Almost 500,000 licensed registered nurses were not employed as nurses in 2000.*
Data from the Health Resources and Services Administration's (HRSA's) 2000 national sample survey of RNs shows that more than 500,000 licensed nurses (more than 18% of the national nurse workforce) have chosen not to work in nursing. This available labor pool could be drawn back into nursing if they found the employment opportunities attractive enough**
The ANA maintains that the deterioration in the working conditions for nurses is the primary cause for the staff vacancies being reported by hospitals and nursing facilities - not a systemic nursing shortage. Nurses are opting not to take these nursing jobs because they are not attracted to positions where they will be confronted by mandatory overtime and short staffing. **
76.6% (of) Licensed RNs (in The U.S. are) Employed in Nursing***
* Projected Supply, Demand and Shortages of Registered Nurses: 2000-2020 (released on 7/30/03 by the National Center for Health Workforce Analysis, Bureau of Health Professions, Health Resources and Services Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services). The Bureau of Labor Statistics, in an earlier report, predicted that that we will need one million new nurses by 2010 (Monthly Labor Review - November 2001) to cover new positions and replace the nurses who have retired.
Funny that people don't want to pay nurses the salaries and benefits they deserve for their knowledge and skills BUT they will pay plumbers, electricians, carpenters, lawyers and just about ANYONE else exorbitant amounts of money to fix things they depend upon, not to mention hourly labor fees of mechanics or countless other positions...I guess saving and maintaining life and health are not as important as daily conveniences...So why pay the CEO of the hospital ridiculous amounts and shaft the nurses? Because they can.....Period....AND they will...Period....However one feels it is all about shafting the nurse because hospitals depend upon them...Lets pay all the docs outrageous salaries, all the management staff and much of the ancillary personnel, but lets cut back on nurses salaries....Hmm...What rocket scientist worked that out AND is surprised that nurses just aren't interested in putting up with the foolishness.....
Specializes in Gerontological, cardiac, med-surg, peds.
Nursing schools are lowering the standards for passing grades so the "time isn't wasted" on someone who flunks out of the program. It scares me to death.
EXCUSE me, but I take exception to this statement. We definitely are NOT lowering our standards at OUR cc nursing school. We are, however, doing our best to RETAIN students (something that wasn't done well in the past... and our attrition rate is much lower). State boards, however, have become more difficult... and the most recent changes (this year--some fill in the blank questions, more emphasis on medications and prioritizing) guarantee that NCLEX will be even more of a challenge to pass. You've got to realize that our existing knowledge base is increasing exponentially--DOUBLING every year or two. So today's students have to learn MUCH MORE in LESS TIME. It's very difficult to keep up with the quantum changes in knowledge and technology... oftentimes material in our BRAND NEW textbooks is already out of date by the time we receive them.
Our school hasn't lowered standards either....but they did open the doors to more students. They used to accept somewhere around 60 students, this time it was 100...However, the standards to pass are the same...must have a minimum of 80% to pass and a 92% for an "A" and there is no rounding at all. I am finding that even though they let in more people, the ones who arent able to cut it are weeding themselves out. Have had a few quit because nursing just wasn't for them. I guess it all evens out as long as you don't lower the standards...we have a 98% pass rate in the NCLEX and graduate aprox 60 students every 3-4 months.
I agree there could be something to that, but I also think that boards must be harder today, too, than they were, say 25 years ago. We have made alot of advances in medicine, so I presume the boards are alot more technical than they previously were to accomodate those advances. Still, if my assumption is true, that coupled with lowering standards will have an even worse effect on the competency of future nurses.
Well, don't you agree we are talking about a continuum here? The nursing boards no doubt contained more detailed info in 1977 (my grad year) than they did in 1955...but still ...let's look at the pass rate and where the schools are in meeting the need. THAT is what I am looking at. Today it is not unusual for a RN student to take extra classes and courses in order to feel good about her/his ability to pass NCLEX. This was unheard of (UNNECESSARY) in my day. Just look at threads and posts from senior students to confirm this. I cannot help but question why. This is my point.:stone
My school did lower the standards, drastically. My grad year (2000) every nursing student who flunked out automatically had their grade changed to passing, no questions asked. This was very insulting to those of us who EARNED our passing grades.
As for the NCLEX, I do not know what the big deal is. I took the old style hand written version for the LPN exam in '93, and the modern, computerized version for the RN in 2000. Both were really pretty easy, IMHO.
I think one explanation for increased rates of failing the boards may be because of the changing motives of why people enter nursing. In the old days, many nurses were very dedicated to their profession, and felt nursing was a "calling". Today, I see that many who are persuing nursing are motivated by job security and what they perceive to be big bucks.
Additionally, many who entered nursing school in the past were full time nursing students, and that was it. Today, many people hold down jobs, raise families etc while going to nursing school.
Specializes in Specializes in L/D, newborn, GYN, LTC, Dialysis.
Originally posted by Hellllllo Nurse
My school did lower the standard, drastically. My grad year (2000) every nursing student who flunked out automatically had their grade changed to passing, no questions asked. This was very insulting to those of us who EARNED our passing grades.
As for the NCLEX, I do not know what the big deal is. I took the old style hand written version for the LPN exam in '93, and the modern, computerized version for the RN in 2000. Both were really pretty easy, IMHO.
