In my estimation there are many differences. When I used to ask this question, some would say "nothing really, just management stuff". Wow was I in for a learning curve in the BSN program.
I don't understand why there aren't real, substantive answers as to why it seems that more hospitals and nursing in general are moving to all BSN status as a minimum.
First, allow me to just say that there are some really GREAT ASNs out there. Their experience, caring and thoughtful nursing skill sets are invaluable. I know of quite a few myself whom I would have care for me or any of my loved ones, due to the fact I know they care and are extremely good at what they do. Secondly, the field of nursing is a great, well respected career path. Any degree in Nursing is indeed a good choice, but why not make a great choice? There are many career paths within the field of nursing and different areas of nursing one can follow or get into. The major two types are the ASN and the BSN. How does it differ from a nurse who has an associate degree in nursing? Are there any differences other than being in school a little longer? Is the pay different? Is it only for a "managers job?".
The associate degree nurse is commonly called the "associate of science in nursing" or ASN degree nurse. An associate degree nurse has commonly completed approximately two years of nursing school training. However before entering any nursing program the student must have completed the prerequisites in order to be accepted into that program. Many times this entails having completed one to two years of education in order to meet the requirements for nursing school. Many students finish much more quickly but not without, arguably, hard work and a lot of time and energy. The latter being true for nursing education in general. ASN nurses take courses in, most obviously, nursing. However, the curriculum includes many other facets of learning. ASNs take courses in psychology, nutrition, microbiology, chemistry, physiology as well as social and behavioral sciences. One thing all nursing schools and curriculums have in common are hours of supervised clinical experience. While the course is technically only two years long, many students, young and old alike say it's one of the toughest programs they have ever encountered.
The baccalaureate in nursing program adds to the educational development of the registered nurse by including several other aspects of nursing. Baccalaureate or commonly called "bachelor" nursing programs contain all of the course work taught in ASN and diploma programs plus a more in-depth treatment of the physical and social sciences, research in the field of nursing, public and community health, nursing management and supervising, as well as the humanities. The additional coursework can continue to enhance the nursing student's professional development It also prepares the new nurse for a broader scope of practice, and provides the nursing student, whether already an ASN or not with a better understanding of the economic, political, cultural, and social issues that affect a patient and influence health care delivery. Throughout the last decade, policymakers and nursing practice leaders have recognized that education makes a difference. One of the major differences is in the area of "people". That is to say, BSNs' learn more on how to deal with people and the dynamics of the people in the workplace as well as effective management and productivity of those people. Also, registered nurses with a BSN possess a substantial chance for advancing their careers. As an example, a bachelor's in nursing degree is needed for acceptance into a master's nursing program, which could result in a career in healthcare administration, health services, or on to specialty nursing roles like nurse anesthetist, nurse practitioner or clinical nurse leader. A BSN is also favored and frequently necessitated for military and public health nursing and other more specialized jobs.
Now, with that said. Education is a great way to become enlightened on even more nursing information and for creation of change in the profession. All one has to do is look up Linda Aiken, RN and the information from her years of research on nursing will enlighten and brighten ones' thoughts on this matter -of magnet hospitals and/or facilities. Dr. Aiken and colleagues found (in over a decade of research) that hospitals that employed a higher percentile of BSNs had lower surgical patient mortality rates than hospitals that staffed with fewer BSNs (Hanink, 2014). The study was done in 2003 and other studies are continuing even now. All point to a need in a BSN. The study in 2003 was done on 168 hospitals. In addition, hospitals with RNs holding a bachelor's degree or higher ranged from 0% to 77% across the hospitals. a 10% increase in the proportion of nurses holding a bachelor's degree was associated with a 5% decrease in both the likelihood of patients dying within 30 days of admission and the odds of failure to rescue (JAMA, 2003). I would strongly recommend that any and all nurses read Dr. Aikens' research paper on this. It can be found in the link below.
