Does the BSN in 10 apply to all nurses or just RN's and why?

Published

Does the bsn in 10 apply to all nurses or just rn and why?

Specializes in Pediatrics, Pediatric Float, PICU, NICU.
1 hour ago, Orca said:

I hate to pop your bubble, but I have a nursing degree, and it isn't a BSN.

What bubble are you popping? I didn’t and wasn’t saying that the only nursing degree one can have is a BSN.

1
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Pediatric Critical Care.
14 hours ago, Wuzzie said:

That was my point. Her "opinion", based on absolutely nothing, is one of the reasons there is so much in-fighting when this topic comes up. She has no facts to back up her opinion, just what she thinks. Take her point about public health nursing. "Many" BSN programs have clinicals in it. Well, so do may ADN programs and back in the dinosaur age when I went to a diploma school we did too. She seems to use this as an example to set the bar as to what differentiates and makes a BSN preferable while at the same time stating that not all BSN programs do this. So does that make those BSN programs less rigorous? I'm all for everyone getting to state their opinion but when you say something like she did you better have something to back it up. It's not like she said her favorite color is green. She pretty clearly stated that BSN programs expect more, grade harder, have a broader clinical experience and have more involved faculty. How she came to that conclusion is beyond me so I asked her to provide some proof. I don't think I was out of line to do so.

Fair enough. I didn't mean to imply that you were out of line, by the way. I don't think you were.

1
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Pediatric Critical Care.
11 hours ago, hppygr8ful said:

There will always be people who disagree on this topic but at the end of the day a patient in pain, or with a new CA Dx, or facing great loss doesn't care what studies show. Nothing replaces your presence at the bedside, a kind word, a gentle touch, quiet support - any nurse with any degree can do this.

Hppy

Well, yes, but so can a CNA, a social worker, a chaplain, etc. I know that isn't helpful, but I'm just saying those skills don't require one to be a nurse at all.

1
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Pediatric Critical Care.
1 hour ago, JKL33 said:

Ugh. Double post.

I often wish that there was an option to delete posts, at least for a 5 minute window or something.

1
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Pediatric Critical Care.
2 hours ago, murseman24 said:

It's nursing "theory" and other fluff classes that require you to write a paper about subjects that in no way pertain to clinical patient care. The education is nonsense, and would be better if it contained material applicable to medicine.

I of course agree that one can be an excellent nurse without a BSN. But it does always make me a little sad that subjects not directly related to bedside care are considered "fluff" and a waste of time. They aren't. This happens at every level...I hear it about bachelors degrees right on up through doctorate degrees in nursing...RNs up through DNPs. Nursing can be more than direct bedside care. The so-called "fluff" isn't worthless.

Perhaps if bedside nurses had better working conditions and staffing, they might have more opportunity to use the "fluff" (if interested). I wonder if that is a part of the problem.

5
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Neonatal Nurse Practitioner.
2 hours ago, It'sYaGirlK said:

Why not? There are LPN to BSN programs out there..

You become an RN in those programs. You don’t stay an LPN. That’s what I said in my first post.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in anesthesiology.
44 minutes ago, Julius Seizure said:

I of course agree that one can be an excellent nurse without a BSN. But it does always make me a little sad that subjects not directly related to bedside care are considered "fluff" and a waste of time. They aren't. This happens at every level...I hear it about bachelors degrees right on up through doctorate degrees in nursing...RNs up through DNPs. Nursing can be more than direct bedside care. The so-called "fluff" isn't worthless.

Perhaps if bedside nurses had better working conditions and staffing, they might have more opportunity to use the "fluff" (if interested). I wonder if that is a part of the problem.

