Is it true that a BSN will be mandatory soon?

jjjoy, LPN · May 3, 2008

No offense, but I think you are overthinking this issue of respect. Why are you so concerned that someone respect your education? Who has told you they think that nursing education is easy and why would you care? In reality your patients are in the hospital because they are ill and are focused on more pressing concerns than where you , one of their many nurses, went to school.

Someone had wondered why nurses might feel like they aren't respected. I was pointing out that what some nurses MIGHT be interpretting as disrespect to themselves as nurses might be a lack of respect for the educational qualifications to become a nurse. That is all.

wabisabi · May 3, 2008

Boy, that should sure ease the nursing shortage, huh?

DianeMyra · May 3, 2008

the point here is whether the bsn gives enough real advantage to patients to make it an entry level requirement for the profession. it clearly doesn't. one has to but examine the curriculum to see that much of it has nothing to do with bedside nursing, which is where the "nursing shortage" is.

I know all schools are different, but where I went to school we were required to have additional psych, sociology, logic and critical thinking, and pathophysiology 1 and 2 just to get into the BSN program. The knowledge obtained is advantageous to patients. Many of the additional requirements within the program also benefit patients; for example, leadership taught me how to advocate for my patients effectively, and research taught me how to cut through the enormous amount of information out there to find legitimate literature for best practice.

Whether I agree, or not, that BSN should be the entry level is not the point I'm trying to make. Frankly, I'm dismayed by erroneous statements. The post I quoted was just an example; I have read numerous posts about the "fluff" of the BSN, and the "superior skill level" of the ADN. My wish is that people would be happy with their chosen path without tearing down someone else's. ~ Diane

traumahawk99 · May 3, 2008

I know all schools are different, but where I went to school we were required to have additional psych, sociology, logic and critical thinking, and pathophysiology 1 and 2 just to get into the BSN program. The knowledge obtained is advantageous to patients. Many of the additional requirements within the program also benefit patients; for example, leadership taught me how to advocate for my patients effectively, and research taught me how to cut through the enormous amount of information out there to find legitimate literature for best practice.
Whether I agree, or not, that BSN should be the entry level is not the point I'm trying to make. Frankly, I'm dismayed by erroneous statements. The post I quoted was just an example; I have read numerous posts about the "fluff" of the BSN, and the "superior skill level" of the ADN. My wish is that people would be happy with their chosen path without tearing down someone else's. ~ Diane

is this reposit of knowledge really all that advantageous to patients, and in what way? i find that organizational ability and the ability to multitask (it doesn't hurt to have a strong back either) are really what makes an effective floor nurse. some of these qualities cannot be taught, or at least not easily. and certainly bsn programs have no advantage over even LPN programs in teaching these most important skills.

the things you're discussing, such as the ability to cut through mountains and find the best literature for practice are, well.. a waste of time. really, how much time does any nurse spend searching for literature to improve their practice? practice improves practice infinitely better than searching for literature. i can read about starting iv's till i'm blue in the face.. but having started a few thousand at this point, well.. i have bsn's come to me to ask me to start their iv's. why would they be doing this when they can just hop online and read the best literature with their valuable literature snooping skills?

certainly, no one should say that adn's have a superior skill level. the point of argument in this thread is indeed whether the bsn should be entry level... and the point i'm making is that it shouldn't be, simply because the supposed extra skills developed by bsn programs are irrelevant to floor nursing. since they are irrelevant, they are correctly classified as fluff in this context.

chestrockwell · May 3, 2008

When ever I point out to people how much work nursing is, and the comparitively low pay and compensation we receive, all I hear is, 'Just what do you 'girls' expect? You only went to school for two years!!" And you know, they are right. JMHO, and my NY $0.02.
Lindarn, RN, BSN, CCRN
Spokane, Washington

You might want to associate with different people if that's the respone you get whenever you complain about that. Are they suggesting that an extra 2 years of theory and research classes will then entitle you to complain?

