I am taking classes towards my BSN because like other nurses with a diploma or ADN I am being "forced" to return to school for my BSN. I have had my ADN for 9 years. My question is HOW is statistics, critical inquiry, and the other classes going to make me a better nurse? Isn't hands on training the best way to learn? I feel like they are requiring BSN now and in 10 years want MSN so that we wont need doctors working on the floors, because nurses will do their own orders!!
I am 42 y/o and rally don't want to do this, but I have a minimum of 23 years left of working and had to be forced to stay where I am due to not having a BSN. Sure they say we may be "grandfathered" in, but that limits us to stay put.
Anyone have any input on this, as to what am I going to learn getting my BSN and why the requirement now?
I bridged to BSN after completing my ADN program. The extra courses were: A public health nursing course; a research class; a couple more nursing theory classes; community health nursing practicum; clinical preceptorship; advanced health assessment; college statistics; a few more humanities classes. The BSN program, at a state university, is accredited.
It is now 16 years since I obtained my BSN. The information in the public health nursing course and research class were useful, as was the excellent advanced health assessment class. The community health nursing practicum and clinical preceptorship (I had already done a preceptorship in my ADN program) were interesting and broadened my knowledge, but they did not significantly contribute to improving my nursing practice. College statistics was an excellent class, and far more interesting than any of the nursing classes I took in my entire major, and the nursing theory classes were unmemorable or ridiculous - all I can remember now is the absurd vocabulary.
While some of the extra classes in the ADN-BSN program did broaden my knowledge, and were useful, as applied to actual patient care the foundation of my nursing practice has been, and continues to be, the excellent clinical training I received in my ADN program. The ADN-BSN classes supplemented my ADN training. The most valuable parts of my education since my ADN and ADN-BSN programs have been putting together in practice all the pieces I learned/was exposed to in my ADN program, together with self-study efforts such as studying for certification, subscribing to a nursing journal, making a strong effort to remain current in my practice, and reading medical literature. I have never regretted taking the ADN and then ADN-BSN route. When I heard generic BSN students, in my program, in their final semesters, tell me they had received hardly any clinical training and did not feel prepared to be nurses, I could only wonder what the whole point of their more time consuming and expensive generic BSN program was.
If one wants to apply to graduate school however, then a BSN is generally necessary, and in some geographical areas employers are preferring to hire BSN's, or requiring BSN's for promotion, so there are obviously very good career reasons for obtaining a BSN. Having the option of graduate school was one of the initial reasons I bridged to BSN, along with having been told in my ADN program that BSN would eventually become the standard for entry into practice. It is 19 years since I graduated from my ADN program, and the discussion about the enhanced value of the BSN and about BSN being required for entry into practice is just the same now as it was then. I have seen no evidence in practice or in studies that BSN trained nurses provide better patient care than ADN trained nurses, although this notion is aggressively promoted by some people.
Is a BSN required to be able to think critically as a nurse? No. My ADN program consisted of people varying in ages from their 60's to their early twenties, many with previous degrees/careers, and with all kinds of life experience, who were very able at thinking critically in all kinds of situations.
Nobody needs to get a BSN. The is nothing a nurse with a BSN can accomplish that the same nurse with an MSN couldn't/ As a person who is in a position to advise student nurses and recent grads I no longer recommend that any of the get a BSN. I think a reasonable argument can be made that the BSN is rapidly becoming obsolete.
Now that an ADN RN can earn a MSN in about 44 credits in two years from real universities what is the point of the BSN?
But...you need to get the ADN before the MSN. There might not be a local MSN program and even an online MSN program might cost 2x more than a BSN degree since the graduate rates will be charged. MSN degrees are not cheap. You also have to go through the enrollment process and fees twice.
Giving the advice the "ADN" is just as good does the aspiring nurse a disservice who might want to be a Public Health or School nurse. Or, they might want to move around and an ADN graduate is not going to find work easily everywhere nor will they get the ICU, flight or specialty team jobs as easily. What if they move to one of the BSN in ten states?
