? Where is the time to get to 'know' someone, to observe them in the variety of situations necessary in order to make a fair assessment? Besides, as someone pointed out, it's really not the school's job to determine who would make a 'good nurse', at least not at the point of admission, but rather to determine who is or isn't capable of doing the work and being successful. By necessity is has to be a somewhat brief and objective process, based mostly on academics. The deeper and more subtle issues, if they exist, will come out as the person progresses through the program. That, it seems to me, is the best way to 'screen' for these issues, because it's not based on assumption, theory, or conjecture applied preemptively, but on the persons ability or inability to perform adequately in the real world.
First, I'll start with my school's way of admitting students into their nursing program. There is a wait list. To get on this wait list, you must have all pre-reqs taken (English, Psych, Math, A&P I and II, Micro, Patho) which of course have their own pre-reqs. You must have a GPA of 2.5, with only one C allowed in the sciences. You are then placed on the wait list, and they go down the list in order each cycle. There are no essays, interviews, points system, CNA requirement, yadda yadda required. In my opinion, this seems more fair than other systems, especially this lottery system I keep hearing about on allnurses. I'd be angry if it was going to be a gamble each year to see if I got in. Yes, I know my school's system will let more people in and create a longer wait list doing this...no system is perfect.
And now onto the good stuff. This thread reminds me of another thread I recently participated in, about whether grades matter. Grades, student selection process...someone is always going to have an issue with them. There is no perfect way to select students, or to evaluate their performance in their program.
Should grades matter? Heck yes they should. I worked hard for my GPA. Not because I have wrapped my identity up in the GPA, but because that is the system used by schools to evaluate me. My current school may only require a 2.5 to enter the program, but what if I want to continue my education at a school with stricter guidelines? They aren't going to change their system for me, so I work within the system. If I had had to volunteer, write an essay, go to an interview, or get my CNA certificate, I would have. I could write a passionate essay about my love for nursing in an hour, but I could also write a passionate essay about how I love to BBQ cats. Not as much work as the grade thing.
This brings me to whether people with kids and jobs should be given credit. Sure, but only if I get credit too. My husband and I saved money for years beforehand because I knew I would not be able to do my best in the program while working. I don't have kids, but I want them. I haven't been able to carry one to term, but I'm still on birth control right now while in school, waving bye bye to some of my iffy reproductive years. I'm a little tired of hearing that my successes were somehow easier to achieve. My sacrifices are just different.
Well, my novella has gone a little off topic...back to the regularly scheduled program...
I think if you have decent grades/scores and show a strong interest in nursing through a personal statement or other materials you should be given serious consideration alongside someone that makes a 4.0 and writes a crappy one-paragraph statement or doesn't send in additional materials because they feel their grade is "enough".
But can your method really be applied to the screening process? Where is the time to get to 'know' someone, to observe them in the variety of situations necessary in order to make a fair assessment? Besides, as someone pointed out, it's really not the school's job to determine who would make a 'good nurse', at least not at the point of admission, but rather to determine who is or isn't capable of doing the work and being successful. By necessity is has to be a somewhat brief and objective process, based mostly on academics. The deeper and more subtle issues, if they exist, will come out as the person progresses through the program. That, it seems to me, is the best way to 'screen' for these issues, because it's not based on assumption, theory, or conjecture applied preemptively, but on the persons ability or inability to perform adequately in the real world.
Sure they can. Experienced nurses are very, very good at reading people.
We have one girl that the first time that I met her, talked non-stop about her boyfriend, and her boyfriend, and her boyfriend. Oh, and did I mention that she a boyfriend? Every time you talked to her, she always spent her time, with her boyfriend, concerts, weekend trips, you name it, they did it.
She was gone after the first semester...she had a near 4.0 average upon admission...guess why? She said she couldn't maintain her relationship with "her boyfriend" and still go to school.
Now, I know what you are going to say...lots of people have boyfriends...but it was very, very obvious from the first conversation that this was an OBSESSION and not just a normal relationship.
Then there was "Karen". She was taking nursing math...we have a whole class just for that at our school. Easiest freaking class you could possibly take...IF you do your homework. I'm really, really bad at math. So if I could do it, anyone can.
The teacher told us on our first day, "Some of the homework is going to seem easy, and not worth your while, but if you aren't doing it and practicing the method, by the time you get into Chapter 8, you are going to be in trouble."
We watched this girl just copy the answers from the back of the book to turn in. She ended up with a C in an easy class.