DianeMyra · May 3, 2008

is this reposit of knowledge really all that advantageous to patients, and in what way? i find that organizational ability and the ability to multitask (it doesn't hurt to have a strong back either) are really what makes an effective floor nurse. some of these qualities cannot be taught, or at least not easily. and certainly bsn programs have no advantage over even lpn programs in teaching these most important skills.

Classes such as the extra pathophysiology courses I mentioned help reduce “failure to rescue”; I find it amazing that you can’t connect this to better patient outcome.

the things you're discussing, such as the ability to cut through mountains and find the best literature for practice are, well.. a waste of time. really, how much time does any nurse spend searching for literature to improve their practice? practice improves practice infinitely better than searching for literature. i can read about starting iv's till i'm blue in the face.. but having started a few thousand at this point, well.. i have bsn's come to me to ask me to start their iv's. why would they be doing this when they can just hop online and read the best literature with their valuable literature snooping skills?

Topics such as starting IV’s are hardly what is researched; with this statement it’s clear to me why you don’t appreciate the value of reading evidence based literature, and find it a waste of time.

certainly, no one should say that adn's have a superior skill level. the point of argument in this thread is indeed whether the bsn should be entry level... and the point i'm making is that it shouldn't be, simply because the supposed extra skills developed by bsn programs are irrelevant to floor nursing. since they are irrelevant, they are correctly classified as fluff in this context.

I’m certain this will be your viewpoint no matter how strong the evidence is to suggest otherwise. My last post did nothing to elucidate the value, and purpose, of higher education, even a little bit, for you. ~ Diane

traumahawk99 · May 3, 2008

if there is such a clear degree of evidence, where is it? you are certainly implying that there is a very clear body of strong evidence that proves the bsn level of education is needed for floor nursing. are you telling me that i will be less likely to allow someone to lay there with excessive work of breathing or inadequate perfusion if i have the extra pathophysiology training associated with a bsn? can you prove this, or are you simply going to imply there is proof that i refuse to see?

let us say that you find my iv example as a waste of time. i see it as a very valid example. the ability to have iv access has a whopping impact on patient outcomes. give me an lpn who can start an iv any day over a bsn who would chart that a med wasn't given because he/she couldn't get a stick. if this isn't a practical example, please, tell me where a real world example is? one that shows the ability of thie bsn to search out needle in the haystack literature that improves floor nursing... i.e. .. saves lives and improves patient outcomes. does a bsn degree mean i'd be more likely to observe isolations precautions? does it mean i would act more quickly to save a patient's life in the event of an electrolyte imbalance? my experience on the floor was shown me that it is the level of experience and motivation and work ethic of the nurse... not whether they're an lpn or rn or bsn or msn. and i am supposed to discount my direct experience for a bunch to studies done by phd level nurses? these are the same crazy people (imo) who tell us that things like therapeutic touch are valuable modalities. i'm sorry.. but they have very limited credibility to me. i can't just take their word for it without conclusive evidence, none of which is presented here.

the arguments behind the bsn requirement are nothing more than ivory tower arguments. is it surprising that the ivory tower finds itself indispensibly valuable?. why aren't citizen advocacy groups demanding a bsn education as entry level? the ivory tower has had years to make the case. are the people educated in other disciplines just too dumb to see the truth?

again, we'll return to the discussion behind this thread. it is whether a bsn will be required. here the very basic point is that those behind this move would love nothing more that to destroy the adn education model. that's the bottom line, isn't it? what do you call this, other than an attack and a power grab?

i am not and have never stated that those with bsn's should be denied licensure. i'm only stating that the emperor doesn't appear to have any clothes. the royalty of nursing may not like this observation, but to attempt to make this sort of a power grab at control over the nursing profession in the face of the coming health care crisis is grossly uncaring and irresponsible. shame on these control freaks!

tell us, do you work on the floor as a bedside nurse? for how long? what is your direct real world experience? i wager that i know dozens of lpn's who can nurse circles around most bsn's. to deny the value of their knowledge based on real world experience shows the worst sort of ingorance.

pagandeva2000, LPN · May 3, 2008

The only thing that discourages me with this arguement over the educational levels of nurses is that it sets us further apart, we are less united in the midst of chaos. I know of the arguments that occurred when LPNs came on to the scene; that we are getting paid less for similar work, etc...and I can even understand it (the same is happening to us with medication aides, medical assistants and the like). The fact is that for some unknown reason, we ALL exist. And, we all wish to make an honest living without robbing, killing or taking from society.

