Is the RN--->BSN push a clever way to get older nurses out of the way

TiffyRN, BSN, PhD · Apr 17, 2014

they commonly do more than 2 years now, and don't get the credit. I think many things could be covered, in a less intense way perhaps, but at least touched on. and not add to the time constraints.

This is the reason that I thought ADN program was a bad idea years ago even as I went through it. I took 3 solid years (including 5 summer semesters) and for my trouble, I went home with an ADN. For one more year, I could have had a BSN (if that had been my path from the beginning). As it was, I wind up having to complete another 20 credits of leveling courses. It would have been better and certainly cheaper, in state tuition even at universities was about oh, $35/credit hour back then.

My contention is that ADN programs rarely turn out nurses in 2 years (I know there are others here that see this happen consistently, but it's not common throughout the US). 3 years is much more standard. A collaboration/partnership between community colleges and universities would be far more beneficial.

But back to morte's quote.

Here's the thing. . . I'm a decent student (I'll leave it at that and not get braggy). I just don't know how much more they expect to cram into 2 year programs than they already do. The problem then is that students just can't absorb what's being tossed out there.

For years, I thought I had the most incompetent nursing professors ever. In my view, they taught me practically nothing except how to pass the NCLEX. Years later, I helped my husband go through RN school. With a few years experience and more available brain cells (as in, not trying to learn everything related to nursing), I realized that those professors had tossed a lot more information out there to us, we just weren't in a place where we could absorb any more information.

When I got to BSN classes and was formally introduced to theory I realized, hey, I've heard a little about this, but it was glossed over so quick, and if it was on the NCLEX it was negligible. And as I recalled more, they were simplifying things quite a bit; as in, practical application of this nursing theorist blah, blah, blah (insert Peanut's teacher voice). Our brains were too crammed to absorb anything more. We were still .

I looked at a course schedule for a local BSN program out of curiosity and it looks like they get two solid full-time years of nothing but nursing courses. I was still taking co-requisites along with my nursing courses until the last semester. So I don't think "2 year" (ha) programs need to cram any more information in them. They need to partner with universities and stick to teaching freshman/sophomore courses at a reasonable cost.

And apologies to my former nursing professors for denigrating their work all these years. I had no idea what a huge task they had and they did the best they could with the time allotted.

PMFB-RN, RN · Apr 17, 2014

However, I can tell you plenty of times when I was glad as hell to have taken physics, two semesters of chemistry and one of organic chem, anthropology, economics, psychology, and sociology in my bedside practice. And you bet they made me a better nurse than I would have been without them.

I don't doubt how glad you were to have taken physics, 2 semesters of chem, organic chem, and the other classes. However a BSN behind a nurse's name is no more or less an indication they took those classes or not. They are by no means universally required.

Considering that ALL of my ADN students have come to the ADN program with previous bachelor's degrees, usually in science, I think neither the ADN or BSN is any indication a nurse has the kind of background you have.

Did you take all of those classes as part of a BSN program?

MunoRN, RN · Apr 18, 2014

Ok, this I don't hear from a lot of the ADN as entry level defenders. For the most part, I hear arguments that the studies are flawed. Sadly, this is from a group that is (by and large) not versed in the intricacies of research. This sounds sad.
What you, MunoRN are contending is worthy of attention. For myself, as as 1992 ADN graduate, I had little to no theory, NO research, virtually no community nursing (oh, we had to attend ONE AA meeting). These are the aspects I found greatly deepened my nursing knowledge in the last couple of years and I am sad that people are fighting so hard against it.

I think there are those that both overstate what the studies show and those that understate what the studies show.

I don't think that people in general are fighting against statistics, research, theory, etc being part of all RN education. These are progressively becoming more and more common in ADN programs.

The studies look at the effect of eduction where the average education was a nursing program in the early 80's (surveys done in 2000 of nurses with an average age of 42). I don't think there's really much of an argument out there that early 80's nursing programs need improving, and that process was already well underway even before these studies came out.

I doubt even the most ardent supporters of BSN as entry to practice really believe better outcomes are due to what we call the education, it's the education itself. Because of this, it should be possible to get better outcomes by providing the components of components of a BSN program that produce better outcomes, but to ADN students.

MunoRN, RN · Apr 18, 2014

I wasn't very clear there; in my opinion there is no reason why the CC programs can't continue the trend of bridging/partnering with colleges and universities in providing lower cost bachelor education.

That's what we're already doing, so you're advocating that we just stay the course?

allnurses Guide · Apr 18, 2014

That's what we're already doing, so you're advocating that we just stay the course?

Sure. Just hold entry until completed.

