First, I do not want to challenge nurses with several years of clinical experience that are ADN or diploma trained nurses or those nurses that graduated recently with a ADN, and I do not want to challenge anyone by saying that there is a difference between the ADN versus the BSN prepared nurse.
There is a push for all nurses to be BSN prepared or for ADNs to achieve their BSN; however, there is no increase in wages for the majority of those with their BSN or those going from an ADN to a BSN. I find that as a workforce, we do not understand our worth. Why do we need the BSN as it costs more and it has no pay benefits. Students that have an ADN from a community college have less student loans, and they make the same a student that has a BSN; however, the BSN student has increased student debt with no increased monetary income to show for their degree.
I challenge the nursing workforce to acknowledge our value as a profession, and demand an increase in pay if we are to have a BSN. The current yearly income of a nurse is based on the costs of an ADN level of education; however, it does not match the cost of a BSN cost of education. If I am required or it is preferred that I have my BSN, I need to be paid accordingly. I do not practice nursing strictly for the income, but I do appreciate putting a dollar value on the work I do.
One of the only realistic solutions for making BSN entry to practice is to take ADN grads and simply rename them as 'BSN' (with the addition of up to 1 year of general electives). If we take a recently graduated ADN nurse and simply change the letters on their diploma to "BSN", do you really think that suddenly alters the mortality rate of their patients?[/quote']
I agree that grandfathering-in is the most practical way of making the change. All current ADNs would remain what they are, RNs. Current ADN programs with enough credit-hours would simply become BSN programs or make small changes.
It does not alter the mortality rate in the present, but it may for the future. In ten years, all the current ADNs will have 10 or more years experience plus education and we will have 10 years of BSNs with less than 10 years experience. If the evidence is correct, this should be an improvement in overall mortality.
It also has an added bonus of temporarily reducing the RNs entering the workforce which increases demand and let's current surplus reduce.
IMHO, it's a decent plan. It's nothing more than an opinion based on current evidence.
I agree that grandfathering-in is the most practical way of making the change. All current ADNs would remain what they are, RNs. Current ADN programs with enough credit-hours would simply become BSN programs or make small changes.
It does not alter the mortality rate in the present, but it may for the future. In ten years, all the current ADNs will have 10 or more years experience plus education and we will have 10 years of BSNs with less than 10 years experience. If the evidence is correct, this should be an improvement in overall mortality.
It also has an added bonus of temporarily reducing the RNs entering the workforce which increases demand and let's current surplus reduce.
IMHO, it's a decent plan. It's nothing more than an opinion based on current evidence.
I guess what I'm asking is: Does the curriculum make the difference or do the letters on the degree make the difference? If an ADN program has already transitioned to a BSN Nursing program curriculum, is there any advantage to taking the extra step of call them BSN Nurses?
I guess what I'm asking is: Does the curriculum make the difference or do the letters on the degree make the difference? If an ADN program has already transitioned to a BSN Nursing program curriculum is there any advantage to taking the extra step of call them BSN Nurses?[/quote']
Not in my opinion. It's imperative they grant a BSN not an ADN because otherwise the student is getting screwed!
And we need to get rid of the joke RN-BSN that we know exist and are nothing more than a waste of money.
Not in my opinion. It's imperative they grant a BSN not an ADN because otherwise the student is getting screwed!
And we need to get rid of the joke RN-BSN that we know exist and are nothing more than a waste of money.
Many ADN programs have already transitioned to BSN curriculum, with no change in tuition due to the the change in curriculum. So if the value of a BSN is in the curriculum, not the letters "B-S-N", how are students getting screwed by getting the valuable part of a BSN at an ADN price?
I would think taking ADN programs, and changing nothing but the price is where students would get screwed, particularly if the only additional thing they get for that increased price are the litters "B-S-N", which isn't where the value lies.
Specializes in burn ICU, SICU, ER, Trauma Rapid Response.
To those that are objective the evidence does matter.
Oh naturaly. However we are not discussing the objective, we are talking about the ANA. There is very convincing evidence that actually having BSN as entry to practice is, at best, a secondary goal. The evidence for that is they do not advocate the well trodden path to higher degree requirements taken by PT, pharamacy and others. That of grandfathering in all those who met the old requirments for licensure and setting a date after which the new degree will be required.