I feel that we all need each other to weather this storm, but will it ever happen with these arguments?? I remember when Magnet visited our hospital, the entire process seperated us even further. Their looming presence (which happened well before they actually arrived) caused more friction than ever before. ADN nurses were basically laughed at, and LPNs were placed below the bottom of a roaches toes. It caused so much chaos in this hospital that we didn't get it at all, because the rift was so deep. And for what?? To perpetuate the suffering of the patients and each other?

I guess I am saying this because it is really frustrating. I respect and admire all levels of nurses-not for their education alone, but their dedication (those that are, anyway). I do not see the connection to how we can make things better for our patients and each other.

DianeMyra · May 3, 2008

traumahawk99,

As previously stated, I'm not arguing whether the BSN should be entry level; it's a complex issue with logical arguments on both sides. Folks like LindaRN, Miss Mab, Freedom42 and many others have written posts addressing this topic much more eloquently than I could even pretend to. However, I find it illogical to declare that BSN programs dole out "fluff". I admit some of the pre-req courses were little more than making one well rounded, but I'm incredulous that anyone would deny that courses such as pathophysiology speak directly to patient outcome. As I also previously stated, I'm speaking to the choices offered where I live. I'm sure some ADN programs offer additional courses in patho that the program in my area did not.

Your posts are emotionally charged with little accuracy in regard to what I say. For example, I would never deny that real world knowledge isn't valuable; I'm not sure how you arrived at that. My point is that additional education is beneficial to the patient as well. I also didn't say your IV example was a waste of time, I said I can see how you think researching literature is a waste of time if you think nurses research how to start an IV by reviewing evidence based practice. I don't think anyone would deny that skills such as starting an IV are best learned in the field. But perhaps the efficacy of continuing the archaic practice of the Homan's sign could be determined and would cease when keeping up with the literature.

My point concerning your apparent unwillingness to budge comes from you misconstruing what I say. Not that my post was so very enlightening, in fact I thought it was fairly simple. I'm simply pointing out that the additional classes I took made me a better critical thinker, and more knowledgeable regarding the human body, and what can go wrong with it, than I was prior to taking them. I have also taken additional classes as credit/non-credit because I know more knowledge equates to better understanding. Personally, I have picked up on slight patient mannerisms consistent to something I learned about in class which led me to act sooner than I would have without that knowledge; I'm no fool, I know this perceptiveness increases with experience also, it simply doesn't have to be one or the other.

It would be much easier to discuss these issues if responses weren't so "knee jerk". You've stated in another post that the BSN degree is "worthless"; I don't expect to convince you otherwise. I've never cared for the phrase "Let's agree to disagree"; instead I'll just say that it's just too frustrating to have my words, and thoughts the behind them, mangled. ~ Diane

traumahawk99 · May 3, 2008

let's examine the differences between curriculum and how they impact on the job of nursing, where the vast majority of it is done. the bsn is loaded with courses such as community, family, etc... which really don't impact on the entry level job in a meaningful way. these are the courses that differentiate between the two curriculums.. it isn't that the bsn has a vastly superior technical curriculum. nursing history really isn't all that helpful. in fact, i'd say the value is anecdotal once you hit the floor.

my nursing courses also made me a better critical thinker and more knowledgeable regarding the human body. am i less a critical thinker and less knowledgeable about the body than i would be if i had a bsn? is the average asn? if you're an asn or a bsn, fresh out of school.. you are only qualified to be a trainee, and you're going to start in the same place, cleaning the same poop. again, where is the evidence to show that your education is superior? you imply that it is. i say the difference is immaterial.

i have said that a bsn is worthless to me. that's true. it is. i can't think of a more meaningless waste of my personal educational resources. however, i am not deciding for anyone else. i'm not saying we should dismantle bsn programs. people may choose these for a variety of reasons. i am arguing the question at had.. whether bsn will/should become mandatory to hold the title of rn at the entry level. i don't think that the average entry level bsn is researching the efficacy of evaluating for homan's sign, and i would have infinitely more faith in medical research directed by physicans than bsn level nurses for determining this...

