Who thinks this school is jumping the gun on the DNP?

Editorial Team / Admin · Oct 17, 2007

Check out this thread about the DNP discussion and the American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN) calling for the requirement of doctorate in nursing for advanced practice nurses, such as nurse practitioners, nurse midwives, clinical nurse specialists, and nurse anesthetists:

https://allnurses.com/forums/f34/doctoral-degree-become-np-160044.html

And, here is a thread with (semi-current) list of DNP programs:

https://allnurses.com/forums/f34/doctor-nursing-practice-dnp-programs-225729.html

IMO? No, they are not "jumping the gun". I feel certain the DNP will be entry into practice as planned for in and around 2015.

prairienp · Oct 17, 2007

Check out this thread about the DNP discussion and the American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN) calling for the requirement of doctorate in nursing for advanced practice nurses, such as nurse practitioners, nurse midwives, clinical nurse specialists, and nurse anesthetists:
https://allnurses.com/forums/f34/doctoral-degree-become-np-160044.html
And, here is a thread with (semi-current) list of DNP programs:
https://allnurses.com/forums/f34/doctor-nursing-practice-dnp-programs-225729.html
IMO? No, they are not "jumping the gun". I feel certain the DNP will be entry into practice as planned for in and around 2015.

SirI is right. The transition is moving much faster than expected. I would anticipate that the majority of programs will be DNP by 2010.

llg, PhD, RN · Oct 17, 2007

I agree with the previous 2 posters. The profession has been "experimenting" with different degrees and titles for many years. Many people have recognized the need for some consistency that can only come by getting lots of schools to come together and form a concensus and actually start to modify their current programs. I believe the rapid shift we are seeing to the DNP degree is a result of a pent up demand for consistency. People have felt the need to come to a decision and this seems like the best bet -- so they are willing to take action and modify their programs accordingly.

core0 · Oct 17, 2007

I agree with the previous 2 posters. The profession has been "experimenting" with different degrees and titles for many years. Many people have recognized the need for some consistency that can only come by getting lots of schools to come together and form a concensus and actually start to modify their current programs. I believe the rapid shift we are seeing to the DNP degree is a result of a pent up demand for consistency. People have felt the need to come to a decision and this seems like the best bet -- so they are willing to take action and modify their programs accordingly.

I'm a cynic. The impetus has not come from practicing NPs but from NONPF and the state BONs. They are doing this for different reasons. I agree that the BONs want consistency. Unfortunately cursory examination of a number of programs shows a lack of consistency. Despite the original recommendations calling for increased clinical and didactic pharmacy hours, some of the programs have increased the nursing research hours instead.

The NONPF in my opinion has a different agenda. Look at the program cited by the OP. The program has expanded from 20 months to 40 months. This means additional tuition money and additional instructors. I predict that shortly you will see a bimodal distribution. The programs that have ample PhD trained instructors and have the ability to grant doctoral degrees will rapidly move toward the DNP. Vanderbilt and UCSF are examples of this. Other programs that don't have a substantial doctorally trained faculty will hold off as long as possible. Many of these programs do not have the ability to grant a doctorate and in the end some many close. Also since may of these programs advocate accessability they are the most impacted by increases in tuition and time to complete a program.

All in all the situation that the OP spoke about should be anticipated.

David Carpenter, PA-C

llg, PhD, RN · Oct 18, 2007

I'm a cynic. The impetus has not come from practicing NPs but from NONPF and the state
David Carpenter, PA-C

You make some good points. I'm not an expert on DNP programs by any means and have just been watching the developments "from the outside." I still haven't formed my final opinion about it all yet -- except that I do believe we need consistency within the nursing profession. I also think that there should be a role for nurses prepared at the MSN level. Not everyone in an advanced position needs to be doctorally prepared.

Advanced Practice Columnist / Guide · Oct 18, 2007

The NONPF in my opinion has a different agenda. Look at the program cited by the OP. The program has expanded from 20 months to 40 months. This means additional tuition money and additional instructors. I predict that shortly you will see a bimodal distribution. The programs that have ample PhD trained instructors and have the ability to grant doctoral degrees will rapidly move toward the DNP. Vanderbilt and UCSF are examples of this. Other programs that don't have a substantial doctorally trained faculty will hold off as long as possible. Many of these programs do not have the ability to grant a doctorate and in the end some many close. Also since may of these programs advocate accessability they are the most impacted by increases in tuition and time to complete a program.