I think one explanation for increased rates of failing the boards may be because of the changing motives of why people enter nursing. In the old days, many nurses were very dedicated to their profession, and felt nursing was a "calling". Today, I see that many who are persuing nursing are motivated by job security and what they perceive to be big bucks.
Additionally, many who entered nursing school in the past were full time nursing students, and that was it. Today, many people hold down jobs, raise families etc while going to nursing school.
Do not agree. Nursing was not my religious/spiritual calling. It was a means to be financially independent should something happen to my husband...a career with potential for great growth and personal satisfaction. I am frankly quite tired of hearing how it should be a calling for us to be good nurses. I could not disagree more. I am one of the evil ones who came in for other reasons and OH YES passed my boards first time around after a 4.0 GPA thru college. Guess my motives are questionable, but I did fine nonetheless...go figure!
I did not say that nursing "should" be a calling. I said that it was calling for many in the past. Nothing wrong with entering nursing if financial independence is a primary motivating factor, but if it is the ONLY motivating factor, that is scary, IMO.
I know of some docs who openly admit that they're in it strictly for the money and status, and they are not good docs.
I would love to read a thesis or a dissertation on the topic of individual's motivations re: becoming a nurse, past and present.
I was asserting that changing motivations MAY be a social trend, and that those changes MAY affect pass rates.
Even if this were a trend that could be backed up with stats, we all know that there are many exceptions to any trend.
Just expressing some THOUGHTS and IDEAS, here. I'm not saying "that's the way it is."
Specializes in Specializes in L/D, newborn, GYN, LTC, Dialysis.
Well I just don't believe the reason schools "may" be lowering their standards at all. I see EXCELLENT, capable, articulate grads join us each year. My school was so difficult (I graduated in 1997) that the attrition rate was 60%-----lowering standards? GOOD LORD if that's true, then what was the standard in the 60s/70s/80s???????
Nope, I think the reasons people enter nursing are as varied as the individuals that choose to do so. I don't think motives should be questioned....as long as people are WILLING to work hard, put in some serious sweat equity, are compassionate/caring and competent who CARES what their motives are?
I am sorry I got a bit preachy here. But I have seen time and again how we should be "called" to nursing as if nuns or priests. I disagree. Motives vary ---perhaps nursing school standards, too, I don't know. But from what I am hearing the NCLEX remains pretty much the same as it was 10 years ago...except for method of delivery (computer versus paper-and-pencil). I was not called, but I love what I do. I came in for the right reasons and plan to stick around, maybe not at the bedside but as a nurse, quite possibly into very old age. But that is just me....
I did not say that nursing "should" be a calling. I said that it was calling for many in the past. Nothing wrong with entering nursing if financial independence is a primary motivating factor, but if it is the ONLY motivating factor, that is scary, IMO.
I know of some docs who openly admit that they're in it strictly for the money and status, and they are not good docs.
I would love to read a thesis or a dissertation on the topic of individual's motivations re: becoming a nurse, past and present.
I was asserting that changing motivations MAY be a social trend, and that those changes MAY affect pass rates.
Even if this were a trend that could be backed up with stats, we all know that there are many exceptions to any trend.
Just expressing some THOUGHTS and IDEAS, here. I'm not saying "that's the way it is."
Many nurses entered the profession because their options were severely limited. Secretary, nurse, teacher, or mother, that was pretty much it. Entering male dominated fields was very difficult, and women were encouraged to stay in their place.
So I would guess that a lot of nurses who entered the field during the first half of the 20th century, and probably well into the 60s, were less motivated by a calling to nursing, or even wanting to help the sick, than the fact that there was little else they could do to earn a living.
Well, don't you agree we are talking about a continuum here? The nursing boards no doubt contained more detailed info in 1977 (my grad year) than they did in 1955...but still ...let's look at the pass rate and where the schools are in meeting the need. THAT is what I am looking at. Today it is not unusual for a RN student to take extra classes and courses in order to feel good about her/his ability to pass NCLEX. This was unheard of (UNNECESSARY) in my day. Just look at threads and posts from senior students to confirm this. I cannot help but question why. This is my point.:stone
Sure, it's a continuum (sp). I Just meant to point out that if nursing students were less informed to due more relaxed ciriculums, then the profession would suffer. Not sure that if that statemtnet is valid, though. Just hypothetical. I don't see new nurses as being ill prepared, except perhaps initially in a clinical sense, but that improves with experience.
mother/babyRN, RN
3 Articles; 1,587 Posts
Funny that people don't want to pay nurses the salaries and benefits they deserve for their knowledge and skills BUT they will pay plumbers, electricians, carpenters, lawyers and just about ANYONE else exorbitant amounts of money to fix things they depend upon, not to mention hourly labor fees of mechanics or countless other positions...I guess saving and maintaining life and health are not as important as daily conveniences...So why pay the CEO of the hospital ridiculous amounts and shaft the nurses? Because they can.....Period....AND they will...Period....However one feels it is all about shafting the nurse because hospitals depend upon them...Lets pay all the docs outrageous salaries, all the management staff and much of the ancillary personnel, but lets cut back on nurses salaries....Hmm...What rocket scientist worked that out AND is surprised that nurses just aren't interested in putting up with the foolishness.....