If the ADN takes 3 years, it would be wiser (and more cost effective) to enroll in a BSN program at a university or at least a community college with a BSN program affiliation. The student can decide later if they want to put out the money for grad school and what specialty after they have obtained a job as a BSN grad.
Specializes in burn ICU, SICU, ER, Trauma Rapid Response.
But...you need to get the ADN before the MSN. There might not be a local MSN program and even an online MSN program might cost 2x more than a BSN degree since the graduate rates will be charged. MSN degrees are not cheap. You also have to go through the enrollment process and fees twice.
Yes, you have a point that the MSN is going to be more expensive, but probably less expensive than getting a BSN and MSN. So if the goal is an MSN then why not just skip the BSN?
Giving the advice the "ADN" is just as good does the aspiring nurse a disservice who might want to be a Public Health or School nurse.
Uh, who is giving that advice? Certainly not me.
Or, they might want to move around and an ADN graduate is not going to find work easily everywhere nor will they get the ICU, flight or specialty team jobs as easily. What if they move to one of the BSN in ten states?
My comments about nobody needs to get a BSN were directed at people who are already ADN RNs. I wasn't talking about non nurses. I should have been more clear.
If the ADN takes 3 years, it would be wiser (and more cost effective) to enroll in a BSN program at a university or at least a community college with a BSN program affiliation. The student can decide later if they want to put out the money for grad school and what specialty after they have obtained a job as a BSN grad.
I was referring to ADN RNs going on to get their BSN.
Interesting to think about though. One can earn an ADN from an accredited public community college in 70 credits in 2 years, and a MSN in 47 credits in 2 years of part time, online education from real universities. That is 117 credits. 3 less than every BSN program I have ever seen and the nurse is a step up over the BSN cause she already has a masters in nursing. One can go from high school grad to MSN in 4 years, 2 for the ADN and 2 for the MSN, plus be able to work for two of those years. Hard to see how the ADN to MSN would be disadvantaged over the university BSN, even if she was unable to get a job with her ADN, though like I said all of my ADN students have been able to secure acute care hospital jobs. Even in specialty units. The cost of ADN to MSN would be comparable to the university BSN since there would be 2 years of very inexpensive community college and two years of expensive grad school.
The ADN doesn't need to take 3 years. One can simply chooses a program without pre-reqs that is set up to be done in two years. People do it all the time. It's how we have so many 19 and 20 year old new grads hitting the floor every summer.
If I had done the two year MSN I would have had a masters degree with only one year (two semesters) of full time college for my ADN and two years of part time online school. That would be some sort of record I think.
Yes, you have a point that the MSN is going to be more expensive, but probably less expensive than getting a BSN and MSN. So if the goal is an MSN then why not just skip the BSN?
My comments about nobody needs to get a BSN were directed at people who are already ADN RNs. I wasn't talking about non nurses. I should have been more clear.
Since this refers to the OP's topic, why get the MSN? You have made it sound very easy but in reality it is not for everybody. If someone wants to get the BSN for the sake of having one for whatever reason, a few reasonably priced credits at a reputable university especially if they are only viewed as "fluff" without must significance for their current practice might be adequate.
I will refer to the info provided in this link for the purpose of quoting.
An average of 60 graduate-level credit hours is required to achieve the MSN.
That is 60 graduate level credit hours at graduate school prices.
I think my biggest problem with your post is the use of EVERY and ALL.
I was referring to ADN RNs going on to get their BSN.
Interesting to think about though. One can earn an ADN from an accredited public community college in 70 credits in 2 years, and a MSN in 47 credits in 2 years of part time, online education from real universities. That is 117 credits. 3 less than every BSN program I have ever seen and the nurse is a step up over the BSN cause she already has a masters in nursing. One can go from high school grad to MSN in 4 years, 2 for the ADN and 2 for the MSN, plus be able to work for two of those years. Hard to see how the ADN to MSN would be disadvantaged over the university BSN, even if she was unable to get a job with her ADN, though like I said all of my ADN students have been able to secure acute care hospital jobs. Even in specialty units. The cost of ADN to MSN would be comparable to the university BSN since there would be 2 years of very inexpensive community college and two years of expensive grad school.