I disagree with this comment. If you examine the list of existing DNP programs in the country, many are in universities that have not been historically big names in doctoral education for nursing. There are some such as U of Washington, Johns Hopkins, Case Western, UIC, etc. that appear to be more of an exception. Columbia, of course, is a pioneer of the DNP degree so it's no surprise that this school is on the current list. The truth is, many of the universities in this current AACN list do not even offer a Nursing PhD nor a DNSc. One should also realize that some universities with an established nursing research focus are still resisting the move to establish DNP programs within their institutions.

You also mentioned UCSF, a school with a well-respected doctoral program in nursing at the PhD level. But looking at their website it doesn't even appear that they are planning on transitioning to the DNP degree for their advanced practice nurse programs. In my home state of Michigan, three of the research-intensive universities that offer a PhD in nursing have not announced plans to transition their NP and CNS programs to a DNP. However, one local state university that does not even offer PhD's in any health related discipline for that matter was able to offer a DNP program beginning this fall.

I think the DNP transition will happen as sirI and prairienp pointed out. But the fact is, any of the current schools who offer nurse pracititioner programs at the master's level can come up with their own curriculum and call it their DNP program. I don't really see an institution not having a PhD program in nursing as a hindrance to this transition.

justme1972 · Oct 18, 2007

I disagree with this comment. If you examine the list of existing DNP programs in the country, many are in universities that have not been historically big names in doctoral education for nursing. There are some such as U of Washington, Johns Hopkins, Case Western, UIC, etc. that appear to be more of an exception. Columbia, of course, is a pioneer of the DNP degree so it's no surprise that this school is on the current list. The truth is, many of the universities in this current AACN list do not even offer a Nursing PhD nor a DNSc. One should also realize that some universities with an established nursing research focus are still resisting the move to establish DNP programs within their institutions.
You also mentioned UCSF, a school with a well-respected doctoral program in nursing at the PhD level. But looking at their website it doesn't even appear that they are planning on transitioning to the DNP degree for their advanced practice nurse programs. In my home state of Michigan, three of the research-intensive universities that offer a PhD in nursing have not announced plans to transition their NP and CNS programs to a DNP. However, one local state university that does not even offer PhD's in any health related discipline for that matter was able to offer a DNP program beginning this fall.
I think the DNP transition will happen as sirI and prairienp pointed out. But the fact is, any of the current schools who offer nurse pracititioner programs at the master's level can come up with their own curriculum and call it their DNP program. I don't really see an institution not having a PhD program in nursing as a hindrance to this transition.

Very, very interesting view.

I guess the point of my original post was, that I knew the transition was coming, but starting NEXT year is what blew my mind.

I just wasn't expecting that, and I'll be honest, it has sort of dampened my spirits a little b/c the DNP program at the school described the degree as the student would have "various experiences" however, the NNP is so incredibly specialized, so I started to wonder....

Who would you want to work on your preemie? Someone who spent 2 years working on nothing but Neonates or someone who spent 3 1/2 years being "well rounded".

It seems like these DNP degrees would make you a Jill of all trades and a Master of none...no pun intended.

Is my thinking wrong?

llg, PhD, RN · Oct 18, 2007

It seems like these DNP degrees would make you a Jill of all trades and a Master of none...no pun intended.

Oh... I like that line. It deserves to be quoted.

core0 · Oct 18, 2007

Very, very interesting view.
I guess the point of my original post was, that I knew the transition was coming, but starting NEXT year is what blew my mind.
I just wasn't expecting that, and I'll be honest, it has sort of dampened my spirits a little b/c the DNP program at the school described the degree as the student would have "various experiences" however, the NNP is so incredibly specialized, so I started to wonder....
Who would you want to work on your preemie? Someone who spent 2 years working on nothing but Neonates or someone who spent 3 1/2 years being "well rounded".
It seems like these DNP degrees would make you a Jill of all trades and a Master of none...no pun intended.
Is my thinking wrong?

I depends on how the degree is implemented. The NONPF statement implies that the NP will use the DNP to become better at that nursing specialty. They recommend extra coursework in Pharmacology, pathophysiology and disease process. They also recommend an additional 1000 hours of clinical time. Using your NNP as an example theoretically the DNP NNP would have more clinical time and a better understanding of the neonatal disease process. On the other hand if this time is used in other ways then I agree with you.

