Many ADN-BSN online programs tried to deceive students into believing that they can get their BSN from ADN in 13 months or less. That's a lie and false advertisement. They are not telling the whole story.
For example, University of Texas at Arlington advertises this past spring that you can get your degree from ADN to BSN in 13 months. After you enrolled and pay their high tuition rates, they want you to take from them American History I and II, Texas history, and other courses that have nothing to do with Nursing. You can take these same courses from Community Colleges in California at 1/6 their cost, but if you do they may or may not accept them for credit. For example, I have a friend who took US History from a community college. UTA does not accept them for transfer credit. Their Academic Advisors are trained to do what is good for business, and not what is good for you, the student. Be careful and do not fall for their traps! They want you to stay longer in their school, and pay for their courses that nobody wants to take, such as political science, and so forth
I heard that Excelsior College gives you 35 BSN credits for your NCLEX. They don't give you the run around treatment. They are located in Albany, New York. Their tuition is a little higher, but you can graduate sooner with no hassle and stumbling blocks.
I don't think so, unless these MSN degreed nurses are willing to accept minimal wages like AD nurses. On the floor, they both empty similar
bedpans. Why would they pay more, especially when Medicare reimbursement is going down the drain.. It simply does not make sense!
In fact, I heard that there is legislation pending in Congress to import cheap nurses from overseas. Now, when you see these foreign nurses
working next to you, then would you believe me that a BSN, MSN, PhD is a waste of time and money?
Beware of RN-BSN programs. They are out there to empty your pockets.
Why is this country letting this happen?! Even domestic nurses! Half the nurses on some floors I have been on have been travel nurses...yet there is a glutton of nurses in my area that need a job! It's awful for the local economy. If the same happened internationally then I say shame on this country. We are the fools who are allowing this to happen, not only in nursing, but with every foreign product we buy to save a buck. We are going to cause our own demise!
Do you know why? Because we are born suckers...! We suck since day one... I am not here for a popularity contest. I am here to bring you the truth and nothing but the truth. Some readers here may not like to read what I wrote. But like I said, I am not here for a popularity contest. I bring the truth, and nothing but the truth!
Do you know why? Because we are born suckers...! We suck since day one... I am not here for a popularity contest. I am here to bring you the truth and nothing but the truth. Some readers here may not like to read what I wrote. But like I said, I am not here for a popularity contest. I bring the truth, and nothing but the truth!
What you are "bringing" is your own, individual opinion, nothing else.
Really quick- been a nurse since "93" worked in so many areas in nursing. Just received my BSN and Certification this past Dec. ...not to mention achieving a ( afraid to say what hospital) heck of an award for nursing at my Mag Hospital. Point is ...most education post RN is a racket. Pay money and answer questions, just paying " The Man " to share crop his hospital plantation with no end . Next breaking news : BSN vs MSN
You sure got that right. And since they saw just how gullible and how easy the nursing community accepted one fabricated study carte-blanche published in 2003; give it a couple of years or so and they'll hire Aiken or someone like her to fabricate another study concluding that hospitals with more MSN nurses experience better outcomes. And that study will also be supported and backed by the very institutions and people that stand to benefit from the revenue generated by an increased influx of students through their doors. Another reason is the fact that enrollments have been dropping at at four year colleges and universities; : 200 college and university campuses have closed during the last 10 years due to decreasing enrollments as baby boomers aged" (Nursing Spectrum, Jan. 9, 2012). In the article, "Hard Times on Campus - Declining Enrollment Means Declining Revenue For Colleges" (Philadelphia Inquirer, Jan. 31, 2016), many area colleges and universities are experiencing hard financial times due to decreasing enrollments. If this continues, people like Aiken, Benner and all others working for or affiliated with four year schools may see their departments downsized. And remember with all the prerequisites required, other departments besides will be affected. Couple that with this fact; . "For the past 40 years, institutions of higher learning have been relentlessly replacing professors on the tenure track (the ones with decently paying jobs and fringe benefits) with contingent faculty, typically part-timers, who cost a whole lot less" (The Weekly Standard, Nov. 16, 2015); and you can see what is really driving those behind the BSN push.
