New LPNs going to EC....why not?

[luv4nursing]

Hey everyone,

Im a soon to be new LPN (graduating in a week thank goodness!) and I have read in several threads and heard from many people that they dont advise new LPNs to get their RN through Excelsior.

The reason it bugs me is that through local traditional programs, the generic RN students get less clinical experience in two years than we got in one year in LPN school. I have also observed that at OUR clinical site(Im not saying generally, this is only my experience), the ASN and BSN students would be seen sitting all day long in the nursing station or simply following a nurse while us LPN students were in there actually working day in and day out. I also have heard other nurses talking about how the new RNs nowdays are clueless and seem like they never went to school a day in their life. I think its because they do so much theory they dont get a good grasp of what the one on one patient care is all about.

There are very few duties RNs do that LPNs cant, its mostly just a matter of a little more education/theory. Most LPNs who go to traditional ASN programs have said they are suprised that there really isnt a whole lot more to it, they only go into most of the same things in more detail. And as far as clinicals, they are a breeze after already taking LPN clinicals. I dont see much of a difference between LPN to RN online and RN to BSN online. You have already received the foundation. You learn the most when u actually get out there and work as a nurse, not in school. There are new RN grads out there with much less clinical experience than LPN school gives, yet everyone says you need to gain experience before going to Excelsior. I know the CPNE will be more challenging, but I dont see it as impossible. Most generic ASN programs dont require experience for their LPN to RN bridge, and EC doesnt specify this either.

Can someone please offer me another point of view? I just cant understand why this is. Not trying to start an argument here, Im genuinely interested in other opinions.

[Laurie888]

Of a lot of the statements here.

One of the requirements that has NOT changed is that you can be admitted as a student who has completed more than half of a traditional program's clinicals.

That's me.

So, a new grad LPN would be the same or possibly in a better position than me, both because a lot of LPN programs DO train better and harder than traditional RN programs and because they can work as an LPN while finishing their education.

And before anybody gets all hot about LPN training, I speak from first-hand experience. I left an LPN program after 5 months because its requirements were too stiff (I had a small child with chronic ear infections) and my then-hubby was not supportive enough to make himself available when someone needed to stay home or run him to the doctor. I switched to an RN program, taking a year to do some of the prerequisite courses and taking some of the other non-nursing courses with the nursing program. It was SO much easier! I'm sorry, but I had more learning and more knowledge and better clinicals in 5 months of LPN school than I did in 3 semesters of traditional RN school. It was much more intense, much more thorough.

The other thing that leaves me with my head shaking is -- when you go to the CPNE you are supposed to practice as a new graduate nurse would. That's one of the reason there is such a high failure rate. You are NOT supposed to perform as an experienced nurse (with their own ways of working things in the real world) you are supposed to perform as a new grad. I have no doubt that I am in the exact same position right now as any traditional new grad RN, and the only floor work I've done is as a CNA (who does foleys and some dressing changes).

[RN34TX]

Supposedly, California has more than anecdotal evidence of the incompetence of nonLPNs/non paramedics who slipped through the cracks, and apparently it was enough to prompt them to get rid of the "problem." I do agree this is throwing the baby out with the bath water.

"Supposedly" was exactly my point.

I've done one search after another looking for anything on the web (and I might add that none of it is on CA BON's website either) that specifically pertains to EC graduates being incompetent RN's.

If the "anecdotal evidence" was enough to prompt them to get rid of the problem, then why isn't any of it out there?

CA has accepted EC graduates for RN licensure since 1973.

You cannot honestly believe that 30 years later that there is some sudden rash of MA's and OR Tech's who became RN's through EC that are hurting or even killing patients and that's why it needed to stop being recognized.

CA has long hidden behind the "Doesn't meet our RN program requirements" rhetoric yet it didn't seem to bother them for the past 30 years while they licensed EC grads without any issue.

Now, 30 some years later, with God knows how many EC grad licensed RN's currently working in their state, along with previously hosting multiple CPNE sites, it suddenly is a problem.

Do you think that it was all brought on by MA's and surgical tech's making mistakes as RN's graduated by EC?

[Spazzy Nurse, RN]

"Supposedly" was exactly my point.

I've done one search after another looking for anything on the web (and I might add that none of it is on CA BON's website either) that specifically pertains to EC graduates being incompetent RN's.

If the "anecdotal evidence" was enough to prompt them to get rid of the problem, then why isn't any of it out there?

CA has accepted EC graduates for RN licensure since 1973.

You cannot honestly believe that 30 years later that there is some sudden rash of MA's and OR Tech's who became RN's through EC that are hurting or even killing patients and that's why it needed to stop being recognized.

CA has long hidden behind the "Doesn't meet our RN program requirements" rhetoric yet it didn't seem to bother them for the past 30 years while they licensed EC grads without any issue.

Now, 30 some years later, with God knows how many EC grad licensed RN's currently working in their state, along with previously hosting multiple CPNE sites, it suddenly is a problem.