The ADN doesn't need to take 3 years. One can simply chooses a program without pre-reqs that is set up to be done in two years. People do it all the time. It's how we have so many 19 and 20 year old new grads hitting the floor every summer.
If I had done the two year MSN I would have had a masters degree with only one year (two semesters) of full time college for my ADN and two years of part time online school. That would be some sort of record I think.
More from the posted link:
Full-time completion of coursework generally takes 7 to 9 semesters (2-3 years)
Generally, during the first semester/s of study, RN to MSN students complete undergraduate (BSN) coursework.
This is in addition to the graduate level course work. If the RN went through an Associates program where credits did not meet all the initial transfer requirements, they may need to additional courses possibly through the school and possibly at a higher cost "for convenience".
Admission requirements can also include:
Some RN to MSN programs require that the RN hold a license in the state in which the college is located.
This is another expense to consider not to mention the application process.
RN to MSN programs prefer to admit students with strong GPAs. However, some programs provisionally admit students with average GPAs and grant final admission to programs after those students demonstrate performance capabilities by successfully completing coursework.
I have also found the colleges which will admit regardless of GPA might charge higher than normal tuition rates since they know some will not have a choice if they really want the degree or if they are bound by having a degree from a college with questionable credits to transfer.
A primary factor for the RN to MSN programs were designed to fast track potential educators.
Federal and state funding aimed at alleviating nursing faculty shortages is a factor in the growing availability of RN to MSN programs
Something to consider would be if this is also why some BSN programs are being thought of as fluff if education itself is being "fast tracked" to plug a hole. I think we saw this in the 1980s and early 1990s when just about anybody could bridge into a nursing program. We are also now seeing this for the military personnel returning home with the fast tracking and incentives. I am not opposed to this in some cases but the educational equivalency should still be examined and a standard should still be maintained. Sometimes when the government gets involved to offer a quick fix, other agendas take precedence over the greater good or the long term consequences. Less is not always the best especially if you want credibility at the higher educational levels. This may make the RN placed under more scrutiny rather than raising the professional status.
My point:
Buyer beware.
Be cautious when "ALL and EVERY" are used by an educator or school. Investigate thoroughly before investing several $1000s. Find a program which fits YOUR long term goals be it a fluff degree for the letters behind your name or a genuine interest in advancing as a health care professional. This applies to potential students looking for entry into a nursing program and all other levels.
I'm a student in an ADN program and I graduate in April. I have a degree from a far better school than what I am attending right now but in a different field. I plan on starting my RN-BSN as soon as possible even though the area I live in is heavily populated with ADN nurses. The area is shifting to a BSN requirement. Actually, the local hospital requires that all ADN nurses hired must finish their BSN within 5 years of their hiring date. No one says you need to bang out a BSN program in 2 semesters - that sure could be a financial burden.
The way I look at is - more education never hurt anyone...and I think that's the point - getting a BSN can only help our profession not hurt it. I feel the more you know, the better off you are! I doubt there are more physical skills that person will gain from the BSN program but I do feel that it will make you more well rounded as an individual. A class in community health may help one to understand the circumstances of individuals in the area and help to reduce the judgement placed upon people.
All I know is when I started my BS (before I went through my ADN program) I changed....my mind opened to broader horizons. This is never a bad thing! I'm all about bettering myself - whether that's getting my BSN, taking cooking classes, joining a book club - whatever! After all, "Knowledge is power!"
Specializes in burn ICU, SICU, ER, Trauma Rapid Response.
That is 60 graduate level credit hours at graduate school prices.
I suppose, but why not choose a program that is only 36 for a holder of a BSN, or 47 for an associates degree?
I think my biggest problem with your post is the use of EVERY and ALL.
It is in no way a problem given how I used them. Fact: ALL of my ADN students have managed to get acute care jobs in hospitals, sometimes in specialiety units over the last 3 years or so.
My use of "every" was appropiate as well. Every BSN program I know of requires at least 120 credits to graduate when one statrs as a high school graduate. If you know fo BSN programs that require less please point them out.
