Credential creep -- do you really NEED that doctorate

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by PsychPhD, Sep 8, 2009.

Loading...
  1. Ted Heiks

    Ted Heiks Moderator and Distinguished Senior Member Staff Member

    It is interesting that Brown's founding documents have been interpreted as prohibiting the founding of a business school or a law school. Of course, the Board of Brown University has the right to interpret their founding documents in any way they damn please. However, it seems to me that the lack of any mention of a business school or a law school in Brown's founding documents should be construed as a prohibition on the founding of a business school or a law school at Brown, especially when you consider that the first US business schools and the first US law schools were founded in the late nineteenth century, long after Brown's founding.
     
  2. Malajac

    Malajac Member


    This seems to closely resemble our pre-Bologna model for most programs except medical ( high-school > 6 years medical school for MD > specialization > 2 year Master's > PhD I believe) and engineering and some other programs.



    I was wondering if DNP envisaged post-degree residency training. So I guess not?




    Yes, certainly, but if I'm not mistaken you yourself believe that quality is satisfactory even with the current level of education (MSN) provided NPs stay within those duties they perform now? Quality would become an issue if practice really showed patients confusing DNPs for MDs and/or DNPs taking over some of the duties of MDs for which they are not qualified. I suspect that hospitals would be quick to control and restrict this, if only to avoid potential malpractice lawsuits? Other than the hospital context, would those DNPs be able to establish their own practices - and if so, doing what?
     
  3. PsychPhD

    PsychPhD New Member

    Well ...

    As someone whose profession required acquisition of a full PhD, followed by a year of internship and another year of residency, I personally am not convinced that nurse practitioner training is sufficient. However, that boat sailed LONG ago and empirical evidence suggests validity and safety in the limted context of primary care.

    To put things in a bit of perspective, psychology in the US is pushing for doctoral psychologists to be permitted limited prescription privleges -- psychtropic drugs only. To qualify, a licensed psychologist (that means all qualifying education/training completed and validated) then would have to earn a two year post-doctoral Master's degree and complete a period of practice supervised by a psychiatrist. Many have suggested a quicker alternative would be having the PhD psychologist study to become a nurse practitioner which, in many states, includes unrestricted prescription privileges and no requirement for post-graduate supervised practice!
     
  4. Paul S Rogers

    Paul S Rogers New Member

    PsychPhD: May I ask if somewhere or at sometime during your career you got into a pissing contest with Nursing Service and came up on the short end of the stick. To me, your post about what the nursing profession is doing and how they are doing it leads me to believe that might be the case. Hospital Committees, Governing Boards and State Legislators will no doubt have the final say on the how and what the role of the DNP will be.

    And just remember when and if cutbacks come to your hospital, Nursing Service will lose fewer personnel than Psychology Service. Trust me, those same physicians that have shared negative comments with you about nursing will turn tables and support then to the hilt. You see, you may be able to administer and score an MMPI-2 or TAT, but at 2:00 in the morning it won’t be psychologist hanging whole blood, or drawing labs for Vancomycin peek and trough. In the grand scheme, the value of nursing i.e., 24/7, proving patient care in ICU, SICU, CCU and PICU will win out every time. Get over it, nursing is a powerful organization with tremendous lobbying skills and support. In the hospital setting, they rule!
     
  5. PsychPhD

    PsychPhD New Member

    Sorry what?

    And can I ask where you feel you have the authority and/or insight to dissect my professional experience?

    I have been exquisitely clear about the nature of my concerns and the bases for them. Most of what I have referenced/citied is public information. Look it up.

    You think so?
    Been in a hospital lately?
    The PHYSICIANS rule -- and always have.

    And there aren't so many nurses there at 2 AM drawing levels or hanging blood because -- as I also pointed out -- many nurses are LEAVING primary care to pursue the "advanced" credentials so they can GIVE the orders not carry them out. Much of the hands-on care has been passed down to even less trained CNAs or phlebotomists. The few primary care RNs left (who are now supervising the CNAs) are spread so thin that medication and other therapeutic errors rates are rising.

