Still don't get the BSN ADN thing...

[tarotale]

One of biggest mysteries I had after I started nursing was: BSN increases patient outcome. What? Just because I shoved up few more dollars into greedy university's rear, that makes me a better student? I used to think that I must be a badass and better than ADN because they are from community college (wooo), but find out, they take exactly same classes as we do, take the same test, and tadaa~ does exactly same things as we do; I met many ADNs and few of them being charge nurses, I didn't even know they were ADNs until they brought up the "I need to/am working on BSN right now." My unit auditor is ADN, and she is great! All BSN serves to me personally, is that it takes less time for me to achieve MSN, and that is it.

I have heard of the studies that show that BSN hospitals improves patient outcomes and resuscitation outcomes compared to ADN hospitals, etc but I can't help but doubt that. I'm a BSN but my degree does not upgrade my brain magically to remember the ACLS algorithm or to push epi better than the ADNs; it's really all experience and that's it. Is it a money thing for universities? Or was I lucky enough to work with only cool ADNs. Maybe someone has good explanation to this?

[applesxoranges, BSN, RN]

They usually have to get their degree evaluated by a commission that specializes in foreign nursing schools. If it meets the boards' standards, then they take the NCLEX in my state. I don't know how hard or easy it is to get licensed in my state if it is a foreign educated nurse.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_on_Graduates_of_Foreign_Nursing_Schools

[BostonFNP, APRN]

Why would that study even matter in the U.S.?

Every reader will have their own interpretation, my two cents:

1. This was a large scale study carried out across Europe spanning a diverse nursing curricula. The results were consistent with prior studies that more education correlates with improved outcomes regardless of the curriculum.

2. This study adds to a growing body of research that has been consistent in the evidence it presents.

[applesxoranges, BSN, RN]

It still questions whether it is applicable in the US though in terms of the bachelors. It also leads to question what type of other education the nurses had. What is their vocational training? They don't have an "associates" degree in the way we think of one. What about experience too about the nurses?

"Our measure of education relied on each country's definition of bachelor's education for nurses, which differs by country."

Which this is a little bit off topic, but I do support the idea of a 3 year bachelors which is specialized in each major with more of the general education credits cut out. Does a nurse really need to know about world history or fine arts? In some UK universities, they view the first two years of a USA bachelors degree as not really counting since it is the fluff classes like general education classes.

In recent years, a lot of the associate degree programs offer the classes that were traditionally reserved for the BSN programs such as leadership, community, and gerontology and incorporating research into the curriculum. Three year bachelors could cut out 15,000 out of the cost of an education.

So in a way, I do support bachelors as a minimum entry however I do not support the current format of bachelors in the US. I think it is an attempt to waste students' money and time by requiring classes that are not directly tied to the major.

[applewhitern, BSN, RN]

I was told (by a doctor from Russia) that in Russia you graduate from high school after 10 years, you go to college for 3 years, and medical school for 3 years. So I agree that you really can't compare degrees from other countries.

[subee, MSN, CRNA]

It still questions whether it is applicable in the US though in terms of the bachelors. It also leads to question what type of other education the nurses had. What is their vocational training? They don't have an "associates" degree in the way we think of one. What about experience too about the nurses?

"Our measure of education relied on each country’s definition of bachelor’s education for nurses, which differs by country."

Which this is a little bit off topic, but I do support the idea of a 3 year bachelors which is specialized in each major with more of the general education credits cut out. Does a nurse really need to know about world history or fine arts? In some UK universities, they view the first two years of a USA bachelors degree as not really counting since it is the fluff classes like general education classes.

In recent years, a lot of the associate degree programs offer the classes that were traditionally reserved for the BSN programs such as leadership, community, and gerontology and incorporating research into the curriculum. Three year bachelors could cut out 15,000 out of the cost of an education.

So in a way, I do support bachelors as a minimum entry however I do not support the current format of bachelors in the US. I think it is an attempt to waste students' money and time by requiring classes that are not directly tied to the major.