I would like to think so, but I whole heartedly disagree. Please tell me one instance where a course in nursing informatics, ethics, and "nursing management". Is applicable AT ALL. The management courses are complete baloney. They are all generalized, beginner courses that define certain aspects of clinical management and leadership. They are survey courses at best. The research based courses designed to improve on disseminating studies are very lacking in rigor and content. Every class I have ever taken relating to nursing that wasn't pertaining to medicine/science were beginning "101" courses. You would be much better served taking a few statistics classes or business courses to get some "depth" in knowledge. A COMPLETE waste of money. Even at the DNP level, most all of the extra courses are quite "fluffy", and none of them are particularly difficult. We would be much better served replacing the social science themed classes with more pharm, bio, chem, statistics, and business courses. Honestly I think the issue is that replacing the fluff classes with courses deeper in (read complex) content would make the curriculum too difficult for some. There are some smart nurses out there, but there are also plenty of those who would rather take an easy fluff class than actually learn some biology or chemistry. Just my two cents.

2
Up Vote Up Vote ×
1 hour ago, Julius Seizure said:

I of course agree that one can be an excellent nurse without a BSN. But it does always make me a little sad that subjects not directly related to bedside care are considered "fluff" and a waste of time. They aren't. This happens at every level...I hear it about bachelors degrees right on up through doctorate degrees in nursing...RNs up through DNPs. Nursing can be more than direct bedside care. The so-called "fluff" isn't worthless.

Perhaps if bedside nurses had better working conditions and staffing, they might have more opportunity to use the "fluff" (if interested). I wonder if that is a part of the problem.

Absolutely. (Ya think?) Fluff is a nice word. I would use "farce," myself.

I have a more appropriate/rational thought about this which I'll PM. ?

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Nursing Professional Development.
On 1/31/2019 at 8:03 AM, CrunchRN said:

I wonder who paid for these studies and who conducted them. I wish those same people would spend their time and energy advocating for better staffing levels which I think (guessing) would improve outcomes much more than making everyone become a BSN.

Actually, a lot of those same researchers do conduct other studies that look at staffing levels, skill mix, length of experience, percentages of certified nurses, etc. These are all variables they use (including educational level) in studying the factors that lead to improved outcomes. Many studies collect data on multiple variables at the same time and mathematically calculate which variables have the most impact. However, they often get written up as separate journal articles.

2
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Nursing Professional Development.
12 hours ago, murseman24 said:

I would like to think so, but I whole heartedly disagree. Please tell me one instance where a course in nursing informatics, ethics, and "nursing management". Is applicable AT ALL. The management courses are complete baloney. They are all generalized, beginner courses that define certain aspects of clinical management and leadership. They are survey courses at best. The research based courses designed to improve on disseminating studies are very lacking in rigor and content. Every class I have ever taken relating to nursing that wasn't pertaining to medicine/science were beginning "101" courses. You would be much better served taking a few statistics classes or business courses to get some "depth" in knowledge. A COMPLETE waste of money. Even at the DNP level, most all of the extra courses are quite "fluffy", and none of them are particularly difficult. We would be much better served replacing the social science themed classes with more pharm, bio, chem, statistics, and business courses. Honestly I think the issue is that replacing the fluff classes with courses deeper in (read complex) content would make the curriculum too difficult for some. There are some smart nurses out there, but there are also plenty of those who would rather take an easy fluff class than actually learn some biology or chemistry. Just my two cents.

I agree with some of what you say. I believe a lot of schools out there have "dumbed down" their programs to please their potential "customers." As a profession, we have not done a good job of establishing and enforcing high standards for our education. However, I don't believe that justifies a stance that says that higher levels of education should not be required or rewarded in nursing. Those who get higher levels of education (even if it is mediocre) should get some credit/reward for what they have gained for that education.

Also, when I hear people say that their educational programs were "fluff" or "of poor quality" ... I always why they invested so much of their time, effort and money into such a bad program? Why didn't they seek a better-quality program? Why did they contribute to the decreasing of standards by paying their money to a school that was providing a sub-standard education? Such students who are willing to pay for sub-standard education are part of the problem -- and yet they blame the schools, faculty and students of the strong programs for working to improve the quality of our educational system. The problem is not that "more education is bad." The real problem is that too many nurses are willing to pay for education that is not very good -- promoting the development of those bad programs.