    Instead of trying to misrepresent content as a "pissing match," might I suggest you actually read it and focus your attention on the substance?

    The only point you got right is about the lobby skills of the nursing profession (which, again, I have consistently referenced). It is because of this NON-CLINICAL proficiency that nursing has been able to hop-skip-and-jump up the healthcare hierarchy. Instead of studying advanced pharmocology or cardiac crises, DNP programs incorporate "leadership" or "public advocacy" course work.

    Yeah, I can interpret that MMPI-2 or TAT because of the substantial coursework and training I received. But, due to their lobbying, so can the NP/DNP with almost no training.

    That really sounds like a good idea to you?
     
  6. GeneralSnus

    GeneralSnus Member

    No, but if you're insured in the US you will probably be forced to first visit your primary physician's office. Some "physician's offices" are literally that -- businesses owned by a physician staffed almost entirely by NPs and PAs. If you never asked, you might not even know you're being treated by a nurse instead of a physician. Naturally you (or your insurer) will not be billed at a lesser rate even though you were treated by a NP or PA instead of by a MD or DO.
     
  7. xai

    xai New Member

    Hi there! Long time lurker here, but posting now because this topic is really interesting to me as a US citizen studying a somewhat related field (veterinary medicine) in a country that follows the British system for awarding professional degrees.

    I don't mean to sound rude, but when you ask "why have professions which never needed a doctorate to enter the profession now encouraging it?" has it occurred to you that physicians in the US did the exact same thing 100-150 years ago? Veterinary schools in the US made the same transition in the early to mid 20th century. Note that this is mainly a US phenomenon! Currently, most countries do not award a doctoral degree as a first professional degree.

    I see it as primarily a fixation on status. A doctorate, which was once meant for educators and researchers is now used as a status symbol. MDs were just one of the first to use it at such. It shouldn't be surprising that non-physician healthcare professionals in the US would strive to do the same. It also shouldn't come as a surprise that universities which look for ways to expand and acquire more funding are willing to give these professionals what they want. I think it's fair to be neutral to the universities in this situation, they're simply fulfilling a demand.

    As you noted in the post quoted above, empirical evidence suggests that DNPs (or rather NPs with MSNs) are competent in primary care. Isn't this what the DNP was created for? If NPs are able to perform competently as a substitute for a GP physician who does get a doctorate, then honestly I don't see why a university shouldn't be allowed to award a doctorate for the level of education NPs receive. It's not a problem with the university, it's a problem with people in the US in general who believe that professional fields deserve their own doctorates.

    You cite quality concerns with the DNP program due to the 6 year period it takes to complete. But BVetMed and MBBS degrees in British systems also take about 5-6 years to complete (internship periods vary, but are relatively short for GPs). These degrees are recognized by the AVMA and AMA as being equivalent to the DVM and MD. So I guess what I'm saying is that 6 years of study can be considered appropriate for professional doctorates. I just don't think they should be considered equivalent to proper doctorates (given for original research).

    The British system makes much more sense to me. Here is an outline of the system:

    MBBS - Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery: First professional degree.
    MMed - Master of Medicine: Awarded in some countries for specialisation.
    MD - Doctor of Medicine: Awarded for a successful defense of a thesis based on original medical research.

    Though it must be frustrating for you that there are so many extra steps a psychology major must take to become a clinician (and hopefully in the future, to write prescriptions) just keep in mind that psychology is an incredibly broad discipline and most undergraduate study in psychology will require students to do coursework that has very little practical application in a clinical setting.

    Sorry for the long post, but I hope I've contributed some interesting information to this discussion!
     