EVERY major in college requires those "fluff" courses not related to their major. A bachelor's is not a trade school degree. It's supposed to mean that the graduate has attained a GENERAL education. If you don't think a general education is important, it doesn't say anything flattering about you. If you just want to drift on the trends instead of using them to you advantage, go right ahead and deny yourself the benefits of a college education. There's tens of thousands of people who would be downright grateful to have that opportunity. Nursing is not just a psychomotor task. If you believe that it is, then be prepared to whittled down to that definition by administrators who will treat you like a tradesperson rather than a professional.

[applewhitern, BSN, RN]

I think most people resent paying an exorbitant amount of money for those "fluff" classes; most of those fluff classes really should have been taught in high school. I had to read Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery" in high school, then in English 101 in college, then AGAIN in English 102 in college! Come on now. I paid for this. Really? I would rather have paid for classes that would actually help me in my career. We have priced our students right out of an education. I personally love literature, but I studied Blake in high school, and should not have had to pay to study him again. The various histories should be taught in high school. I think if we didn't have to go deeply in debt just to have an education, we would not be having this conversation. A well-rounded education is great, I am all for it, but not if the average working person has to graduate owing thousands of dollars.

[adnrnstudent, ASN, RN]

Just because you may "doubt" it doesn't mean it isn't true. That's why studies are done in the first place, because gut feeling isn't the way healthcare should be practiced.

It's the scientific process.

And there is no legitimate study that shows it does. Just because someone puts out a study doesn't mean it's actually factual.

[BostonFNP, APRN]

And there is no legitimate study that shows it does. Just because someone puts out a study doesn't mean it's actually factual.

Yes. The dozen studies published in major medical and nursing peer-reviewed journals shouldn't be considered factual because...well because you don't agree.

[BostonFNP, APRN]

I think most people resent paying an exorbitant amount of money for those "fluff" classes; most of those fluff classes really should have been taught in high school. I had to read Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery" in high school, then in English 101 in college, then AGAIN in English 102 in college! Come on now. I paid for this. Really? I would rather have paid for classes that would actually help me in my career. We have priced our students right out of an education. I personally love literature, but I studied Blake in high school, and should not have had to pay to study him again. The various histories should be taught in high school. I think if we didn't have to go deeply in debt just to have an education, we would not be having this conversation. A well-rounded education is great, I am all for it, but not if the average working person has to graduate owing thousands of dollars.

Just because you covered once doesn't mean that you don't learn more covering it again. In my academic career I have taken some form of pathophysiology a dozen times and each time I learn more.

So if you want to graduate owing less money you are happy also with lower wages right? Nurses are, after all, one of the highest paid professions by academic degree.

[TitleTownRN, MSN, APRN]

I couldn't agree with you more, but you put it in words better than I ever could have. I chose my NLN accredited little old ADN program with 100% NCLEX passage rate and all MSN prepared nursing instructors from UCSF and USF (to name a two) because it was a great fit for me, I was a single teen parent working and paying my way through school and could not afford a huge tuition price tag. I would not change that experience for the world and am glad I had it, so I never look down on anyone for the route they chose to get their education.

[APRN., DNP, RN, APRN, NP]

The ADN & BSN educated nurses are the same regarding clinical expertise. This is evidenced by passing boards. Questions like whether to Insert this tube or that. If Hazel starts slurring her words and has facial droop, what is the first, best thing that a prudent nurse should do. Nobody is asking you to find the "P" value on boards.

The crux of the matter lies in the extra courses that more letters behind the initials "RN" require you to take. Classes about evidence based practice, statistical analysis of empirical data, research methodology, community health, etc. If you took those in your ADN program, it probably was not an entire year or perhaps more devoted to the topic, but rather an exposure to the subject matter.

Those extra classes ARE helpful.

[Mintypeach]

This reminds me of what is going on in teaching. First it was a 4 year degree and now it is a Masters with interdisciplinary studies.

You should do what is best for you and follow your career goals in your area. If everyone has a 4 year degree and you need this to remain competitive then it is what it is!

Nobody is better than the other but it is important to move towards the future and always keep learning.