Pennsylvania does not accept license from RN program

lovinglife2015 · Apr 11, 2015

I'm usually on the side that leans toward "experience trumps education", but not in this case. Anyone who sits for the NCLEX RN/PN should only be allowed to do so if they passed an accredited nursing program. Or a program that is equivalent, such as someone who completed military corpsman training challenging the LPN. And that particular scenario is really just the exception that proves the rule.
If given the chance, I am very confident I could pass the NCLEX RN. But this doesn't mean I should be allowed to do so, not even with my experience as a LPN. If I want to take the NCLEX RN, then I need to take and pass an approved professional nursing program. It's just that simple.
And, in the specific cases of failed RN students or experienced CNAs challenging the NCLEX PN.... yes, I do find that offensive. In the case of the failed RN students, it sends the message that someone who couldn't complete an RN program is somehow nonetheless qualified to sit for the LPN boards. In the case of CNAs in California, it sends the message that all a LPN amounts to is basically no more than an experienced CNA with some pharmacology class thrown in the mix. How can a LPN not find that at least a little offensive?

...in your opinion.

Last I read, a CA CNA needs 10 years of experience before s/he can qualify to take the NCLEX-PN, so it's not as if CNAs are walking in and taking the PN exam after a few weeks on the job. Unless you have statistical research showing poorer patient outcomes/care linked to fast-track nursing licensure, your complaint merely sounds like sour grapes. You're mad that your fellow LPN's found a way to 'beat the system' and you didn't.

BrandonLPN, LPN · Apr 11, 2015

O

...in your opinion.
Last I read, a CA CNA needs 10 years of experience before s/he can qualify to take the NCLEX-PN, so it's not as if CNAs are walking in and taking the PN exam after a few weeks on the job. Unless you have statistical research showing poorer patient outcomes/care linked to fast-track nursing licensure, your complaint merely sounds like sour grapes. You're mad that your fellow LPN's found a way to 'beat the system' and you didn't.

But how does 10 years of CNA experience equal being qualified to be a LPN? 5 years, 10 years, 20 years, whatever. Being a CNA is not the same as being a LPN no matter how you look at it. Because they challenged and passed the NCLEXPN?...... let's not make the NCLEX out to be more than it is. Any adult of moderate intelligence can pass the NCLEX if they study for it and have decent test taking skills. Even people with zero healthcare experience.

Its not sour grapes. As I stated, I don't think experienced LPNs should be able to challenge the RN boards, either. It's not "beating the system". I understand that LVNs in California who got their license through the whole CNA-challenge thing did so perfectly legally. I just think that it's a poor law. I'm not loosing sleep over it or anything. But, yes, my opinion is it's an insult. It's basically saying that a LPN is no more than an experienced CNA with a pharmacology class. That's insulting.

If I could become an RN tomorrow by taking an IV therapy class and challenging the NCLEXRN, that would be insulting to RNs. Both those scenarios are the same as saying all that separates the different levels of nursing is a few tasks and a test. That's insulting, and shows a deep misunderstanding of what seperates a CNA from a LPN from an RN. Again, not losing sleep over it, but that's my opinion.

Honestly, I suspect that the California CNA-LVN thing is a deliberate snub to LVNs. There's a strong anti-LVN sentiment in that state, and by letting CNAs challenge the LVN, they're basically confirming the whole "LPN/LVNs are glorified CNAs" mentality.

smartnurse1982 · Apr 11, 2015

.Unless you have statistical research showing poorer patient outcomes/care linked to fast-track nursing licensure, your complaint merely sounds like sour grapes.

That would be some interesting stats for sure.

I wonder if a similar analogy could be used on stats with Excelsior grads who became Rn's,that were previously physician assistants and paramedics.

I know back in the early 2000's that physician's assistants and paramedics could take the bridge program to become Rn's at that time.

No clinicals were needed.

wow,i just learned that surgical techs and medical assistants were allowed to sit for Nclex-Rn through Excelsior.

If i would have known that i could have skipped both Lpn and Rn school,but all in all i am glad i did not attend Excelsior because certain states do not allow Rn grads of Excelsior to sit for Nclex.

TheCommuter, BSN, RN · Apr 11, 2015

Last I read, a CA CNA needs 10 years of experience before s/he can qualify to take the NCLEX-PN

CNAs need a pharmacology course and approximately 54 months of inpatient experience to qualify to challenge the board and take NCLEX-PN.

I know back in the early 2000's that physician's assistants and paramedics could take the bridge program to become Rn's at that time. No clinicals were needed.