Everywhere nurses look, other professions are taking on additional responsibilities, given more credibility and even more respect (PTs, OTs, Pharmacists, RTs etc) while nurses are seen as the pill pushers, IV starters etc. We need to educate ourselves and be proactive in all areas of patient care. That would include management, and lobbying congress for better nurse ratios as well.
On a personal note, if you are someone in nursing school or are considering nursing. Consider going for the BSN. The ASN is good if you are considering working and THEN going for your BSN, however as most nurses will tell you. It's hard to stop then start again, and sometimes expensive. Just keep going. Don't stop.
I like to write as you can tell. So what do you think?
An ADN is not a two year program. There is at least a year of pre-req courses to complete (a&p, micro, english 1&2, psych, socio,human growth, stats, pharm, etc) followed by 2 years of just nursing courses. Most ADN programs take at least 3 years to complete and require the same number of clinical hours as BSN programs.
This.
As someone who has had the unusual experience of doing an ADN program (did not complete) and a BSN program; at least in my area, there really is no difference in course work, even clinical hours are equal, there are probably three pre-req's I did additionally; but it would've taken 4 years to complete my ADN; I decided then to go for my BSN because it was my personal goal; back when I made this decision, they were not discerning between ADN and BSN; and there were at least six hospitals with Magnet status that still hired ADNs as much as BSNs.
The only difference I would say is how credit hours are awarded at community colleges vs. universities; which the department of education requires; then you still have to meet clinical hours set forth by the BON.
At this point, there should be a joint effort with community colleges and universities to help allow people to obtain their BSN after obtaining their ADN; my area does this as well.
I'm all for grandfathering ADNs; we would be losing the backbone of many competent individuals that help future nurses become competent, well rounded nurses; we need that for the safety of our patients, and for our profession; I have received care in a critical situation; and I want competent individuals far more beyond the degree association; I did in my experience thank goodness; therefore I want an expert per Benner's theory, far more than a Magnet designee requirement.
The ADNs are going to say they don't need BSNs and the BSNs are going to say that they learned more and that should be the entry level minimum.
If you ask me - DOESNT MATTER. What matters is your personality and your ability to stand out personably from the pack.
I'm a new ADN graduate with a job, many BSNs can't find one. Sure, I'll keep going to get my BSN, the hospital will pay for it. Even with a masters, if my attitude and personality were crap, I wouldn't get a job.
Can you pass the NCLEX and get RN after your name? that's what's important, many from both sides have trouble doing just that.
I mean - we could pick that apart. Some of them don't seem particularly competent...
Actually, it's funny you bring physicians up. In the last few years, more students accepted into med-school, surprisingly, had degrees in english and the like rather than an undergraduate degree in science. The "suspected" reason for this slight shift in acceptances of these types of students with these non-science undergraduate degrees was that these students were more well-rounded and had better interpersonal/communication skills than those with undergraduate science degrees such as biology.
Physicians that had non-science undergraduate degrees were thought of to be more personable with other healthcare professionals and patients, treating them with respect and were able to effectively work as a team. (They also seemed to have nicer handwriting.)
Perhaps nursing followed suit?
Those who had completed an ADN program and went back for your BSN and claim to have not learned anything, maybe you did? Maybe you just didn't know it? Maybe you actually didn't learn anything, known or not? Maybe you did yourself a disservice by not listening/learning things in those "useless" classes. Maybe it made you, or COULD have made you have better social skills?
I'm not saying that it made you SMARTER in nursing/critical-thinking related skills or that a BSN is better, but maybe hospitals require it, not so you are better able to interpret labs or put in a foley, but to better work with a team or talk with other people with respect/empathy?
The classes to obtain your BSN are claimed to be "hosh-posh", but many who claim that also claim that they went to nursing to "help people". If you think that non-science related nursing classes are hosh-posh, what do you think of the "non-nursing" activities in NURSING? Such as sitting with your patient and just talking? It's not a skill that is the nitty-gritty of science, so does that not interest you? The courses to get a BSN, such as a history or a religion class, are not about learning science, it's about learning about cultures, people, and life. Just the same, nursing is not only science either.