MunoRN, RN · Apr 18, 2014

Sure. Just hold entry until completed.

So your fine with renaming current ADN programs as BSN programs?

allnurses Guide · Apr 18, 2014

So your fine with renaming current ADN programs as BSN programs?

Provided they meet the appropriate criteria in association with a college or university. Any less and the students of these programs pay for and do the work without the recognition.

Susie2310 · Apr 18, 2014

A clever way to get multi-year nurses out of facilities seems to be a push in a number of facilities due to having to pay them for their many years per a union contract, the years of merit based raises, back when nurses actually GOT yearly wages and other benefits that now affect the bottom line of the facility.
Most orchestrated by Master's prepared directors who have little to no bedside experience.
For a number of multi year nurses, it was a time of good bedside care. That the art of nursing was just as important as the science. That it was a humbling experience to work with the ill, the vulnerable. That a patient was not discharged until they were at the highest functional level possible, even if that were 2 weeks later.
Now, it is a push to get em up and get em out. A BSN prepared nurse can pull a rabbit out of a hat--they had to--multiple papers on theory and other subjects have most researching the most obscure to make sense. It is an alternate education based on thinking outside of the box, which equates proper documentation to ensure facilities get paid.
Most facilities don't want one to be experienced enough to really KNOW that a patient is not actually at their best to be discharged. They don't necessarily care that one is clinically skilled. They seemingly care about how it is documented accordingly so that their reimbusement rate is at an all time high. They want spin doctors, not classic bedside nurses.
The class argument is a valid one. However, most patients don't care if you are a doctorate degree, they are interested in having their needs met. Hence the disconnect. This is why "I endevour to give you the most excellent care" is amusing at best.
Because facilities have changed so much in their care models and priorities, BSN is the preference for many. Because to attempt to play mind games with patients (BSN's are more educated, therefore better nurses) with scripting and in such a rush to get them out the door within very distinct time frames--this is in deep contrast to how many clinically based education works, and how many multi-year nurses have practiced. Then it becomes a practice issue for many a seasoned nurse.
What is also laughable is the thought process that a "higher class" person gets a BSN. Interestingly, those who are in the poverty range (which really has not a thing to do with "class") can and do get such financial aid assistance that they can really go to school for close to nothing at all as far as tuition. And more seasoned nurses who are making decent wages are lucky to be able to get a loan. Which makes it near impossible to take on a more advanced degree.
Every part of nursing should have a place. Every patient would fare well with a team of multi-disciplined/degreed nurses who can work together for the good of patient care.
However, if we continue to have the power that be be the powers that have no nursing experience just a degree that says they can run the show, this mindset will continue.

I agree with your post except for this part:

"A BSN prepared nurse can pull a rabbit out of a hat -- they had to -- multiple papers have most researching the most obscure to make sense."

I completed my ADN-BSN in an accredited program at a state university, where the bridge students took classes along with the generic BSN students. I can tell you that the students, both ADN-BSN and generic BSN, did not walk on water. I believe you are giving too much credit to the BSN. I say that having graduated with honors from my ADN and ADN-BSN programs and having joined Sigma Theta Tau in my final BSN semester. You are correct that we did write a good number of papers, some of which I found to be busywork, that required research, creativity, and for some papers, a tolerance for boredom, but there was nothing magical about the BSN. My experience was that the research course was a good course, and was important and useful; the advanced health assessment course was excellent because the instructor was excellent and the course content was good; the public health nursing course was informative and interesting, and the community health nursing practicum was useful. College statistics, another requirement, was an excellent, very useful course. The extra coursework I mentioned above was worthwhile, but no more than that, as I had already taken college level coursework for my ADN program.

PMFB-RN, RN · Apr 18, 2014

I think there are those that both overstate what the studies show and those that understate what the studies show.
I don't think that people in general are fighting against statistics, research, theory, etc being part of all RN education. These are progressively becoming more and more common in ADN programs.
The studies look at the effect of eduction where the average education was a nursing program in the early 80's (surveys done in 2000 of nurses with an average age of 42). I don't think there's really much of an argument out there that early 80's nursing programs need improving, and that process was already well underway even before these studies came out.
I doubt even the most ardent supporters of BSN as entry to practice really believe better outcomes are due to what we call the education, it's the education itself. Because of this, it should be possible to get better outcomes by providing the components of components of a BSN program that produce better outcomes, but to ADN students.