Where is her work ethic? She didn't have one.
So guess what happened??? She got into the program, and failed not only nursing, but A&P...she kept saying, "Well, this is hard!!! I can't spend all my time studying???"
If students are getting bad grades in an easy class...that should be a red flag.
Another one I'll call "Amy". Amy was a nervous wreck. She made you nervous just sitting next to her. She came to school every day with her hair and clothes looking like she pulled them on as she was driving...and came to clinicals the same way.
She flipped out so bad over EVERYTHING that she couldn't function. We asked her to help with a foley one day, she shook her head and said nervously, "No, I can't do that."
Well, turned out she had a problem with TOUCHING people. No amount of coaxing fixed it. No amount of support. Our fourth day in clinical our instructor sent her in ALONE to bathe a 74-year old woman....just to make her do it.
"Amy" walked out.
Yup, you may not be right 100% of the time, but you can bet your bottom dollar, if you work with enough people and the public, you will be pretty darn close.
Every single one of these people took up a slot of someone that probably would have finished the program.
Remember that.
Grades should be the MOST important...but you can pick up in things like this, if they just had an interview.
Grades should be the MOST important...but you can pick up in things like this, if they just had an interview.
Possibly I suppose, but I don't think it's as simple as described. First of all, interviewing is a skillset as well, and it's very possible that you'd be screening out folks who didn't yet have that skill set, while the folks you described would get in. Would the girl with the boyfriend "really" have spent the entire interview speaking about her boyfriend? Interviews are like a first date, folks are on their best behavior.
Secondly, this isn't the real world yet....it's school, shouldn't candidates that have the rest of the qualifications needed get a chance to learn and grow through their program? The girl with the boyfriend just sounds young, or possibly in her first new relationship....she might have figured it out. The gal in the math class might have figured out during the term what she needed to do to succeed. No one can predict what someone will do with an opportunity.
At the end of the day, there's a big difference between clinically "reading" someone and making snap judgments.
Sure they can. Experienced nurses are very, very good at reading people....Every single one of these people took up a slot of someone that probably would have finished the program.
Remember that.
Grades should be the MOST important...but you can pick up in things like this, if they just had an interview.
Maybe, but I tend to be the kind of person who likes to give people the benefit of the doubt. Sure, there are people that I don't like from the first meeting, or shortly thereafter, or that set off warning bells, or that I can see will probably have trouble in the program, but also there are plenty of times that i've been wrong and was surprised at how smart and capable they turned out to be.
It's true that if those that end up not making it could have been kept out there would have been room for someone who might have made it in their place, but how do you prevent cutting off that person who would have surprised everyone, including themselves, and made it in spite of problems, and really grown as a person as a result?
I'm not saying there should be no psychological evaluation or character assessment at all, there are clearly cases where it would be best for some people not to enter the program, I just think you have to be careful in judging people, because people can and do change, when they're ready, or when the necessary impetus is there, and I think those that are ready to change should be given that opportunity.
It can never be a perfect process. Given that, my feeling is that unless there are clear signs, and I mean very clear, that they just don't have what it takes, and if they meet the academic requirements, they should be given a chance.
My school does it strictly based on a point system. I think it sucks. Here is the basic break down.
*Critical thinking test: 5/10/15
*GPA for 5 out 6 pre req (they take highest 5): 5/10/15/20/25/30
*Having your final pre req finished prior to applying: 5
*Previous Application into program: 10
*There are six classes worth 2 points a piece just for completing
*Then your A&P II, Nutrition, and Dev Psych are work points based on your grade: 5/A, 4/B+, 3/B, 2/C+, 1/C
*Then work experience: 5/10/15 (In this group you can also supplement volunteer hours, NSA membership or an intro to health science class. Each are worth 5 points but in this group you max out at 15)
With that being said the 144 applicants with the highest points get admitted. I think the process they use is terrible. I think if they want to do the non-subjective application, fine, but they need to change some things around. I think the critical thinking test should be weighted just as highly as the GPA, I mean, what good is a 4.0 if you can't think critically? I mean it is great to have a really book smart nurse, but if she can't think critically, that scares me. I also think the extra 10 points for a previous application is stupid, have they gotten any smarter in the year off? Probably not, if they needed extra points then they should have taken that time to improve the other areas, taking classes they haven't, working to fill out the 15 points, etc.
