What would you recommend

greygooseuria · Jun 23, 2008

If your ultimate goal is to be an NP, I would go for your BSN and then MSN. It'll make giving programs easier to get into (there are a lot more MSN programs that I know of that are BSN-MSN than RN to MSN).

A BSN will give you a solid bachelors degree in case you ever do leave nursing, and a solid liberal arts education that will broaden your mind. And you'll get to live the college life and still be an RN afterwards!

ProLogic · Jun 23, 2008

If your ultimate goal is to be an NP, I would go for your BSN and then MSN. It'll make giving programs easier to get into (there are a lot more MSN programs that I know of that are BSN-MSN than RN to MSN).
A BSN will give you a solid bachelors degree in case you ever do leave nursing, and a solid liberal arts education that will broaden your mind. And you'll get to live the college life and still be an RN afterwards!

So do you think an RN to BSN would be a waste of time?

greygooseuria · Jun 23, 2008

I don't think it would be a waste of time per se, but if you are ultimately going to go for an MSN, why wait 2 years on a waiting list for a ADN and then do a BSN which in total could take you 6 years when you can just start the BSN program now and you'd graduate in the same time as you would with an ADN with a "better" degree in the field?

elkpark · Jun 23, 2008

There's no one "right" answer to that (the OP's) question -- either route will get you to the same end point; which one will work best for you, in your particular circumstances (finances, length of wait at various schools, etc.), is a very personal choice. (For the record, I am an old diploma school grad who later did a BSN completion program in order to go to grad school.)

PMFB-RN, RN · Jun 24, 2008

If you're trying to go for your MSN, which path would you recommend.
Getting your ADN, taking the NCLEX-RN and becoming an RN, then go for you're MSN or get your BSN first, then become an RN, and after that going for your MSN?

*** As usual, it depends. My advice would be to enter whatever program allows you to sit the NCLEX fastest. It may be an ADN, unless there is a significant waiting list then it may be a BSN. Waiting list aside I think you would be at a much greater advantage to do ADN first. Heres why.

You can do an ADN in two years and become an RN. While working as an RN you can complete an RN to BSN program in two years. Four years total. Go the ADN rout and at the end of four years you are an RN with a BSN and two years of real RN experience (not to mention two years of RN pay and benifits). You are now ready to enter graduate school with your degree, license and two years of real experience. Go the BSN way and at the end of four years you are a new grad RN with zero real experience. In addition you would not have made the $230,000 or so over two years you would have made going the ADN rout.

Of course a waiting list for the ADN or an ADN program that requires extensive re-reqs would change that considerable in favor of the BSN first. Here in Wisconsin the ADN programs are desinged to be done in two years. Some have extensive waiting lists, a few don't.

llg, PhD, RN · Jun 24, 2008

As others have said, what is best for one person might not be best for another.

For me, I can't imagine dragging it out by starting with less than a BSN. I went from high school to my university-based BSN program. So, I got my BSN at 22. Then I worked as a staff nurse for 2 years to get some concrete practice experience and to solidify my long-term career path choices. After 2 years of staff nursing, I entered my MSN program -- graduating with my MSN at age 26.

After working as a CNS for 10 years, I went back to school and got my PhD. The only change I would make might be to start my PhD program sooner.

ProLogic · Jun 25, 2008

Thanks for putting it into perspective guys . Really appreciate it. llg, I think I might do what you did.