Serious question-how do you explain the DNP to the average layperson?
I'm not a NP (MSN-Ed) and I am currently in an education and leadership focused DNP program. I work in nursing education and am excited about the knowledge and opportunities that my advanced studies will bring. While still evolving (and rightly so), I believe that having a terminal practice degree is a great step for nursing. My question, though, is how do you explain what this means to the layperson? I thought I knew, until this week, when I attempted to explain it to my mother-in law. She asked how school was going and then said, "So...are you going to be an NP now?" I offered that it expanded my current skills and knowledge, as well as opportunities for leadership and faculty positions. She just seemed baffled that if it wasn't "seeing patients", what was it? I also made the parallel to the PhD, but pointed out the difference. It was a pretty short conversation as she lost interest quickly...
So, how do you explain the DNP to your friends and family; especially if you are considered part of the educated but non-advanced practice group?
All of those studies posted are pretty biased. I mean cmon you know they are not controlling for all of the variables.
With all of these online shabby for profit NP programs out there, you know more and more complex diagnoses will be missed. The argument that you can just refer out a complex patient is false if you do not know what you are looking for.
It doesn't take research studies to show that, just common sense. Nurse practitioner quality of care will go down over time due to the mass of graduates being produced by these crappy programs. Everybody here seems to be thinking my war is with nurse practitioners. It is not, it is with the shabby education model that a large amount of schools have.
But what do you expect when you post on a forum full of nurses, they will battle till they can't breath if you tell them anything truthful, such as they are not as Godlike as they think they are.
Specializes in burn ICU, SICU, ER, Trauma Rapid Response.
That is not exactly true. Market demands have a big impact on people wanting to enter certain career fields, but as the AACN is not the governing body of any APRN group there recommendation only goes so far.
The CRNA (AANA and COA) advocated and mandated that doctorate level education would be the new entry requirement for all new CRNAs by 2025, and all current NA schools have either already switched to a entry level doctorate or are making the switch.
I am sure if the NP credentialing bodies made the same decision there would be an equal response by NP programs.
I will be interested to see what the sole CRNA program in my state does about this. Currently it is located in a college that does not have a nursing program, and does not grant any doctorate degree. CRNA grads graduate with MS in Biology.
I will be interested to see what the sole CRNA program in my state does about this. Currently it is located in a college that does not have a nursing program, and does not grant any doctorate degree. CRNA grads graduate with MS in Biology.
It depends if it is a profitable program they will probably just switch to a DNAP. What state are you in?
All of those studies posted are pretty biased. I mean cmon you know they are not controlling for all of the variables.
With all of these online shabby for profit NP programs out there, you know more and more complex diagnoses will be missed. The argument that you can just refer out a complex patient is false if you do not know what you are looking for.
It doesn't take research studies to show that, just common sense. Nurse practitioner quality of care will go down over time due to the mass of graduates being produced by these crappy programs. Everybody here seems to be thinking my war is with nurse practitioners. It is not, it is with the shabby education model that a large amount of schools have.
But what do you expect when you post on a forum full of nurses, they will battle till they can't breath if you tell them anything truthful, such as they are not as Godlike as they think they are.
lol lol lol go back to writing papers
Common sense tells me that there are thousands of articles supporting APRN practice including reviews by IOM and Cochrane database.
Do you think they everyone is in on some big conspiracy and that all these studies haven't been thoroughly vetted looking for biases?
All of those studies posted are pretty biased. I mean cmon you know they are not controlling for all of the variables.
And your response to the "pretty biased" studies is to post two opinion pieces by a physician who thinks physicians are better than nurse practitioners. Oh, well, then. Now I'm convinced. You certainly put everyone here in our place.
I wouldn't bother explaining it at all. If people really want to know they can look it up on Wikipedia themselves as they do everything else.
There are many, many different types of doctoral degrees and titles out there. The only one that some people seem to take exception to is the DNP. The DNP, like any other doctoral degree, is an opportunity to learn things at a more advanced level. What you choose to profile and study in-depth at that level is pretty much up to you. If you can write good papers to support your theory and research findings then you can create opportunities to influence clinical practice in a positive way.
The mistake that nursing academia made with the DNP was to call it a "clinical doctorate". It isn't that. But there is no such thing as clinical doctorate in any other discipline either. Pharmacists have a doctoral title, but they are not clinicians. Physicians have the doctoral title, but their degree title is a professional one, not an academic doctorate. From reading many of the posts in this thread it seems that some who have decided that they will not pursue the DNP have made it their mission to ridicule the degree and those who pursue it. I sometimes wonder if and when some of us nurses will ever stop knocking and trash talking others who are trying to elevate our profession and themselves.
From reading many of the posts in this thread it seems that some who have decided that they will not pursue the DNP have made it their mission to ridicule the degree and those who pursue it. I sometimes wonder if and when some of us nurses will ever stop knocking and trash talking others who are trying to elevate our profession and themselves.
I am in a DNP program currently, and enjoy it very much..from an academic point of view. It is absolutely not a clinical degree, although it is touted as such. I don't really see much of a benefit to clinical practice.
I am considering taking a leave of absence from the DNP to reevaluate it. I am academically inclined, so from that stand point I am finding it fulfilling personally. But I'm not sure if I can justify the cost of time and money just to satisfy academic fulfillment. Not sure what I'm going to do in this regard.
sauce
178 Posts
How I would end the war between nurse practitioners and doctors
Nurse practitioners, doctors, and the lost art of diagnosis
All of those studies posted are pretty biased. I mean cmon you know they are not controlling for all of the variables.
With all of these online shabby for profit NP programs out there, you know more and more complex diagnoses will be missed. The argument that you can just refer out a complex patient is false if you do not know what you are looking for.
It doesn't take research studies to show that, just common sense. Nurse practitioner quality of care will go down over time due to the mass of graduates being produced by these crappy programs. Everybody here seems to be thinking my war is with nurse practitioners. It is not, it is with the shabby education model that a large amount of schools have.
But what do you expect when you post on a forum full of nurses, they will battle till they can't breath if you tell them anything truthful, such as they are not as Godlike as they think they are.
lol lol lol go back to writing papers