BSN

I don't know if it's a ploy really....ANA has been suggesting baccalaureate prepared nurses for years

...and years and years.

How's that working out for them?

...

Then again, I'm a mere ADN and may not fully understand.

Well thats your problem. Didn't you know that was part of the BSN indoctrination?

I am just a few courses into my RN-BSN program, and as of yet I have not learned anything new that has changed my patient care or improved my pt outcomes.

I am all for increasing my knowledge though.

You asked for some research and I provided ten separate studies. Ignoring the research doesn't make it any less valid. As for "only having" an ASN you said it not I. You may be right though, that could be why your having a hard time... guess we will never know

It seems ridiculous to me that "magnet status" requires BSN and having it gives better reimbursement for hospitals.

None of what you just said is correct.

I work at a Magnet Hospital and we have BSN, ADN and diploma nurses working, no time requirement to get a BSN, nothing.

No one would know if one was a BSN unless it's on their name tag, although I have a BSN and it's not on my name tag; maybe because I can't do nothing without that RN behind my name, I'm not so concerned about having that on a name tag, not when I sign my name.

Don't bite... Don't bite... Don't bite... Alright... I'll bite...

Just my opinion/2 cents...

I have an Associates in nursing. I also have a Bachelors in nursing. I also have Bachelors degrees in psychology and sociology. I know about research, I know about writing papers, and I know how to be a bedside nurse. I can tell you there are endless studies out there to prove any point. My opinion... the best patient outcomes come from those who have experience, and continue to learn. Continuing to learn doesn't necessarily mean get more degrees or alphabet soup after your name- it just means you are actively learning about new trends. Completing CEUs, actively participating in different groups within your work place, etc etc. This topic has been beat to death, revived and beat to death again. I will say, as some one who has both an ADN and a BSN- I credit my excellent patient care and their usual excellent outcomes to my associates degree training. My BSN taught me many things and I am proud to have that degree- but it definitely did not make me more safe at the bedside. I was safe due to my diligent training in my ADN program.

You asked for some research and I provided ten separate studies. Ignoring the research doesn't make it any less valid. As for "only having" an ASN you said it not I. You may be right though, that could be why your having a hard time... guess we will never know

You sly dog. You have me pegged.

How many of your BSN nurses in those studies are bridge nurses? There was just a huge thread on Gen about this a few weeks ago. I will try to dig it up.

I have no problem with BSN nurses. I have a BA in Psych. I like the idea of a 4 year degree. I'm in the bridge and it's FLUFF, and it's expensive, and it's not going to change my status.

As has been discussed before, those studies don't take into consideration that many BSNs were first ASNs with experience which makes the studies a little inaccurate.

I don't understand this argument. Maybe I should go find this other thread. The fact that some of the BSN nurses in the study were RN to BSN doesn't seem to matter to whether there are better outcomes. It might be an important factor if you were trying to argue that initial licensure BSNs are better than bridge BSNs but I'm not sure too many people are making that argument. What many are arguing is that why bother going through the two-step process when it can be over and done with all at once?

I wish I had lived in a city that offered an initial licensure BSN but I would have had to move and not had a nice Aunt who let me live with her for super cheap rent. I would have only had to go to school 2 more semesters (at $50 a credit hour no less) and I would have been a full fledged BSN. But I digress.

Now, would it be an interesting study to compare the outcomes of nurses with bridge BSN versus initial licensure BSN? I think it would though there is so much variation in quality it might not be productive.

As for my experience with RN to BSN, I went to a decent school, but I became fascinated and engaged and probably got a lot more out of my education than some of my classmates. I know I'm a better nurse today than before that coursework and those changes are clearly (in my mind) directly linked to the things I learned there. I had classmates declaring during capstone (in guarded tones as to not upset the professor) that this whole experience was useless and a waste of time, money and effort. What can I say, we took the same courses, had many of the same professors. You get out of the course what you put into it. Basic adult learning theory.

Do any of you truly think hospitals obsess over "better" or "worse" nurses? They worry about the BOTTOM LINE. Management love stats and numbers. They love saying "We had a 10% increase in....." Or "we had a 10% decrease in.." Anyone can say all day long about how great ADN nurses are..and guess what..I am not going to argue with you. However that is not statistical evidence and in this world you need to argue with data not "I think". Go to your management with peer reviewed evidence that shows better patient outcomes AND money saving to the hospital and guess what..they WILL be hiring ADNs over BSN. If a random person was asked would you like a doctor who went to Harvard or Michigan State which would they most likely pick? This does not mean one doctor is "better" or "worse". They have nothing else to go on besides perception. If people see a stat that hospital X has 75% BSN prepared nurses then hey..they MAY be more likely to pick that hospital. No one is saying an individual nurse is a good nurse or a bad nurse. MONEY TALKS. Do not take things personal...good or bad..hospitals are a business.

Well, let me think of how to word this.

Nursing is simply different. The other healthcare fields have moved into a position of requiring more education for entry positions such as pharmacists, physical therapists, occupational therapists, etc. Nursing has a dozen and 1 ways to enter the profession.

Under the guise of a shortage, we have increased the number of schools and the number of graduates which allows hospitals to not raise wages and have the pick of who they want to work for them. Some nurses still talk about hiring bonuses and being able to have multiple job offers before they left school. Is that true? I don't know.

Now, one thing that does make me nervous is when people will cite studies about hospitals based in other countries. I know a year or two ago there was a huge debate about bachelor-prepared nurses and they cited a study without fully researching and understanding how the nurses were prepared in that region. I argue for a more strict nursing curriculum that cuts out unnecessary classes and focuses primarily on nursing for a full 3 years of nursing education (for most BSNs, there is at least one year of general education classes that are not science related). That area actually had a similar model of what I proposed. So that was slightly amusing.

In all honesty, I think BSN nurses should have more nursing and science education and less general education classes.