CCNE Accreditation Comments

Are you in the Clinical NPs for Change fb group Jules?

I suspect that part of the problem is that too many people don't want the standards increased. Too many people in nursing are looking for the easy path, and want to be taken seriously as a professional but don't want to do the "heavy lifting" all the other professions take for granted.

Exactly this. I can't tell you how many nurses ask about my program and when I say the lectures are "live" and you have to go to campus, etc, they wrinkle their nose and say never mind. Nursing caters to the lowest common denominators.

Heaven forbid we require too much to have people's lives in our hands. Wouldn't want to be inconvenienced.

Exactly this. I can't tell you how many nurses ask about my program and when I say the lectures are "live" and you have to go to campus, etc, they wrinkle their nose and say never mind. Nursing caters to the lowest common denominators.

Heaven forbid we require too much to have people's lives in our hands. Wouldn't want to be inconvenienced.

I look at it more from this perspective. While many have some thoughts or opinions on the state of nursing practice, most won't take the time or bother to make those opinions known to the powers that be. Just like most people don't take the time to vote... Most don't call their congressmen about whatever... And most wouldn't show up or support a local nursing advocacy group to save their life. People are lazy and can only care to tackle a subject when they get fired up on an internet forum. Past that, those NPs who have a job are content working and making a living and certainly won't admit their education was possibly lacking and those who want to be here don't want to make the process harder on themselves.

After reading the proposed document here are the highlights.

To be accredited you need

80% cert rate

70% hired rate at 12months.

School must have the three P's and follow MSN/DNP major publication

No where do I see guaranteed site acquisition by the school.

Seems like the average weak accreditation as normal.

I see someone responded to me but it was deleted before I could see it. Only could see the first sentence lol. I am aware of the different proposals, my post was intended to give the basic overview of the current one from the CCNE (aka the only one that matters because that is what will likely be passed). First, to let people know the current "changes"that they are proud of like new terminology in wording does not change anything substantial. The current CCNE proposed paper is basically identical to previous. Lastly, to inform the community that if you want to change things then your voice needs to be heard. As, obviously CCNE does not envision their view points as the same as ours. By demonstration of the current weak accreditation standards they have put forth :).

I see someone responded to me but it was deleted before I could see it. Only could see the first sentence lol. I am aware of the different proposals, my post was intended to give the basic overview of the current one from the CCNE (aka the only one that matters because that is what will likely be passed). First, to let people know the current "changes"that they are proud of like new terminology in wording does not change anything substantial. The current CCNE proposed paper is basically identical to previous. Lastly, to inform the community that if you want to change things then your voice needs to be heard. As, obviously CCNE does not envision their view points as the same as ours. By demonstration of the current weak accreditation standards they have put forth :).

Unfortunately I agree about the CCNE. They are not going to change a thing.

Low standards..... big money grab for schools and CCNE. Patient safety isn't the bottom line. Cash flow is.

Low standards..... big money grab for schools and CCNE. Patient safety isn't the bottom line. Cash flow is.

And an endless supply of low quality matriculants to supply the cash...