This is in addition to the graduate level course work. If the RN went through an Associates program where credits did not meet all the initial transfer requirements, they may need to additional courses possibly through the school and possibly at a higher cost "for convenience".
Or choose an associates degree from an acreditied program where all the credit will transfer. I did. Took a little looking and calling around but wasn't very difficult. Then choose a MSN program that does not require additional course work.
I am not suggesting that a graduate of ANY ADN program can go to ANY MSN program seemlessly. Yes, it's true, one might actually have to spend a few hours doing a little home work when making choices.
I have also found the colleges which will admit regardless of GPA
I am not talking about such school. I am refering to a reputable state university.
Something to consider would be if this is also why some BSN programs are being thought of as fluff if education itself is being "fast tracked" to plug a hole.
The message being recieved is that it is the actual letters behind one's name that matter and make the difference. I am thinking how one cam maximize the letters behind their name with a minimum expence and time investment. As I clearly pointed out this is something worth thinking about. i am not attempting to provide a blue print and recommend everyone follow it.
I work in Private Duty and want to until retirement(33 years away)
Do you guys recommend an ADN who doesn't want to work in acute care still get a Bsn?
Trust me,there are lots of nurses who don't want to work in acute care at ALL.
I do want to add something I see a lot.
It seems nurses in acute care regardless of degree think they are smarter than nurses who don't work in acute care settings.
My friend who has a Bsn and only works private duty tells me all the time that when she comes across Adn nurses who work in acute care they try to talk down to her even though her degree is higher.
It seems nurses measure ourselves by experience rather than education.
Specializes in burn ICU, SICU, ER, Trauma Rapid Response.
The way I look at is - more education never hurt anyone
Maybe not, however there are a heck of a lot of people who would have better lives without the overwhelming burden of large student loans to pay back for an expensive education that doesn't increase their income.
At a time when nurse wages and benifits are on the decline (see recent wage survays here on AN, new grads in NY being started at $18/hour!), and nurse autonomy is decreasing (see recent discussion here on AN about scripting), the demand to drasticaly INCREASE a nurses time and monitary investment is, at best, questionable to me.
As I said before if RN actually needed a BSN then they would simply set a date after which a BSN would be required to take the NCLEX, all the the dipiloma and ADN RN would be grandfathered in and we would have a constantly increasing percentage of BSN prepared RNs.
According the the AACN in 1980 only 22% of RNs held a BSN, vs 55% in 2013. Yet RN autonomy and compensation are on the decline. This would seem to argue aginst increasing the time and financial investment for nurses to me.
Maybe not, however there are a heck of a lot of people who would have better lives without the overwhelming burden of large student loans to pay back for an expensive education that doesn't increase their income.
At a time when nurse wages and benifits are on the decline (see recent wage survays here on AN, new grads in NY being started at $18/hour!), and nurse autonomy is decreasing (see recent discussion here on AN about scripting), the demand to drasticaly INCREASE a nurses time and monitary investment is, at best, questionable to me.
As I said before if RN actually needed a BSN then they would simply set a date after which a BSN would be required to take the NCLEX, all the the dipiloma and ADN RN would be grandfathered in and we would have a constantly increasing percentage of BSN prepared RNs.
According the the AACN in 1980 only 22% of RNs held a BSN, vs 55% in 2013. Yet RN autonomy and compensation are on the decline. This would seem to argue aginst increasing the time and financial investment for nurses to me.
In one post you want people to spend big money for the MSN. Now you are saying it is not worth it.
In your MSN post you take about taking the shortest possible route to get an end result yet you complain about autonomy declining.
Since there are over 3 million RNs in the US and only 55% have higher degrees, that leaves 45%, which is a large number, to argue that education is not worth it and the ADN is good enough.
You stated ALL of your new grads are employed. I believe that is alot better than some in the US. I bet they also have insurance. I also bet they are making much more than other entry level workers who require only an Associates degree.