Also, anyone who finds themselves in a bad class that isn't teaching them anything useful should make an effort to use that class as a springboard for some activities that WOULD be meaningful to them. A good student can take a mediocre class and make something positive of the experience. A poor (or mediocre) student will just sit their passively and whine about the course. Most educational opportunities are what you make of them.

2
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in CPN.
15 hours ago, murseman24 said:

I went to an ADN, then did the ADN-BSN. I got 4 ICU job offers and only put in two applications. I was on a 1 day rotation to the ICU and was offered a job in said ICU with the option of starting in their CVICU if I so wanted. During the interview the manager said she preferred applicants from our school over the much more expensive BSN program because our clinical experience was much better than the BSN. Everyone knew this, and we could see it on our rotations at the hospital. the BSN students were coddled and not required to really "get their hands dirty." Where I am now (different state) some of the programs won't even let the students pass meds. I think it's dependent on school/location. I received an excellent nursing education, and the BSN did ZILCH in making me a better nurse. The only reason I did it was that it was a hoop to jump in order to get where I am now. This is obvious if you look at any of the curriculum for the BSN. It's nursing "theory" and other fluff classes that require you to write a paper about subjects that in no way pertain to clinical patient care. The education is nonsense, and would be better if it contained material applicable to medicine.

The lack of standardization on clinical hours and experiences really surprises me, but learning more (like for my state BON there is no minimum requirement for hours - just a recommendation), I'm realizing that it shouldn't. That's definitely something that needs to be fixed. And yeah, overall the classwork difference in BSN and ADN is basically theory and research type stuff. I'm in an RN-BSN program now, and as much as I dislike some of it (I started out viewing nursing as a more technical skill rather than something to philosophize over), I also can see the usefulness of it for the profession and health care as a whole. I'm definitely more thoughtful about my approach and dedication to my chosen profession, and I see the opportunities available to nurses to help instigate change in healthcare. (That's not to say ADNs can't have this mentality, but for me, the drive to achieve more and be a better nurse made pursuing a BSN a "no question" type decision even though I hate school. Perhaps the idea of a Technical RN (ADN) and a Professional RN (BSN) distinction has some merit, but honestly, I would anticipate large hospitals still requiring BSNs at the bedside. It's a status thing for the most part, IMO, even if there are potentially better patient outcomes in hospitals with higher percentages of BSNs.

Here's the thing though - even though not recognized internationally, ADNs and BSNs are both equal in scope and capacity to be excellent registered nurses. From my very humble (because really, I don't know a ton about the details of this issue) perspective, I can't help but wonder though why nurses, who should always be in a state of continual learning and growth, so strongly oppose the idea of BSN being the entry-level or even simply the expected eventual level of education? I get that BSN isn't initially attainable for everyone wanting to become a nurse - it certainly wasn't for me. I don't know if I would have gone to nursing school had the only option had been a BSN. Still, I don't understand the overall, emphatic passion against the BSN. We should all be looking for opportunities to standardize and grow our profession.

And just so friends up thread don't think I'm ignoring them, I don't need to provide "proof" for things I clearly state are my opinion. If I make a definitive statement, by all means. I was simply sharing my experience and perspective. That being said, it looks like the issue is that there is a huge lack of standardization in clinical experience from program to program. Not that people aren't adequately being trained for nursing - I can't claim that. But we can all agree that there are bound to be shortfalls in some of these programs (which I'll acknowledge can be BSN or ADN) due to the lack of standardization.

3
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in CPN.
On 1/29/2019 at 2:14 PM, CelticGoddess said:

Exactly how did the BSN programs clinicals exceed those of your program?

1

I can't speak for all programs and I also can't speak to how accurate my perceptions are. As an example though, one of the local BSN programs incorporates public health nursing, which I didn't have any experience with. They also have a more specific final clinical semester that allows them to work with one nurse as a type of preceptor - they work the nurse's schedule. They don't just get assigned to whoever is available that Wednesday. This wasn't how my ADN program worked and thus I feel I missed out on some critical opportunities to learn more about what nursing is in "real life." Instead, I would be bumped around to whoever was available, only occasionally having the same preceptor.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
+ Join the Discussion