Do you think that it was all brought on by MA's and surgical tech's making mistakes as RN's graduated by EC?

Very well said!

[DYatesRN]

"Supposedly" was exactly my point.

I've done one search after another looking for anything on the web (and I might add that none of it is on CA BON's website either) that specifically pertains to EC graduates being incompetent RN's.

If the "anecdotal evidence" was enough to prompt them to get rid of the problem, then why isn't any of it out there?

CA has accepted EC graduates for RN licensure since 1973.

You cannot honestly believe that 30 years later that there is some sudden rash of MA's and OR Tech's who became RN's through EC that are hurting or even killing patients and that's why it needed to stop being recognized.

CA has long hidden behind the "Doesn't meet our RN program requirements" rhetoric yet it didn't seem to bother them for the past 30 years while they licensed EC grads without any issue.

Now, 30 some years later, with God knows how many EC grad licensed RN's currently working in their state, along with previously hosting multiple CPNE sites, it suddenly is a problem.

Do you think that it was all brought on by MA's and surgical tech's making mistakes as RN's graduated by EC?

As a matter of fact I DO believe there has been a rash of errors made by incomopetent grads. I think that with all these fly by night publishing companies setting up shop and luring students in, that the result has been an increase in unqualified people entering the program. Back 3o years ago there was no internet to spread word like wildfire. Hey come take this short EMT class and we will have you on the fast track to RN!!!30 years ago was an entirely different era--think about it. Heck, 10 years ago was definately not as didgital either. Yes, because of the increased publicity about the program more and more people entered on the bare minimum basis.....and yes, eroors did occur in my opinion. Common sense would tell me that it was errors made by incompetence but also money is behind it too. I wouldn't want a short trained EMT being my nurse without any floor or patient care experience...just my honest opinion.

[MedictoRN]

You might be surprised to know that those "short trained" EMT's have a pretty comparable knowledge base to that of an LPN and certainly have the assessment skills to back them up. Let's not forget they don't have the benefit of a physician 20 feet away to tell them what is wrong and how to fix it. They have to figure that out for themselves with limited resources and unpleasant conditions, quickly and accurately.

The NCLEX, just like every other licensing exam is designed to ensure that people are capable of performing at the minimum requirements. If they pass and don't live up to that standard they have noone to blame but themselves. Sloppy patient care isn't performed but unqualified people it is performed by LAZY people who don't ask questions when presented with something outside of there comfort zone.

Just because a "fly by night" publishing company lures people in doesn't mean they passed the exams and the CPNE.

As a matter of fact I DO believe there has been a rash of errors made by incomopetent grads. I think that with all these fly by night publishing companies setting up shop and luring students in, that the result has been an increase in unqualified people entering the program. Back 3o years ago there was no internet to spread word like wildfire. Hey come take this short EMT class and we will have you on the fast track to RN!!!30 years ago was an entirely different era--think about it. Heck, 10 years ago was definately not as didgital either. Yes, because of the increased publicity about the program more and more people entered on the bare minimum basis.....and yes, eroors did occur in my opinion. Common sense would tell me that it was errors made by incompetence but also money is behind it too. I wouldn't want a short trained EMT being my nurse without any floor or patient care experience...just my honest opinion.

[DYatesRN]

You might be surprised to know that those "short trained" EMT's have a pretty comparable knowledge base to that of an LPN and certainly have the assessment skills to back them up. Let's not forget they don't have the benefit of a physician 20 feet away to tell them what is wrong and how to fix it. They have to figure that out for themselves with limited resources and unpleasant conditions, quickly and accurately.

The NCLEX, just like every other licensing exam is designed to ensure that people are capable of performing at the minimum requirements. If they pass and don't live up to that standard they have noone to blame but themselves. Sloppy patient care isn't performed but unqualified people it is performed by LAZY people who don't ask questions when presented with something outside of there comfort zone.

Just because a "fly by night" publishing company lures people in doesn't mean they passed the exams and the CPNE.

Unfortunately passing the CPNE or the NCLEX does not ensure that one is competent. With enough studying someone not even in the field could pass. The CPNE is a structured exam--a dedicated studier could pass the exam. I not trying to say that EC is not a good way to go, I am merely saying that in my opinion too many people who really aren't qualified have gotten into the program. If it is so acceptable for a basic level EMT to bridge via EC...then why do most bridge programs traditionally only allow LPN's or paramedics??? To me it is quite clear--lack of clinical hours. A basic EMT, in my opinion is not equivical to LPN clinical hours--now a paramedic is, and even more so in terms of autonomy and critical thinking....

[Jo Dirt]

Unfortunately passing the CPNE or the NCLEX does not ensure that one is competent. With enough studying someone not even in the field could pass. The CPNE is a structured exam--a dedicated studier could pass the exam. I not trying to say that EC is not a good way to go, I am merely saying that in my opinion too many people who really aren't qualified have gotten into the program. If it is so acceptable for a basic level EMT to bridge via EC...then why do most bridge programs traditionally only allow LPN's or paramedics??? To me it is quite clear--lack of clinical hours. A basic EMT, in my opinion is not equivical to LPN clinical hours--now a paramedic is, and even more so in terms of autonomy and critical thinking....

