What option did you do?

Published

There seems to be so many options for non-nurses with a BS/BS degree. I am wondering and would love to hear what option you went for and why?

There are accelerated BSN program's and they are 12-16 months and ELMSN programs that are 2-3 years. I know it depends on goals and so forth but am wondering if you wanted to pursue a Ph.D would it be better to get the accel. BSN degree and then go right into a Ph.D program instead of the master's.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in NICU.

I went to a BS/MS combined program - one year for the BS and sit for the boards, then 2 years for the Masters and eligible to sit NP boards. If you want to only do research then I don't see a problem with going straight from BSN to DNSc or PhD or whatever. If you want to teach clinically at all, I think working as a nurse would be good, probably. Looking back, I probably would have looked harder at simple accelerated BSN programs. I had a misconception about what RNs really do and wanted to go straight to NP. Now, I'm going to work as an RN for a while before I go on. Just me, though. I think for FNP and other primary care stuff, the direct entry master's programs are fine. I do question it a bit (nobody hurt me!) for the intensive care specialties. Just because I think assessment skills (which need to be speedy and accurate in the acute setting) take more practice than we get in clinicals. JUST MY OPINION DON"T FLAME ME.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Nephrology, Cardiology, ER, ICU.

I slogged through the entire thing: LPN, ADN, BSN, MSN and now post-MSN APN certificate. When I started there weren't as many options. However, nowadays I would explore all my options very carefully. A direct entry MSN would provide clinical experience (after you get licensed) and also allow you a route to the PhD or DNSc or DNP. And...it is important to understand that you may change your mind and having other options is important.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
+ Join the Discussion