Paramedics are still permitted to complete Excelsior's bridge program. Respiratory therapists were once allowed to complete the program, but not anymore. In addition, persons who completed at least 50 percent of a professional registered nursing program were allowed to complete Excelsior's program, but not anymore.

dream'n, BSN, RN · Apr 11, 2015

I'm with Brandon LPN on this. CNA experience and Pharmacology do not a LPN make. No Way! I was a LPN prior to becoming a RN and I can honestly say that LPN school was much more difficult. That's because I went into it without any nursing knowledge base. LPN school and experience made my RN program so much easier. I give my LPN Med/Surg. instructor most of the credit for the nurse I am today. She taught me how to put the patient and disease process puzzle together by teaching me the why's. For example, why is HTN a risk factor for stroke, why an edematous patient could be dehydrated, why does dehydration show often with tachycardia and decreased BP, what would I be watching for in a septic patient to indicate worsening. She didn't just teach me the facts, but why these things happened, how they occurred. That was crucial to my learning. I could see the patterns of illness and thereafter take a few patient facts and make critical thinking decisions. CNAs have none of this training and after working with them for 21 years, I do not see them having this knowledge. I am not dissing CNAs, but no way can they have LPN knowledge just through experience.

smartnurse1982 · Apr 12, 2015

I'm with Brandon LPN on this. CNA experience and Pharmacology do not a LPN make. No Way! I was a LPN prior to becoming a RN and I can honestly say that LPN school was much more difficult. That's because I went into it without any nursing knowledge base. LPN school and experience made my RN program so much easier. I give my LPN Med/Surg. instructor most of the credit for the nurse I am today. She taught me how to put the patient and disease process puzzle together by teaching me the why's. For example why is HTN a risk factor for stroke, why an edematous patient could be dehydrated, why does dehydration show often with tachycardia and decreased BP, what would I be watching for in a septic patient to indicate worsening. She didn't just teach me the facts, but why these things happened, how they occurred. That was crucial to my learning. I could see the patterns of illness and thereafter take a few patient facts and make critical thinking decisions. CNAs have none of this training and after working with them for 21 years, I do not see them having this knowledge. I am not dissing CNAs, but no way can they have LPN knowledge just through experience.[/quote']
i agree for the most part,but it really depends on the state.
In some states Cna's can start Iv's,administer meds, and insert foley catheters.
But then again,those are only skills,and they still will not know the why's.

caliotter3 · Apr 12, 2015

When the Excelsior College nursing program was initiated circa 1978 or so, it was a fact that Joe or Josephine Blow, civilian, could walk in off the street, and complete the program. No health care background whatsoever. At some point in time though, multiple bad experiences/bad outcomes/probable lawsuits/deaths/whatever caused Excelsior (then Regents College) to change their rule. Joe or Josephine Blow could no longer walk in off the street and enroll in the program. Through the years, Excelsior has bent to the prevailing wind and increasingly made their entrance requirements more and more difficult in order to improve their reputation and assauge the public perception. For each one of those potential Joe or Josephine's who might have been at the height of incompetence, there must be at least one person who would have been at the opposite end of the competence spectrum as a new nurse. Like any school, Excelsior College has an academic reputation to uphold, so they set their rules accordingly. The money still flows.

PacoUSA, BSN, RN · Apr 12, 2015

Maybe as an RN I should just challenge the medical boards and become an MD? It seems to be the same stupid logic as a CNA challenging the NCLEX-PN.

Sent from my iPad using allnurses

lovinglife2015 · Apr 12, 2015

If you think that you have what it takes to become an MD, go for it. Though hubris alone won't get you too far.

Let's be real. LPNs don't(can't legally) diagnose patients. LPNs work under the direction of the RN, so an intelligent, experienced CNA could handle the LPN scope of practice. Further, in addition to the pharm class, the boards have outlined numerous work experience requirements(linked below) needed to challenge the boards. A CNA must have paid bedside nursing experience in a clinical facility to even be eligible.

Perhaps, you're too easily offended if you're insulted that a qualified CNA can challenge the CA Board.