You make some very good points but I do disagree about one thing. I think that for many supporters of BSN as entry to practice it matters VERY much what the education is called. I think very many of them pretty much only care about the letter and the name, and only give lip service to the actual education.

jadelpn, LPN, EMT-B · Apr 18, 2014

I agree with your post except for this part:
"A BSN prepared nurse can pull a rabbit out of a hat -- they had to -- multiple papers have most researching the most obscure to make sense."
I completed my ADN-BSN in an accredited program at a state university, where the bridge students took classes along with the generic BSN students. I can tell you that the students, both ADN-BSN and generic BSN, did not walk on water. I believe you are giving too much credit to the BSN. I say that having graduated with honors from my ADN and ADN-BSN programs and having joined Sigma Theta Tau in my final BSN semester. You are correct that we did write a good number of papers, some of which I found to be busywork, that required research, creativity, and for some papers, a tolerance for boredom, but there was nothing magical about the BSN. My experience was that the research course was a good course, and was important and useful; the advanced health assessment course was excellent because the instructor was excellent and the course content was good; the public health nursing course was informative and interesting, and the community health nursing practicum was useful. College statistics, another requirement, was an excellent, very useful course. The extra coursework I mentioned above was worthwhile, but no more than that, as I had already taken college level coursework for my ADN program.

And hence one of my points--a BSN has a student engaged in a process where one is writing papers regarding who knows what, and by the end of it all, I am sure said student is just so exhausted with a "prove or disprove this theory" coursework they have exhausted all of their search engine options.

This equates to a bottom line for a facility. If you can pull whatever billable options you can from a patient, and then get them out in record time, you are a "good" nurse. I am not suggesting ADN's can not do this. I am not even suggesting that LPN's can not do this. However, a BSN can due to the extra course work in the many, many papers that are needed to pass the courses. Most can justify just about anything.

And the last thing that a number of facilities want is a bedside nurse to "find" things that muddy the waters.

If one is truly seeking a BSN because they want personal growth, then by all means have at it then. If one is required to obtain a BSN because facilities want nurses who can play the game to raise their bottom line, their so-called prestige, to make them look better on paper, that is where I have the issue.

I have a problem with taking on debt to make someone else look better for little extra other than I can elaborate appropriately, so I would be fun in my personal life at parties.

subee, MSN, CRNA · Apr 18, 2014

Not saying any of these classes would not be useful, but my RN_BSN doesn't require us to have any physics, any chemistry, any economics, or anthropology.
Would that mean it's inferior?

Yes, most certainly.

SmYle4PeDs, BSN · Apr 18, 2014

A clever way to get multi-year nurses out of facilities seems to be a push in a number of facilities due to having to pay them for their many years per a union contract, the years of merit based raises, back when nurses actually GOT yearly wages and other benefits that now affect the bottom line of the facility.
Most orchestrated by Master's prepared directors who have little to no bedside experience.
For a number of multi year nurses, it was a time of good bedside care. That the art of nursing was just as important as the science. That it was a humbling experience to work with the ill, the vulnerable. That a patient was not discharged until they were at the highest functional level possible, even if that were 2 weeks later.
Now, it is a push to get em up and get em out. A BSN prepared nurse can pull a rabbit out of a hat--they had to--multiple papers on theory and other subjects have most researching the most obscure to make sense. It is an alternate education based on thinking outside of the box, which equates proper documentation to ensure facilities get paid.
Most facilities don't want one to be experienced enough to really KNOW that a patient is not actually at their best to be discharged. They don't necessarily care that one is clinically skilled. They seemingly care about how it is documented accordingly so that their reimbusement rate is at an all time high. They want spin doctors, not classic bedside nurses.
The class argument is a valid one. However, most patients don't care if you are a doctorate degree, they are interested in having their needs met. Hence the disconnect. This is why "I endevour to give you the most excellent care" is amusing at best.
Because facilities have changed so much in their care models and priorities, BSN is the preference for many. Because to attempt to play mind games with patients (BSN's are more educated, therefore better nurses) with scripting and in such a rush to get them out the door within very distinct time frames--this is in deep contrast to how many clinically based education works, and how many multi-year nurses have practiced. Then it becomes a practice issue for many a seasoned nurse.
What is also laughable is the thought process that a "higher class" person gets a BSN. Interestingly, those who are in the poverty range (which really has not a thing to do with "class") can and do get such financial aid assistance that they can really go to school for close to nothing at all as far as tuition. And more seasoned nurses who are making decent wages are lucky to be able to get a loan. Which makes it near impossible to take on a more advanced degree.
Every part of nursing should have a place. Every patient would fare well with a team of multi-disciplined/degreed nurses who can work together for the good of patient care.
However, if we continue to have the power that be be the powers that have no nursing experience just a degree that says they can run the show, this mindset will continue.

Wow!!! This was very well written. This honestly, was one of the best responses I have read!

Smyleern2b walking by faith :)