Instead of dreading it, you could embrace it and be thankful you could go to school and be a nurse, let alone have a bed to sleep on.
This really is an over-debated topic that actually doesn't matter. Get mad at your choice of school and hospitals if you want to disregard my take on the subject.
Patient has been sleeping most of the day but tells you they are in pain and need more dilaudid with a RR of 6.
When the subjective and objective conflict on which side do your err?
Sent from my iPhone.
I err on the side of patient safety and use the objective information (rr 6) to determine the dilaudid should not be given at this time. I go to the provider, give them the vital signs and let them know the patient states they are in pain. Hopefully together we can come up with a plan that will get the patient more comfortable but not be unsafe.
Be careful: merely suggesting that someone take a look around the site to glean easily-found information that is requested in one's VERY first post can earn you the description of "acrimonious and bombastic". ROTFL...
LOL! sorry for the long write up and no need to be acrimonious or bombastic in your writing. I meant no wrong. If you do not wish to read my write up, simply dont read it and/or do not reply. In regards to RN403, as i said in my write up here, all nurses have something to add. ASNs are invaluable, but by 2020-they will all have to be RNs if they want to have a good job/position.
Well that's a relief. Heaven knows we don't want those ASNs who are NOT RN's running around trying to get good nursing jobs....
FWIW, while I may disagree with the requirements placed on an experienced nurse to obtain a BSN, it's pretty clear it's the wave of the future. Necessary or not, it is becoming entry-level for many jobs.
. ASNs are invaluable, but by 2020-they will all have to be RNs if they want to have a good job/position.
Nurses with ASN/ADN are RNs (assuming they passed the boards). And I don't know if you're a nurse, in school or whatever, but "all" is never the right answer.....
If you ask me - DOESNT MATTER. What matters is your personality and your ability to stand out personably from the pack.
Perhaps this is true about getting hired, at least in some markets, but in the vein of the discussion it is not "what matters"; what really matters is patient outcomes.
crossfitnurse said:
The ADNs are going to say they don't need BSNs and the BSNs are going to say that they learned more and that should be the entry level minimum.
I know this issue has been beat to death and it always becomes a wheel-spinning thread where little is accomplished or gained, as you hint at: this most often becomes an emotional argument between ADNs and BSNs.
If I had to be in the ICU at my hospital the RN I would want taking care of me is an ADN; he is simply amazing and I would trust him over anyone else with my life. But the profession, as a whole (at least in my opinion), can't make decisions about the future of the profession based on isolated experiences.
There are two things that have been mentioned in this threat that I think are critical to the debate has a whole:
1. The objective evidence. The reason we do large research studies with good statistical power (and repeat them) is to limit the variability of individuals. The extant literature has demonstrated, several times, that there are improved outcomes associated with an increased number of baccalaureate-prepared nurses. Until objective evidence is published to the contrary, that evidence should carry weight. This evidence doesn't mean all ADNs have worse outcomes than all BSNs: it just means, in aggregate, there may be some small difference that results in a statistically significant improvement in outcomes when the sample size becomes large enough to meter most of the individual variability.
2. The length of ADN programs. I absolutely agree than many ADN program exist that are more rigorous than BSN programs and require more credit hours when pre-reqs are factored in. Nurses need to identify these programs as these graduates should be awarded BSNs not ADNs if that have done the coursework! Those graduates, in many ways, are being "cheated" by being awarded a degree less than what they completed. Likewise, those subpar BSN programs need to lose accreditation. This improves the profession and (hopefully) outcomes. As a profession we shouldn't stand for either of these and we should advocate for what is right, for us and for the patients.
3. The RN-BSN bridge. First off, I have never read a study that is applicable to this regarding outcomes; it could potentially be extrapolated form the current literature, bu that is a stretch especially for experienced RNs. I often see posts about those that have gone back for a RN-BSN bridge stating they have learned nothing. The only way one can learn nothing is to not invest anything in learning. I would also argue that the change in practice/outcomes may not be something one "notices"; a small change is enough to be significant in aggregate.
