43% of New Nursing Students do not have jobs.

I did not read through every post - no. If I missed something please let me know.

Now I see it...sorry. I will ask some nurse managers that hire and see what thye have to say. I know I see students from USF, SPC, PTEC, and Galin in the hospital. I work for a large healthcare group with 20,000 employees so that will be a nice sample.

 

My nieces both earned BSN's from a local state university and both were hired immediately as nurses. While I do believe BSNs get preference over RNs with a two year degree, I think that the school they graduate from probably is not a huge factor in most hiring. Just like in teaching, you have to choose a school that will lead you to the licensing and credentials that you need, but when you get those credentials, the credentials themselves are more important than what school you went to. I'm sure there are exceptions where some hiring managers are big on certain schools, but I do think those are exceptions, just as with teaching. Nobody ever cared where I went to school as long as my certification is documented.

As for the 57% of nurses that get hired sooner than the rest, I would imagine they have other things on their resume that indicate they have some job related experience, are responsible, ethical, dedicated, etc. The interview can make a big difference. If you appear as an airhead, well, some hiring managers are not impressed by airheads. Nursing programs are hard, but my sister and her daughters will tell you that, yes, some airheads make it through nursing school. They might get jobs too, but I also think they may often find themselves in the 43% that don't get a job right away. I do not find this figure (43%) alarming regarding nurses that don't get jobs. If I knew an intelligent, responsible young person who showed any interest in nursing, yes, I would most definitely encourage that person to pursue it with every hope he or she would get hired very soon after graduating.

 

Interesting subject. My 21yo daughter is finishing her last term of pre-reqs for nursing school, so far with a 4.0 average in pre-reqs. She graduated last June with a BA in English from a well-known university - it only took her three years. She had intended to go to law school but had a change of heart after medical crises in our family in 2012 and now feels like nursing is her true calling. Her eventual goal is a Nurse-Practitioner designation and perhaps becoming a nursing instructor/professor. She investigated direct-entry RN/MSN programs, which are generally open to applicants with prior BAs but they would require another year and a half between O-chem and patho and the application timing cycle. She also investigated BSN programs, which also had the same timing problem. So she is applying to several community college AD programs this spring for an August 2013 start date. After the two-year RN program, she'll immediately sign up for an online BSN either from her first University (since she has all the distribution and graduation requirements, it should be pretty quick) or from WGU. Then she wants to get into an MSN program.

One thing she did last summer was to get her CNA/NAC license. It really solidified her feeling that she was in the right career. And since it's required prior to admission at most of the nursing schools locally, it was good that she did it. She can work before nursing school starts and will try to get a few shifts in a month during school and/or holidays. She is hoping that the previous CNA experience along with her other BA and her high level of enthusiasm and teamwork will help her get that first job out of nursing school. One of her long-term possibilities is geriatric nursing, which some nursing students look down on – so she would not be displeased with a first RN job in a nursing home.

Funny/sad commentary: The last pre-req that she has to take is English 101. Since she had so many AP classes (she was an AP Scholar with Distinction) she never took college English 101 and many CCs won't take a substitute for 101 in their entrance matrixes. Her English 101 class is online and she did not tell her instructor what her undergrad major was: The instructor is so impressed with her writing skills! I was so hot on her getting ahead via AP classes and so bummed that I/we have to pay for 101 now. Oh, well, the AP and college-in-the- HS-classroom classes allowed her to graduate early, so they counted for something.

 

Sounds like your daughter is doing EVERYTHING right. (except maybe I would have fought a little harder for an English 101 waiver as a holder of an ENGLISH DEGREE) It's likely that she won't need a BSN by the way. All of the programs I looked at took RNs with non-nursing BAs. Even really top schools like Vanderbilt and Yale. She may be able to also count some of her CNA experience TOWARDS (not instead of) her health care experience and have an exception made with her entrance application. I read over and over that NP type programs wanted a year of nursing but exceptions were available. FWIW, that path (BA--> ADN/RN --> MSN) might allow her to skip organic chem. The organic/biochem (and college algebra, stats, and path -and/or nutrition/genetics) are typically found in the BSN prereq list while not in the ADN prereqs, so she may not need it after all.

 

Now I'm wondering...

Not that I'm doubting Koolcypher or his source, but in the same article that SurfDoctor posted about the lack of jobs for Philosphy majors (thread here http://www.degreeinfo.com/general-distance-learning-discussions/44077-joke-even-meaner-than-fries-joke.html
) talks about a 4% unemployment rate for new RNs. Here's the source I'm talking about: Loved and Hated Degrees - Yahoo! Education

True, this article is talking about those new grads with BSNs but only a 4% unemployment rate is phenomenal. And with experience, unemployment is only 1.9%. However, this author gives no sources for is information, so I'm a bit skeptical.

 

Jennifer, thanks for weighing in as I know you have a lot of experience in this area.

RE: waiving English 101. She asked for a waiver and three programs agreed to substitute a class but required it to be a “composition” class. Her only comp class was a 400 level class in which she got an A-, which would lower her point score (they’re so competitive). The rest flatly refused and said if she didn’t take 101 she’d get zero points for that line item. So since she has to take it for at least one school, she gave in and is taking it.

Regarding her post RN schooling, she’s got some options and you’re right – she could just go right to the RN-to-MSN/NP program. But if she can get a good job right after then she’ll probably do that and work while getting the BSN, perhaps getting part/all of it paid for by her employer. And her top-choice school has an articulation agreement with her undergrad University. However, she wants to move after the RN to another state and you know with in-state tuition and the waiting period in some states complicates it, so she might go with WGU, which might allow her to go right to the MSN. Plus she doesn’t know what her specialty will be – pediatrics, geriatrics or other. And yes, she thinks she can skip Ochem in the RN to MSN programs or most of them.