  8. PsychPhD

    PsychPhD New Member

    Interesting perspective

    Thank you for a very interesting perspective. I often am curious how other countries handle similar situations -- not being one of those who believe America is the only place where things are done "right"! :)

    This is valid point. But do also consider that at the point in history you are referring non-professional/unscientific practice of healthcare was the norm. The efforts you describe were undertaken to IMPROVE the quality of the services provided and incorporate advancing scientific knowledge.

    I do not believe the same can be said today, particular as the the training systems you describe have demonstrated their ability to produce qualified and quality practitioners for 50+ years now.

    I agree with ...

    But ...
    I'm not so sure I see this being the case. As I've illustrated, the nursing profession, in particular, has filled its "advanced" training curricula with leadership and public policy courses, appearing to be creating a self-perpetuating cycle.

    I don't see where there is a clinical/societal demand that needs to be filled. The profession saw an opening, realized members would welcome a chance to become "doctors", and created programs to take advantage of that. A classic tail wagging the dog situation (and the genesis of the term "credential creep.")

    I agree with the "believe they deserve doctorates" sentiment. But that doesn't mean they should be provided them.

    My original comment was about MSN/NPs. Just because we haven't been overwhelmed with nurse practitioner malpractice suits doesn't mean a DNP needs to be added. (Remember, the AANP has indicated it wants the DNP to become the qualifying credential for nurse practitoners in 2015.)


    A valid point and I admit I am not as familiar with the British system as I'd like. But my understanding is that it is MUCH more rigorous than the US system, practically beginning at the first step. What we call "high school" in the British system would equate to the first couple years of college here.

    It is confounds the comparison that the British system decided to call the entry level qualification for a physician a "Bachelor's" degree. But I don't think anyone in the US would argue that some one with a US Bachelor's degree should be permitted to practice medicine.

    You don't think medicine (or nursing, for that matter) aren't broad disciplines?
    One of the arguments against psychologists prescribing is that our education is not as focused on biological sciences. Pre-medical curriculum in the US likewise has nothing to do with clinical applications -- it lays the foundation of science education upon which the clinical sciences will then be built.

    Consider that someone an undergraduate who then goes to an American medical school, still has another 4 years before s/he will be allowed limited responsibility for a patient.

    A nurse, on the other hand, could graduate from an 18 month nursing school/2 year Associate's program/4 year BSN program and then immediately be given responsibility for patient care. Tack on another 1 - 1.5 years and you could then be a Master's level nurse practitioner, now with independent, unsupervised clinical authority.

    (Remember, the physician-in-training is still only in year 2 of medical school at this point!)

    Sorry, but I do not see that the US and British systems can be realistically compared.
     
  9. xai

    xai New Member

    Hey PsychPhD, glad you appreciate my input! I just want to clarify a few points:

    - I am aware that the MD degree was created to improve the quality of healthcare in the US. I was trying to show that this wasn't necessary (the change to the name of the degree) through the example of other countries that made the same changes without changing the names of their degrees.

    - I somewhat agree about the lack of a societal/social demand, I was instead referring to the wants of these professionals (a school sees that a lot of nurses will want to study in a DNP program, as in there is a high demand for one, and decides to create a DNP program). However, whether it is through DNPs or PAs, there will be an increased demand for general healthcare services in the future that these professionals will hopefully be capable of handling.

    - Just to clarify, I don't see the MD degree as being a true doctorate (though many MD graduates go on to do research), it is simply a first professional degree. If US schools want to label what is typically a 6 year program elsewhere a doctorate then I think it's a bit weird to argue that 6 years of professional training shouldn't be given the same sort of status. But that's just my perspective :)

    - This is just my opinion, but from my experience here in vet school (in NZ) I would say that US students who did well in college preparatory schools would be able to handle the curriculum just fine.

    Also, it was the US that decided to call entry level professional degrees doctorates. A Bachelor's degree in medicine has been the norm in Britain, and was previously the norm in the US for a very long time.