Tell me how many other jobs have flexible hours or days of work, decent pay, benefits and an opportunity to work almost anywhere in the US including travel assignments. All of this can be done with an Associates degree. Why change if you can get all that for a mere Associates? Right now the RN is probably the only patient care profession which will grant an Associates degree with no nursing clinicals in some states. You are losing autonomy and compensation because you have become complacent and have stood back while others have started making a move. Others are also willing to work for less just to get a piece of what nurses have. When you are wanting more than you are willing to put forth to keep up, you get left behind. When you fragment your educational system with shortcuts and inadequate programs, your profession suffers. You reap what you sow and your autonomy will suffer.
In one post you want people to spend big money for the MSN. Now you are saying it is not worth it.
In your MSN post you take about taking the shortest possible route to get an end result yet you complain about autonomy declining.
Since there are over 3 million RNs in the US and only 55% have higher degrees, that leaves 45%, which is a large number, to argue that education is not worth it and the ADN is good enough.
You stated ALL of your new grads are employed. I believe that is alot better than some in the US. I bet they also have insurance. I also bet they are making much more than other entry level workers who require only an Associates degree.
Tell me how many other jobs have flexible hours or days of work, decent pay, benefits and an opportunity to work almost anywhere in the US including travel assignments. All of this can be done with an Associates degree. Why change if you can get all that for a mere Associates? Right now the RN is probably the only patient care profession which will grant an Associates degree with no nursing clinicals in some states. You are losing autonomy and compensation because you have become complacent and have stood back while others have started making a move. Others are also willing to work for less just to get a piece of what nurses have. When you are wanting more than you are willing to put forth to keep up, you get left behind. When you fragment your educational system with shortcuts and inadequate programs, your profession suffers. You reap what you sow and your autonomy will suffer.
HOLY COW!!!
There are some states you don't need nursing clinicals?
Which states are those?
My state requires it,but we never,ever got to do any "hands on" skills for fear of lawsuits(as per the professor)
Susie2310
2,121 Posts
I bridged to BSN after completing my ADN program. The extra courses were: A public health nursing course; a research class; a couple more nursing theory classes; community health nursing practicum; clinical preceptorship; advanced health assessment; college statistics; a few more humanities classes. The BSN program, at a state university, is accredited.
It is now 16 years since I obtained my BSN. The information in the public health nursing course and research class were useful, as was the excellent advanced health assessment class. The community health nursing practicum and clinical preceptorship (I had already done a preceptorship in my ADN program) were interesting and broadened my knowledge, but they did not significantly contribute to improving my nursing practice. College statistics was an excellent class, and far more interesting than any of the nursing classes I took in my entire major, and the nursing theory classes were unmemorable or ridiculous - all I can remember now is the absurd vocabulary.
While some of the extra classes in the ADN-BSN program did broaden my knowledge, and were useful, as applied to actual patient care the foundation of my nursing practice has been, and continues to be, the excellent clinical training I received in my ADN program. The ADN-BSN classes supplemented my ADN training. The most valuable parts of my education since my ADN and ADN-BSN programs have been putting together in practice all the pieces I learned/was exposed to in my ADN program, together with self-study efforts such as studying for certification, subscribing to a nursing journal, making a strong effort to remain current in my practice, and reading medical literature. I have never regretted taking the ADN and then ADN-BSN route. When I heard generic BSN students, in my program, in their final semesters, tell me they had received hardly any clinical training and did not feel prepared to be nurses, I could only wonder what the whole point of their more time consuming and expensive generic BSN program was.
If one wants to apply to graduate school however, then a BSN is generally necessary, and in some geographical areas employers are preferring to hire BSN's, or requiring BSN's for promotion, so there are obviously very good career reasons for obtaining a BSN. Having the option of graduate school was one of the initial reasons I bridged to BSN, along with having been told in my ADN program that BSN would eventually become the standard for entry into practice. It is 19 years since I graduated from my ADN program, and the discussion about the enhanced value of the BSN and about BSN being required for entry into practice is just the same now as it was then. I have seen no evidence in practice or in studies that BSN trained nurses provide better patient care than ADN trained nurses, although this notion is aggressively promoted by some people.
Is a BSN required to be able to think critically as a nurse? No. My ADN program consisted of people varying in ages from their 60's to their early twenties, many with previous degrees/careers, and with all kinds of life experience, who were very able at thinking critically in all kinds of situations.