Anyways, my two cents.
ADDENDUM: The discussion about ADN vs BSN and NP vs MD is similar (less formal ed vs more formal ed), and many people bring that up. They key difference for me in that debate is the evidence favors NP (less formal education). It is an interesting topic.
Actually, it's funny you bring physicians up. In the last few years, mord into med-school, surprisingly, had degrees in english and the like rather than an undergraduate degree in science. The "suspected" reason for this slight shift in acceptances of these types of students with these non-science undergraduate degrees was that these students were more well-rounded and had better interpersonal/communication skills than those with undergraduate science degrees such as biology.
Physicians that had non-science undergraduate degrees were thought of to be more personable with other healthcare professionals and patients, treating them with respect and were able to effectively work as a team. (They also seemed to have nicer handwriting.)
Perhaps nursing followed suit?
Those who had completed an ADN program and went back for your BSN and claim to have not learned anything, maybe you did? Maybe you just didn't know it? Maybe you actually didn't learn anything, known or not? Maybe you did yourself a disservice by not listening/learning things in those "useless" classes. Maybe it made you, or COULD have made you have better social skills?
I'm not saying that it made you SMARTER in nursing/critical-thinking related skills or that a BSN is better, but maybe hospitals require it, not so you are better able to interpret labs or put in a foley, but to better work with a team or talk with other people with respect/empathy?
The classes to obtain your BSN are claimed to be "hosh-posh", but many who claim that also claim that they went to nursing to "help people". If you think that non-science related nursing classes are hosh-posh, what do you think of the "non-nursing" activities in NURSING? Such as sitting with your patient and just talking? It's not a skill that is the nitty-gritty of science, so does that not interest you? The courses to get a BSN, such as a history or a religion class, are not about learning science, it's about learning about cultures, people, and life. Just the same, nursing is not only science either.
Instead of dreading it, you could embrace it and be thankful you could go to school and be a nurse, let alone have a bed to sleep on.
This really is an over-debated topic that actually doesn't matter. Get mad at your choice of school and hospitals if you want to disregard my take on the subject.
And what makes you think that associate degree nurses do not have those courses or skills. I have a full liberal arts education, for my first trip through the University, including the multiple literature, history, English, art and music classes. And far exceeded what was required for the BSN courses required.
Many associate degree nurses are second coursers and already have a college/university degree.
But thank you, for painting us as socially awkward, too poorly educated to speak and empathise with our patients, and unable to recognize our own learning, when we report that we are just learning the much same things over......and over....and over again, at 5 to 10 times the cost of the first time....and expected to be grateful for it. All to earn some initials after our name that validates to our employer that we are capable of doing the exact same work that we have been doing for years.
LadyFree28, BSN, LPN, RN
8,429 Posts
This.
As someone who has had the unusual experience of doing an ADN program (did not complete) and a BSN program; at least in my area, there really is no difference in course work, even clinical hours are equal, there are probably three pre-req's I did additionally; but it would've taken 4 years to complete my ADN; I decided then to go for my BSN because it was my personal goal; back when I made this decision, they were not discerning between ADN and BSN; and there were at least six hospitals with Magnet status that still hired ADNs as much as BSNs.
The only difference I would say is how credit hours are awarded at community colleges vs. universities; which the department of education requires; then you still have to meet clinical hours set forth by the BON.
At this point, there should be a joint effort with community colleges and universities to help allow people to obtain their BSN after obtaining their ADN; my area does this as well.
I'm all for grandfathering ADNs; we would be losing the backbone of many competent individuals that help future nurses become competent, well rounded nurses; we need that for the safety of our patients, and for our profession; I have received care in a critical situation; and I want competent individuals far more beyond the degree association; I did in my experience thank goodness; therefore I want an expert per Benner's theory, far more than a Magnet designee requirement.