of course, i see evidence based practice as important in all of medicine. i just don't see what that's got to do with requiring bsn as entry level to the nursing profession.

and yes, all arguments are charged with a level of emotion. obviously, yours is as well, else you wouldn't be investing so much energy into this. after all, it's only a thread :)

if i were here stating that bsn's shouldn't be allowed to become rn's, you'd be hititng the roof yourself. my educational background is the one the bsn only crowd is attempting to deny licensure. and i'm simply calling it as a see it, which is form over substance, and fluff over reality.

GilaRRT · May 4, 2008

let's examine the differences between curriculum and how they impact on the job of nursing, where the vast majority of it is done. the bsn is loaded with courses such as community, family, etc... which really don't impact on the entry level job in a meaningful way. these are the courses that differentiate between the two curriculums.. it isn't that the bsn has a vastly superior technical curriculum. nursing history really isn't all that helpful. in fact, i'd say the value is anecdotal once you hit the floor.
my nursing courses also made me a better critical thinker and more knowledgeable regarding the human body. am i less a critical thinker and less knowledgeable about the body than i would be if i had a bsn? is the average asn? if you're an asn or a bsn, fresh out of school.. you are only qualified to be a trainee, and you're going to start in the same place, cleaning the same poop. again, where is the evidence to show that your education is superior? you imply that it is. i say the difference is immaterial.
i have said that a bsn is worthless to me. that's true. it is. i can't think of a more meaningless waste of my personal educational resources. however, i am not deciding for anyone else. i'm not saying we should dismantle bsn programs. people may choose these for a variety of reasons. i am arguing the question at had.. whether bsn will/should become mandatory to hold the title of rn at the entry level. i don't think that the average entry level bsn is researching the efficacy of evaluating for homan's sign, and i would have infinitely more faith in medical research directed by physicans than bsn level nurses for determining this...
of course, i see evidence based practice as important in all of medicine. i just don't see what that's got to do with requiring bsn as entry level to the nursing profession.
and yes, all arguments are charged with a level of emotion. obviously, yours is as well, else you wouldn't be investing so much energy into this. after all, it's only a thread :)
if i were here stating that bsn's shouldn't be allowed to become rn's, you'd be hititng the roof yourself. my educational background is the one the bsn only crowd is attempting to deny licensure. and i'm simply calling it as a see it, which is form over substance, and fluff over reality.

With the current educational system, I tend to agree with your points. For the sake of discussion, let us say we changed the way BSN programs are designed. Let us say the courses were focused on teaching the RN what they need to know when they hit the floor. Let us say the foundation of the BSN program will provide the student with a solid foundation in science, nursing didactic, and nursing clinical education.

I think if things changed, we could argue that the BSN should be a requirement for entry into practice. Then again, in the era of EBM, I suspect good research would be needed. However, from what I have seen and communicated from BSN students, the extra two years are simply not providing quality education in many cases.

jjjoy, LPN · May 5, 2008

To say that the additional coursework for a BSN (as opposed to for ASN) is completely worthless and a waste of time is about as useful as someone saying that acquiring a BSN is the only way to acquire adequate critical thinking skills. These aren't all-or-nothing issues.

I'd agree that much of the BSN coursework, as it currently stands, ISN'T very relevant to bedside nursing care. Most any extra education or experience will help someone be a better nurse, from having taken extra psych classes to having raised children. The question here is what is the MINIMUM educational requirement, not what could be useful.

And I'd agree that it does seem like many proponents of entry-level BSN are too caught up in issues of "nursing as a profession" as opposed to training students in the PRACTICE of nursing at entry level... instead putting more emphasis education on issues that are well BEYOND entry level... eg research, professional issues, etc. More important is a firm grounding to succeed as a ENTRY-LEVEL nurse. An ideal program would address both to some extent, but training in nursing practice should not be cut back in order to address other nursing issues and pursuits.