Interestingly the original proposal by the State BONs envisioned a different process. All RNs would take a basic "NP" course and then specialize after that. This would be more analagous to the medical model of training.

David Carpenter, PA-C

justme1972 · Oct 28, 2007

I depends on how the degree is implemented. The NONPF statement implies that the NP will use the DNP to become better at that nursing specialty. They recommend extra coursework in Pharmacology, pathophysiology and disease process. They also recommend an additional 1000 hours of clinical time. Using your NNP as an example theoretically the DNP NNP would have more clinical time and a better understanding of the neonatal disease process. On the other hand if this time is used in other ways then I agree with you.
Interestingly the original proposal by the State BONs envisioned a different process. All RNs would take a basic "NP" course and then specialize after that. This would be more analagous to the medical model of training.
David Carpenter, PA-C

David,

You ended up being right on the money with this.

I was going by what the school had posted on their website, but when I spoke to the director of the program (who is over the NNP Masters now), she said that the DNP that will be awarded will be in a specialty..which did sound much better. So you would get the DNP with an NNP concentration, and your entire focus will center around not only neonates, but leadership roles.

This is at the University of Tennessee of Health Sciences in Memphis...she explained the program so much better..it's 3 1/2 years as of now, but she believed that once the full transition is made, she thinks that they may be able to shave a semester off the program to three years. She said that you only have to make 12 trips to campus, and the rest is done online, and one of the hospitals I am considering they already have a clinical arrangement with.

The other school I was looking at, East Carolina Univ, has no plans to transition in the near future, so they will be continually offering the Masters-NNP.

I do agree David, that if it moves from a recommendation to a requirement, either the colleges will have to make major bumps in salary or some of the existing (and already rare) programs will close.

On the NNP, I have learned there is a marked clinical shortgage...and I'm sure one of the reasons is a lack of programs available, as they are very, very difficult to find.

Multicollinearity, BSN, RN · Oct 28, 2007

I have been working for the last few months trying to "map out" where I am going to receive my BSN and NNP, b/c I don't want any suprises when it comes time to apply for these programs.
I also have to be sure to establish a residency in the state that I am moving to so I don't pay out-of-state tuition.
Univeristy of Tennessee of Health Sciences, I called them yesterday regarding their NNP program and was excited to find it was offered online (and a state I was considering moving to when I am done here).
However, before I got off the phone, they asked, "When are you graduating?" and I said, "Not for awhile, I'm a new student but just trying to plan."
They said that starting in 2008, they are phasing out all of their advanced practice nursing programs, you would go from a BSN to a DNP.
That sounds all fine and dandy, but it's 3 1/2 years of SCHOOL that I don't want to put in. There is a HUGE financial difference between working for 2 years to get the work requirement in, being in school for 20 months vs going for 3 1/2 years straight. I just have no desire to have a "doctorate".
Are they jumping the gun with this? I thought this was something that the ANA was tossing around but it ranked up there with having a BSN as a minimal requirement to be an RN...sounds great, but you need to have enough in the profession before you can "bump" the requrement.
Has anyone heard this at other schools?

We have a great deal in common. You are a bit ahead of me. I start nursing school in January. I've mapped out all of my coursework down to each and every class, and I'll graduate with my BSN in 2010. My goal is NP. This is why I'm in undergrad nursing school to begin with.

I, too, wanted to sneak in under the MSN/DNP border-time period and be grandfathered in. Just like you, all of the NP programs I'm looking at are terminating their MSN-NP programs in 2008 and going to DNP. I'm surprised at the swift movement to DNP. So I'm resigning myself to the notion that it'll just take longer and cost more to become an NP. I imagine at the end, we will be glad we got DNPs.

I just hope that NP earnings rise with the increased educational requirements to offset the additional tuition dollars. I'm looking at 4 years of full-time grad study for a DNP, at $60k in today's tuition dollars. This is paying in-state tuition at a public university.

Pharmacists' salaries shot up when they went to PharmD. So did physical therapists' when their educational requirements went to D.P.T. Here's hoping the rules of economics apply in nursing - because I'm mortgaging my future with student loans.