Had they done so, and given all the community college ADN programs time to partner with a university, or come up with some other plan to meet the new requirments, I am convinced they would have met a minimum of opposition and BSN as entry to practice would have happend years ago.
It does not alter the mortality rate in the present, but it may for the future. In ten years, all the current ADNs will have 10 or more years experience plus education and we will have 10 years of BSNs with less than 10 years experience. If the evidence is correct, this should be an improvement in overall mortality. IMHO, it's a decent plan. It's nothing more than an opinion based on current evidence.
From your earlier post on this thread that I have included below, I presume you are referring primarily to the first study in your list when you refer to "the evidence" in your post above.
@MunoRN - Extant ADN programs that meet criteria for BSN wouldn't have to cost more (that is an entirely different debate), they would simply confer a different degree, that way students that do the increased work and pay for an increased number of credit hours are awarded the degree they have earned and all the benefits that go with it. For ADN program that do not meet the criteria, they have a choice: 1. shut down, 2. change curriculum to meet the criteria by adding more credit hours (which would, in theory, moderately increase cost, or 3. change to a LPN program.
@NRSKaren - Those are several of the studies that provide some evidence, yes.
@MunoRN - Extant ADN programs that meet criteria for BSN wouldn't have to cost more (that is an entirely different debate), they would simply confer a different degree, that way students that do the increased work and pay for an increased number of credit hours are awarded the degree they have earned and all the benefits that go with it. For ADN program that do not meet the criteria, they have a choice: 1. shut down, 2. change curriculum to meet the criteria by adding more credit hours (which would, in theory, moderately increase cost, or 3. change to a LPN program.
@NRSKaren - Those are several of the studies that provide some evidence, yes.
The shift to BSN curriculum is already well underway, 14 states have laws that require BSN articulation agreements for all ADN programs (which in turn require an adoption of BSN curriculum), and the rest are all at least beginning to make that transition just out of necessity. So for the most part, switch to BSN curriculum or get phased out is already the choice they face.
While there are those ADN's who will find having a BSN useful for obtaining an advanced degree, most won't go on to get a masters or doctorate. For those, the extra $20,000 or more they might have to pay, just to change the letters on their degree just isn't worth it; it's the education they need, not the name.
Next to EMTs and Paramedics, RNs in the US have the least professional education requirements of all health care professions. Even "Assistants" (PT, OT) require a minimum of an Associates. Nursing in the US is the laughing stock of the civilized world when it comes to education. Raising the bare to meet the minimum of what the rest of the educated world is doing in health care should not be too much to ask.
I would also come to the conclusion that those complaining about pay are employed. If you have a BSN and are employed, consider yourself one of the lucky ones. There are also many professionals in professions requiring more than a mere 4 year degree (teachers, IT, engineers, lawyers, accountants) who don't have jobs because of layoffs.
If we are a joke it is not nursing, but our greedy capitalistic system in general where a few people have billions and the majority are poor, barely getting by, working without benefits and healthcare and living like we were a third world country! We are the richest country on earth, my opinion, and yet stilll do not provide national healthcare because the govt doesn't want to do what is necessary to provide this in case it would get in the way of the rich getting richer! Give me a break! Even Costa Rica has national healthcare!
Our healthcare system is a joke! People without insurance and now many who won't be able to afford insurance. And many of us with insurance face thousands out of pocket and even thousands for premiums so it is not affordable. That is the real joke on the American people! You can have insurance, but it isn't affordable and isn't going to cover your medical needs so care is being rationed by cost already.
The fact that you can become a nurse without a BSN has to do with the hospitals desire for cheap and plentiful nursing labor to keep costs down! The reason many professions upgrade the minimum required to practice has more to do with keeping supply of workers down to lessen competition and keep wages up! It is not about being a professional! Now that their is a glut of nurses hospitals can afford to be picky and choose the BSN which is supported by Magnet status and all the latest propaganda. They are choosing BSN's because they are available, but don't expect them to pay more! There are so many BSN's now because people who have a BA/BS in other fields find out nursing is one of the few things out there that actually pays a living wage and so many are going back to school for a second degree! The first liberal arts degree just left them broke and in debt!