BVNPT - Method 3: Qualification Based on Equivalent Education and/or Experience

Experience
Pursuant to the California Code of Regulations section 2516(b), the 51 months of paid general duty inpatient bedside nursing experience must include a minimum of each of the following:
48 months medical/surgical nursing;
6 weeks maternity or genitourinary nursing;
6 weeks pediatric nursing.
The majority of the paid bedside nursing experience must have occurred in a inpatient clinical facility providing the types of patient care that will prepare the applicant for the content topics covered in the licensure examination. It is required that all experience must have occurred within the past ten years, with half of the required experience occurring in the past five years. The experience must have been recent enough that the applicant is knowledgeable regarding current types of patient care equipment, policies and procedures.
When calculating work experience, the applicant can substitute up to a maximum of eight months of the required medical-surgical clinical experience with experience obtained outside of the acute care setting; however, a minimum of 40 months of medical-surgical experience must have occurred in an acute care facility. Paid work experience in the following areas will be applicable toward the eight months that can be substituted for acute medical-surgical experience:
[Please note: The following types of work experience will not be accepted in this category; home health aide, in-home care provider, in-home hospice provider, board and care provider, residential care provider, unit secretary, ward clerk, transport aide, phlebotomist, monitor technician, field paramedic. This list is not all-inclusive, but is offered for clarification purposes.]
In the application packet, an Employment Verification form is provided. The applicant must provide a copy of this form to all employers. On the verification form, all paid bedside nursing experience must be verified by the applicant's employer(s) indicating specific dates of employment and the number of hours worked in each area. The employment verification form must be mailed directly to the Board by the employer in an official business envelope.
The verification of experience must also include certification from the Director or Supervisor (must be a registered nurse) that the applicant has satisfactorily demonstrated the following knowledge and skills:

BrandonLPN, LPN · Apr 12, 2015

If you think that you have what it takes to become an MD, go for it. Though hubris alone won't get you too far.
Let's be real. LPNs don't(can't legally) diagnose patients. LPNs work under the direction of the RN, so an intelligent, experienced CNA could handle the LPN scope of practice. Further, in addition to the pharm class, the boards have outlined numerous work experience requirements(linked below) needed to challenge the boards. A CNA must have paid bedside nursing experience in a clinical facility to even be eligible.
Perhaps, you're too easily offended if you're insulted that a qualified CNA can challenge the CA Board.
BVNPT - Method 3: Qualification Based on Equivalent Education and/or Experience

Are you a nurse, or a student? Because I get the impression you're a student. Not saying that to be snarky, it just seems like you don't have any practical experience regarding what RNs, LPNs and CNAs actually do in real-world nursing.

Neither RNs nor LPNs diagnose, so I don't understand that point.

A CNA with umpteen hours of experience on a med-surg floor does not really mean anything other than that person has lots of CNA-type experience. An experienced CNA will have the experience necessary to perform the job of a LPN only if said LPN-job is one where the LPNs are utilized as aides. Put that CNA in a job where he's a charge nurse responsible for an entire skilled nursing facility on night shift, and I'm not so sure his extensive aide experience will be of help.

And I find it amusing that the required experience settings for this (med/surg, L/D and acute peds) are the settings LEAST likely to hire a LPN. Especially a LPN with such flimsy credentials. The great majority of LPNs find themselves in LTC, where they function as charge nurses, supervise CNAs, admit patients, discharge patients, assess patients, page physicicians, send residents to the ER, take and note orders.... all things which I doubt very much will be helped by years of aide experience, no matter the setting.

SquishyRN, BSN, RN · Apr 12, 2015

In some states Cna's can start Iv's,administer meds, and insert foley catheters. But then again,those are only skills,and they still will not know the why's.

This is what makes California so funny. In California CNAs can't do any of these things, yet it's the state that allows CNAs to challenge becoming LVNs based on only experience and a pharmacology class.

Are you a nurse, or a student? Because I get the impression you're a student. Not saying that to be snarky, it just seems like you don't have any practical experience regarding what RNs, LPNs and CNAs actually do in real-world nursing.

I agree with Brandon that PP clearly has no idea what each role does in real-life, or even theoretical, nursing. The scope of practice and duties of LVNs and RNs are far more related than CNAs and LVNs. Yet in California it takes more education to go from being an LVN to an RN than CNA to LVN. That's ridiculous. As an LVN in Med-Surg, when I was assigned as a primary nurse instead of part of a team, I did EVERYTHING the RNs did except for administer IV medications. The only difference between me and the primary RNs was that the charge nurse would give my IV meds and co-sign my assessments. I still administered my own IV fluids and blood. On the flip side, CNAs don't do even half of what the LVNs do.

PacoUSA, BSN, RN · Apr 12, 2015

If you think that you have what it takes to become an MD, go for it. Though hubris alone won't get you too far.

You obviously failed miserably in seeing the facetiousness of my statement.