My CC does it the same as a previous poster....2.5 GPA, nothing lower than C in science pre-reqs, pass a nursing math test. Then be put on a waiting list that for me was 2 semesters, but has averaged 3-4 semesters for sometime. That said in my class of 48 to start we have lost less than 15% of the students(going into fourth semester)and previous graduation classes have NCLEX pass rates 94% & above. We have a reputation for turning out caring nurses with good skills. So GPA alone can't be an indicator....but our program is so much the "luck of the draw"....but it seems to be working! I'm not sure what the answer is!
Maybe, but I tend to be the kind of person who likes to give people the benefit of the doubt. Sure, there are people that I don't like from the first meeting, or shortly thereafter, or that set off warning bells, or that I can see will probably have trouble in the program, but also there are plenty of times that i've been wrong and was surprised at how smart and capable they turned out to be.
It's true that if those that end up not making it could have been kept out there would have been room for someone who might have made it in their place, but how do you prevent cutting off that person who would have surprised everyone, including themselves, and made it in spite of problems, and really grown as a person as a result?
I'm not saying there should be no psychological evaluation or character assessment at all, there are clearly cases where it would be best for some people not to enter the program, I just think you have to be careful in judging people, because people can and do change, when they're ready, or when the necessary impetus is there, and I think those that are ready to change should be given that opportunity.
It can never be a perfect process. Given that, my feeling is that unless there are clear signs, and I mean very clear, that they just don't have what it takes, and if they meet the academic requirements, they should be given a chance.
Oh, I'll agree with you there about it not being a perfect process. There is no doubt about that.
Nursing schools aren't exactly cranking out a high percentage of the people that they take in...yes, it's a tough program, but it's not impossible.
I have just seen students that fail for obvious reasons...partying, spending too much time with "the boyfriend", going to the beach the weekend before a major exam, not taking things seriously.
The point that I am trying to make is that if you have a conversation with these students...even a small one, sometimes these things can be easily revealed. To me, it's no more judgemental than assuming that just b/c someone is a 4.0 that they are going to "burn it up" in nursing school.
All of us who are currently in, know that is an animal that doesn't exist.
These slots in nursing school are precious, very, very precious. Patients are suffering b/c of the understaffing, and mistakes are being made...and nurses quit and retire every day.
They need to be filled with people who are going to fight tooth and nail to complete the program...not people that just feel like waking up one morning and saying, "OMG, scrubs are sooooo cute! I want to be a nurse so I can marry a doctor and quit my job!"
Our abused classmate, our widowed classmate that I described earlier...these are the people that fight tooth and nail to stay in the program. Who gives a rat's patoot about their grades right now...as long as they can pass the NCLEX...that is all that matters, b/c you can bet their learning won't stop there...and how valued do you think they will feel about their job?
The girl obsessed with her boyfriend? A typical interview question (if someone happened to interview her and wonder if this could be a problem) would be, "So, tell me about a typical week for you?"
Then her answer would be followed by asking her when she was planning to study...the specific answer that you are looking for, is how she plans on scheduling it, how much time she plans to devote to it, and how she plans on working that into her life and balancing her relationship...and is she willing to make sacrifices.
Schools are very small places. Most of the instructors know who is applying before your application hits the desk.
In a nursing ed class of mine, we were given a list of "students", basic info in similar categories that you describe. We were also told we had to balance minorities, gender, etc. in the mix of students. Our group chose the top 20 according to what we were told to look for, and the professor later told us that the 4 groups in the class (all of us with exactly the same lists and instructions), chose completely different sets of students. There is no one way to be impartial, and still meet all the expectations of everyone. Yet somehow, nursing schools still fill up, people pass the NCLEX, and life goes on. I think the schools NCLEX pass rate and percent of students that make it all the way through, says more about the selection process and the school, than any formula can.
justme1972
2,441 Posts
Thus, it is BACK to my original point, that just because you can excel academically, doesn't mean that you are capable of being a nurse.
There are "tell tale" signs that my study partner and I picked out, just from knowing these people outside of the program, and our predictions have so far, rung true.
If we can notice it, then other instructors can notice it.
We have about 6 students in our class that also, would rather watch than do. They don't have to "do" to pass the class...they just have to know how to do it in theory.
Those people that won't do in school, I can tell you now, won't "do" in a hospital.
...and that can probably start a whole other thread of nurses who are really, really good at "delegating" so they won't have to do anything...and every RN/LPN knows who those people are at their facility.