You are right about one thing, there are many professionals without jobs. A college degree doesn't guarantee a person a job! The perverse American capitalistic system that is pro-business is at the expense of the worker didn't want unions that are known to lead to higher wages. Without the unions we wouldn't have the benefits such as a 40 hr work week and overtime and pensions! But with the decline of unions we are seeing wages stagnating and pensions becoming practically extinct. The sad thing is I expect Obamacare will lead to the end of insurance thru your employer as they dump more workers onto the exchanges to save money on healthcare and pocket the profit!
This will cost many workers even more money than before and is with after tax dollars, while your premiums thru your employer are paid with before tax dollars. The only people benefiting are those poor enough to get the supplements and the rest of us will be paying more in taxes for those select few!
Why not even the playing field and give everyone national healthcare like a national medicare! We are already paying into medicare even though we can't access it tilll we're 65! The IRA's, 401k's and 403B were created by Congress to supplement a workers retirement, but the companies decided to use them as an excuse to dump their pensions instead and pocket the profit and this is exactly what is going to happen to many people's health insurance, it's only a matter of time! So the corp CEO's and Waltons of this world can keep more profit for themselves and the workers will become even poorer as they are forced to pay for retirement and health insurance and indebted from student loans to pay for college because people are brainwashed that college is the way to get ahead! It is not! Only a few people benefit from colleges degrees and many are worse off, working as janitors, waitresses, and secretaries but now having expensive student loans to pay back!
I only have my ASN. WOULD I LIKE MY BSN?? SURE...BUT IM NOT GONNA GET PAID ANYMORE...WHICH I THINK YOU SHOULD BE COMPENSATED FOR THE BSN... I FEEL THAT IF YOU WANT A MANAGEMENT POSITION IN THE HOSPITAL IT MAY BE BETTER YOU HAVE THE BSN...BUT IT REALLY DOESNT MATTER.... ITS THE PEOPLE YOU KNOW...THATS HOW YOU MOVE UP...I SEE IT ALL THE TIME
AS LONG AS YOU HAVE YOUR RN LICENSE....THATS THE MOST IMPORTANT ...for now
Many ADN programs have already transitioned to BSN curriculum, with no change in tuition due to the the change in curriculum. So if the value of a BSN is in the curriculum, not the letters "B-S-N", how are students getting screwed by getting the valuable part of a BSN at an ADN price?
I would think taking ADN programs, and changing nothing but the price is where students would get screwed, particularly if the only additional thing they get for that increased price are the litters "B-S-N", which isn't where the value lies.
It appears that some proponents of BSN for entry into practice have other unstated objectives in wishing to not recognize ADN education as equivalent to BSN education, if the curricula is in some instances now the same as for a BSN. If many ADN programs have already transitioned to BSN curriculum, or are in the process of doing so, should this not suffice for the proponents of BSN entry into practice to meet the BSN equivalency in curricula, bridging the educational coursework between ADN and BSN education? If this does not suffice, then it appears to me that other largely unnamed agendas are at play.
Some time ago there was a thread on AN titled: "In support of Independent NP practice." One poster commented that it was interesting to see that some of the people who were arguing in favor of independent NP practice were the same people who were arguing for BSN entry into practice.
Making it harder to begin practice as an RN by requiring a BSN for entry, and regarding ADN education as less than a full passport to starting work as an RN, when both ADN's and BSN's take the same licensing exam, would reduce the number of RN's entering the profession, as BSN education is usually considerably more expensive and time consuming. It would reduce competition for master's degree and doctoral degree nursing education, as potential candidates would likely be more bogged down with debt from the more prolonged and expensive BSN, and thus would reduce competition for jobs requiring a master's or doctoral degree in nursing. With the number of entrants to the profession and to master's/doctoral nursing tracks restricted, supply and demand would come into play, and one could envisage for the master's/doctorally prepared nurses increased salaries, improved job security, and possibly improved working conditions.
BostonFNP, APRN
2 Articles; 5,584 Posts