The fact that the study driving all this was so fatally flawed, I have to wonder if those pushing it felt that nurses were too stupid to see it for what is was or just too apprehensive to speak up. The BS in the study included these facts:
- As if they were in a big hurry to get the study out there; the data pool for the study on BSN staffing and mortality rates was used for an earlier study about staffing levels and mortality. The information was just copied onto another template for the BSN study. The authors then said they would simply factor out the results from first study for the subsequent study. The criteria for the inclusion of certain data for the BSN study was based solely on the discretion of the so-called†‘experts' creating the study. And all those 'experts' were backed by the AACN (American Assoc. of Colleges of Nursing); an organization committed to BSN-entry (for obvious reasons).
- BSNs were lumped in with MSNs and nurses with doctorates while ADNs and diploma nurses were lumped together. We don't know how many nurses were originally ADNs who went back to get BSNs. Those nurses would by default have more experience from working as ADNs before they got their BSNs. This factor alone seriously compromises the study's validity and produces flawed conclusions as it does not simply target a population of ADNs and BSNs. This is flawed sampling methodology, also, because many BSN nurses were originally ADN nurses who went back to get their BSN's. The opposite is not true- BSN's don't go back to get their ADN. So the study doesn't even compare the relative levels of RN education the study and make the comparisons it supposedly purports to have studied!
- Also, the study only applied data that was manipulated 133 times (according to the authors' own admission) to hypothetical situations, not real conditions. They ran the data through a logistical regression model to see what might happen in a hospital if it had a 10% increase of BSN nurses. They did not even attempt to compare the relative levels of RN education in real hospital situations; which is supposed to be the reason for the study in the first place.
The example of the Aiken study exemplifies the danger and sheer stupidity of institutions making practice recommendations on the basis of one, study, especially if the study involved has serious biases and flaws in its methodology. A report will probably come out soon about the major errors of this study. Problem is; the damage has already been done with many diploma and two year nursing programs having closed giving prospective nursing students much fewer choices and having to fork out huge amounts of money for the much higher priced four year schools. Not to mention the dedicated, experienced older nurses who were either terminated or threatened with termination if they did not go into debt for thousands of dollars for a BSN. What so-called nursing leaders have done is unethical and deplorable and I hope they will be answering for it soon.
We don't know how many nurses were originally ADNs who went back to get BSNs. Those nurses would by default have more experience from working as ADNs before they got their BSNs. This factor alone seriously compromises the study's validity and produces flawed conclusions as it does not simply target a population of ADNs and BSNs.
BSN, MSN, and nurses with doctorates all grouped together; ADN's and diploma nurses grouped together. For an accurate comparison, the researcher needs to compare strictly new ADN graduates with BSN graduates and patient outcomes. They also said they adjusted for age differences of the patients that died, but in another analysis we read that if there is a very strong statistical relationship between two variables you do not adjust for it , you would analyze it into the data. The hospitals that had the higher mortality rate had a higher mean pt. age. When the data was analyzed into this scenario the death rates in her data equaled about the same as the general population. And as the small print on your little chart points out: They ran the data through a logistical regression model to see what might happen in a hospital if it had a 10% increase of BSN nurses. They did not even attempt to compare the relative levels of RN education in real hospital situations; which is supposed to be the reason for the study in the first place. You can keep on trying to defend this garbage just like the AACN who supported and backed this nonsense for obvious reasons, but the truth is coming out. I contacted a popular radio station who briefly talked about the topic to try to get the issue pushed on-air again. And with much talk of student loan debt and the ridiculous cost of four year schools, I'm sure we can get the topic pushed. Every nurse and doctor that called in agreed that study had absolutely redemptive value. We're going to do the same to nursing leaders, the ANA and big education the same as what these venal, prevaricating people have done to nursing students and new nurses. And it will be enjoyable to see some of these people have box their belongings, get off their ample cabooses and try to find another job.
You can keep on trying to defend this garbage just like the AACN who supported and backed this nonsense for obvious reasons, but the truth is coming out. I contacted a popular radio station who briefly talked about the topic to try to get the issue pushed on-air again.
I am not really defending anything other than the scientific process; these studies don't apply to me and I don't have any "horse in the race" so-to-speak. If a quality study comes along to refute it then my position would change. You can call it "garbage" and regurgitate the objections of the N-OADN (talk about bias) but until there is a study published that refutes it, you are spurting only your personal opinion supported by anecdotes.