:yeahthat:

[MedictoRN]

A lot of programs don't allow paramedics to bridge not to mention Medical assistants, rad techs, respiratory therapist. Isn't the whole point to study enough to pass the exams and then the CPNE. Isn't that what you do for a traditional program as well? The classroom clinical hours are not comparable that is why there was a requirement for documented patient care hours after they were licensed as an EMT.

I would like to see proof that relates the licensure of emt's to patient care errors in excess of those by other practitioners. Beyond that it's all speculation.

Unfortunately passing the CPNE or the NCLEX does not ensure that one is competent. With enough studying someone not even in the field could pass. The CPNE is a structured exam--a dedicated studier could pass the exam. I not trying to say that EC is not a good way to go, I am merely saying that in my opinion too many people who really aren't qualified have gotten into the program. If it is so acceptable for a basic level EMT to bridge via EC...then why do most bridge programs traditionally only allow LPN's or paramedics??? To me it is quite clear--lack of clinical hours. A basic EMT, in my opinion is not equivical to LPN clinical hours--now a paramedic is, and even more so in terms of autonomy and critical thinking....

[DYatesRN]

A lot of programs don't allow paramedics to bridge not to mention Medical assistants, rad techs, respiratory therapist. Isn't the whole point to study enough to pass the exams and then the CPNE. Isn't that what you do for a traditional program as well? The classroom clinical hours are not comparable that is why there was a requirement for documented patient care hours after they were licensed as an EMT.

I would like to see proof that relates the licensure of emt's to patient care errors in excess of those by other practitioners. Beyond that it's all speculation.

No the point isn't just to pass...the point is *trying* to see if the individual is competent of safe patient care. This is exactly where EC ran into trouble--people not qualified studying enough to pass--then boom clueless in the real world! EC didn't always require basic EMT's to show documented proof of clinical hours...hmmm, what do you think prompted it????? Sure, in traditional school you study to pass--but there is a greater net to oust those incompotent individuals, it is called clinical instructors. Even someone with no background could study enough to pass. Here in Florida we have paramedic to RN bridges. No, basic EMT's, CNA's, CMA's, surgical tech's, RT's, etc in my opinion are a large part of the reason EC has a tainted rep. Boards of nursing besides CA are looking into it--Colorado is one of them. The point is not to merely pass but to be competent--but it doesn't ensure it. I think traditional schools let out questionable students to practice, however, I think EC allowing individuals with limited clinical experience increase the chances of incompetence in the work place.

[Jo Dirt]

I don't think some people are getting the point, it isn't really about *can* you pass. Yes, most anyone who wanted to could pass, medical or nonmedical person. As a matter of fact, the tests are so structured a monkey could pass them. The point is

EC was operating on the assumption that only experienced medical personnel would go through this program and it was basically almost like a skills check off or CEU. Only when you take people with no medical experience and have them pass the program, that is just asking for trouble, because a person with such limited training cannot see the bigger picture, the whole picture, like an experienced nurse or paramedic can. It is like a sugical tech coming out on the floor and trying to take the place of a surgeon.

[Spazzy Nurse, RN]

You might be surprised to know that those "short trained" EMT's have a pretty comparable knowledge base to that of an LPN and certainly have the assessment skills to back them up.

I have to disagree with you on that one. I had my EMT-B before having my LPN and there was a WORLD of difference. I don't think the knowledge base is comparable by any means.

There are incompetent RNs out there who have graduated from many, many different schools...... EC is just a teeny piece of that group of programs. There are no more incompetent grads from EC than there are from any other schools.

And for the record DYates, EMT-Bs haven't been allowed to enter EC's program with that certification/experience alone for quite a while now.

[DYatesRN]

I have to disagree with you on that one. I had my EMT-B before having my LPN and there was a WORLD of difference. I don't think the knowledge base is comparable by any means.

There are incompetent RNs out there who have graduated from many, many different schools...... EC is just a teeny piece of that group of programs. There are no more incompetent grads from EC than there are from any other schools.

And for the record DYates, EMT-Bs haven't been allowed to enter EC's program with that certification/experience alone for quite a while now.

Yes, I know that they haven't been able to get in on that certification alone. They used to and things changed in early 2003 I believe--just about a few months before we students started hearing about the trouble brewing up with the California board. I recall seeing their posting that EMT's needed so many hours to enroll and there was a mad influx to enroll before they changed the policy. Do any of you recall that company that went down in SLC, Utah? Yes, the one that took several thousands of dollars from prospective students. They were operating on the idea of training people to be EMT's then going through the program...they eventually shut down (by force) because EC kept changing their admission policy so much....all around the time California started saying hmmmm.....