Here are the options as she sees it:
RN then BSN (via her undergrad school) while working then move for MSN program in Arizona that she likes
RN then RN-to-MSN online while working (if she can find a program that has her concentration)

Any other ideas?

 

Chicago or LA downtown hospitals are hungry for ER Nurses.
Not to many want to work there, as they have to deal with overcrowded rooms and
wounded gang members.

 

My experience is limited to my own little world, but I think she's on the right track. I think by the time she's into her RN program, she'll have a better idea about which path seems most appropriate. I think there are a lot of factors- especially cost and time- but I'm really excited for her!! Tell her good luck from me!

 

Take Yahoo's education articles with a grain of salt. Yahoo is known for writing one thing in one article and then contradict themselves on another article. I'm not a very big fan of Yahoo. :cool2:

 

Yahoo is floundering and I am surprised the company still exists.

 

In the last quarter reported (Q3 2012), they had a profit of $177 million. They may be floundering but they aren't foundering.

 

Where I live, you can survive well on a third of that. For $10,000 more, which is just under $600/week and around $31,000/year (and provided you have the restraint to save at least $10,000 a year for 2.5 to 3 years, which is very doable here if you don't have a lot of luxuries) you can own a nice home outright in a good neighborhood. I did it myself here years ago.

That said, there are also no jobs in my area that pay enough to survive on (most are minimum wage or slightly above), and finding a job paying above $21,000 is like finding the holy grail. Finding anything over 30K is virtually impossible. I'm not in the job market, fortunately. But, I hear the despair of many job seekers here, and a lot of employers are just taking advantage of workers desperation, paying them piddly wages that they never would've gotten away with when the market was up.

 

$30k a year provides a fairly comfortable living in the South. I grew up in a home that depended on government assistance (in this century by the way) and we definitely could not afford the same living one would get with $30k a year let alone $20k a year. I would wear the same pair of shoes for years until they fell apart. If there was a particularly hot summer, we would have to do without air conditioning because we couldn't afford high electric bills. We often had to go to the food bank and churches for food assistance. I had no cell phone like many of my friends and I wasn't able to buy a pair of name-brand shoes until I got a full-time job after high school. We also had no car, so we depended on public transportation.

I doubt we were living the lifestyle of a family that earns $65k a year. We actually had a little more cash than the "average welfare leech" because my mother was on SSI. Before she received SSI, we rarely had cash for anything outside of the electric bill and household necessities. Sometimes, we didn't even have enough for household items such as soap, detergent, and deodorant.

 

I'm very proud of you. You have clearly worked very hard to break the cycle of poverty, you should be applauded!!!!

 

Thank you. I just couldn't see myself being a lifelong welfare dependant. It's neither easy nor fun at least for those who know there's better. I give thanks to resources like this forum and the people who contribute to them for pointing me to options that allowed me to complete a degree while working full-time at odd hours.

 

This is definitely going off the subject of nurses and jobs, but in my area, those on Welfare seem to be able to afford decent housing, many pets, transportation, cigarettes, and liquor. I applaud anyone who grew up on welfare, but has broken this cycle, whether it was to have a better lifestyle, or just because it was a better thing to do, ethically, if able to work.

I have seen and heard plenty on the local television, that would convince the masses these people do not have enough money to buy new shoes for their kids, and they must go to food banks (in addition to food stamp money) in order to even get nearly enough to eat. Yet, most they show on television seem to be overweight. Please don't buy into the idea they can afford nothing but starchy foods so that is why they are overweight.

They buy and eat whatever they want, and lots of junk food and too much of it. I have seen plenty in my area throwing expensive steaks and prepackaged foods in their cart, and then paying with their "Access" card. Because they CAN and do afford it. Unfortunately, most of the welfare clientele in my area do not realize they SHOULD spend the resources they get on children's shoes, and they buy dog food and liquor instead, and then expect society to give even more (if their kids are supposed to wear decent shoes to school).

Kids that go to school without breakfast and say they go hungry all weekend, simply have horrible parents. The resources are there and are given to these people and yet they still don't take care of their children. Giving more money to these people is not the answer and further removes their incentive to ever get a job. I guess the only answer, if there is one, is to educate them on how to prioritize spending, how to do without things for themselves in favor of making sure their children are well cared for, and letting them know in no uncertain terms, if they don't make sure the resources are used to PROPERLY FEED their children, their children will be removed from their home. I do feel sorry for the kids in these homes and wish there was a better answer.

 

It's this kind of judgment that keeps me a Republican. Really? You know what's best for everyone? More power to ya.

 

I guess I don't understand where I said I knew what is best for everyone. I think I said I don't really have the answer (for anyone) but the answer is not to give even more money to people who do not know how to properly prioritize what they do already get, to make sure essentials are taken care of before they buy cigarettes and more dogs they should not be able to afford on the tax payer dollar.

I stand by my statement that in my area, at least, people on welfare have decent housing, afford many dogs, go out to bars regularly, have good clothes for themselves (or at least a few expensive items) but their kids still sometimes go to school hungry, and looking like they can not afford shoes or a coat. Something is wrong with the picture.

 

Funny. I read suelaine's post as basically being Republican itself. Several images are offered of entitled people on welfare, and the argument that welfare "removes" their "incentive to ever get a job."

But then all this is taken to a place I don't think either of us like about government removing children from homes. Probably in very large number: the post seems to imply that obliviously negligent parenting – not buying "children's shoes," instead choosing "dog food and liquor" – is widespread among families on welfare.

And it's this kind of thinking, I'd thought, that makes me a Democrat.