Good luck with that, I will be waiting to hear about it in the news. If some for-profits get shut down along the way, that's a bonus to everyone.
All studies have flaws, I don't particularly love the 2003 Aiken study for an entirely different reason, but this has been replicated over and over in multinational studies by different authors using different study designs.
I am not really defending anything other than the scientific process; these studies don't apply to me and I don't have any "horse in the race" so-to-speak. If a quality study comes along to refute it then my position would change. You can call it "garbage" and regurgitate the objections of the N-OADN (talk about bias) but until there is a study published that refutes it, you are spurting only your personal opinion supported by anecdotes.
Good luck with that, I will be waiting to hear about it in the news. If some for-profits get shut down along the way, that's a bonus to everyone.
All studies have flaws, I don't particularly love the 2003 Aiken study for an entirely different reason, but this has been replicated over and over in multinational studies by different authors using different study designs.
There was no scientific process here. Just a group of self-serving academic lackeys who got a bucket load of funding and nice bonuses to boot to push the agenda of the very people and institutions backing and supporting them. The authors know this which is why they refused to return a call from a major news network inquiring about it. You will not see a refuting study mentioned in any nursing publication because there is no money to made that way and most of those publications make a lot money selling advertising to four year schools. And coming from a former business background, anyone with common sense knows non-profits are a joke, what they make, they can't call a profit. But they do make money as I know for fact working for one currently.
I outlined facts about the study in above post. And to remind you, those were facts in the study itself- not my anecdotes. The authors banked that the average person could not see flaws and accept the conclusions carte-blanche as being unquestionably true. The only thing I will agree in this "study" is that ones chances of survival are probably better having surgery in a hospital with more board certified surgeons. But as far as proving people fare better in hospitals with more BSNs - garbage. You do what you feel you must do and I will do the same
I am not really defending anything other than the scientific process; these studies don't apply to me and I don't have any "horse in the race" so-to-speak. If a quality study comes along to refute it then my position would change. You can call it "garbage" and regurgitate the objections of the N-OADN (talk about bias) but until there is a study published that refutes it, you are spurting only your personal opinion supported by anecdotes.
Good luck with that, I will be waiting to hear about it in the news. If some for-profits get shut down along the way, that's a bonus to everyone.
All studies have flaws, I don't particularly love the 2003 Aiken study for an entirely different reason, but this has been replicated over and over in multinational studies by different authors using different study designs.
P.S. Any other study I've seen referenced the Aiken study and even cited it in their sources. Talk about regurgitation! The ION made its recommendations solely based on the "Faiken" study. Because that's exactly what it is.
There was no scientific process here. Just a group of self-serving academic lackeys who got a bucket load of funding and nice bonuses to boot to push the agenda of the very people and institutions backing and supporting them. The authors know this which is why they refused to return a call from a major news network inquiring about it. You will not see a refuting study mentioned in any nursing publication because there is no money to made that way and most of those publications make a lot money selling advertising to four year schools. And coming from a former business background, anyone with common sense knows non-profits are a joke, what they make, they can't call a profit. But they do make money as I know for fact working for one currently.
I outlined facts about the study in above post. And to remind you, those were facts in the study itself- not my anecdotes. The authors banked that the average person could not see flaws and accept the conclusions carte-blanche as being unquestionably true. The only thing I will agree in this "study" is that ones chances of survival are probably better having surgery in a hospital with more board certified surgeons. But as far as proving people fare better in hospitals with more BSNs - garbage. You do what you feel you must do and I will do the same
The "pro-ADN" folks are more than welcome to do studies and find that there is no significant difference between the results of ADN-prepared nurses and BSN-prepared nurses, and publish their results. If the existing literature is so deeply flawed, it shouldn't be difficult to come up with different results, right?
I am not here for a popularity contest. I am here to bring you the truth and nothing but the truth. Some readers here may not like to read what I wrote. But like I said, I am not here for a popularity contest. I bring the truth, and nothing but the truth!
MBrickle
462 Posts
Why is this country letting this happen?! Even domestic nurses! Half the nurses on some floors I have been on have been travel nurses...yet there is a glutton of nurses in my area that need a job! It's awful for the local economy. If the same happened internationally then I say shame on this country. We are the fools who are allowing this to happen, not only in nursing, but with every foreign product we buy to save a buck. We are going to cause our own demise!
:::off soapbox:::