Quote from smile123
Hi there! I just got accepted in the MEPN (direct entry RN to Masters NP) programs and am trying to decide where to go. (These are both 3 year accelerated programs - you get an RN after the 1st year and then you have 2 more years to get a masters for nurse practitioner. It's for people who already have a bachelor's degree in another field.) One is U. of San Diego and the other is Johns Hopkins. One main difference (besides one being on the East Coast vs. West Coast) is that at the end of 13.5 months, you can get a BSN/RN at Hopkins, vs. a RN at USD. Any one have any experiences at Hopkins or USD they would be willing to share? Or does anyone have opinions of whether a regional school (USD) vs. a nationally known school (Hopkins) makes a difference to get a NP position in California afterwards? Thanks!
I have been going through the same decision myself, and have been including UCSF in the discussions going around my head. Here are my thoughts so far:
Hopkins gives a BSN along the way, the other programs do not. If you look at a lot of RN positions now they advertise either 2 years experience or a BSN. So I think the high cost of Hopkins can be justified by that fact alone. Also, Hopkins allows you to leave the program for a year to get experience working as an RN, and then you can return to the program to finish your masters. Again, the other programs do not. Working a year will mean having to take on less debt as well. You can always come back to California (I am in California too.) to work for that year, which will make it easier to get a job in California as you mentioned you want to do. Also, Hopkins allows you to work parttime during your masters portion of the program.
I like the BSN, and the flexibility that Hopkins allows. Since the other programs don't give BSNs, you are kind of stuck there to finish the program.
Anyway, those are my thoughts so far. I have a friends at both programs (Hopkins and USD). Feel free to send me an e-mail.