    There are a number of US schools that offer 6 year accelerated MD programs, if these were labelled as a Bachelor's of Medicine I would have no problem with any graduates from such a program. But I agree I wouldn't want a person with any of the US Bachelor's degrees offered at the moment practicing medicine on myself or anyone I know.

    - Sorry I don't think I explained myself properly. My perspective is that people such as yourself, who have done extensive study in the clinical applications of psychology should be able to write prescriptions. However, I recognize that there is some hesitance to doing this, because as you've pointed out, there is this perception that people who study psychology don't necessarily focus on biological sciences or clinical work. In comparison, I can see why a nurse practitioner, who would have been studying practical applications of medical science for 6 years could be seen as someone who could be expected to write prescriptions.
     
  10. PsychPhD

    PsychPhD New Member

    Ahh ... debate! :)

    Actually, it is a perspective shared with some egocentered MDs as well! :)
    Those who truly understand the history of academe will admit that they are not "true" doctorates but actually more akin to "human mechanics".

    I'm not so sure. Isn't this the system of A-levels? My understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) is that the British system is one that if you do not pass the qualifying exams, you cannot proceed to university.

    In this US nowadays, they has been pressure to do away with entrance exams (the SAT/ACT were a factor in admission but not a make-or-break gatekeeper). Many schools are now "open admission" and faculty are pressured to make sure everyone passes. There are open debates about the need for remedial skills courses to raise graduation rates.

    Correct, but in such programs, what usually is accelerated is the underlying Bachelor of Science degree (usually by including summer sessions). The core medical school curriculum remains intact.


    Well, welcome to the oddities of American edu-health-politics
    The ascendency of NPs seemed to happen for two reasons: 1) nurses organized REALLY well; and 2) physicians didn't consider it a serious threat.

    However, they have realized their mistake and now are circling the wagons to prevent psychologists from joining the prescribing "club".

    Sorry, but I do not see how someone who has earned a 4/2/5 PhD PLUS a 2 year post-doctoral Master's with supervised practice should garner so much animus asking for limited prescription privleges after someone with a 2/2/2 MSN/NP gets unlimited privileges. (And if you look at the curricula of the associate's degree RN, the BSN completion program, and MSN/NP, you'd see they are in no way accruing comparable core science competence as the pre-med/medical school sequence.) When I was an undergraduate, I actually tutored BSN completion students in science. Now, remember, these were people who had been practicing nurses for several years. Their lack of understanding of basic biology/chemistry/biochemistry/physics was scary.

    But this is the same argument used against providing RxP (prescription privileges) for psychologists.
     
  11. Jeremy

    Jeremy New Member

    Well I may as well throw my opinion into this.

    I am a NP, actually completed 3 NP programs/

    If you are starting from scratch to be a RN it will usually take a minimum of 3 years for a AS in nursing, BSN usually 4-5 years. MSN with NP focus 2-3 years. I have looked into DNP programs since I have about 30 years left to practice and at a minimum they are 36 credits for current NPs to top up their education. For other nurses it is much more credits.

    As a NP I do functions that are shared with a physician, but I come from a nursing base. Similar to an OD eye exam same as a MD but differet proffesion and training for shared functions.

    One reason for the DNP was designed to provide some consistancy to NP education. Also many MSN programs for a NP are 48+ credit hours which is over the stanard 36 credit hours. I am not sold on the idea but it is here only time will say if it will last or go away like the ND (nursing doctorate) did. Also not all DNP programs prepare nurse practitioners some are for educators, nurse leaders ect....
     
  12. PsychPhD

    PsychPhD New Member

    Thanks for weighing in

    I do appreciate the input of someone who's been there, but still, my information doesn't jibe with yours:

    I have never heard of an Associate's program lasting three years. I was very curious at a local community college's recent job fair to verify my information. Their program brochure for an AAS degree for an RN was 2 years (18 months if taken on an accelerated basis.)

    Yes, a BSN usually take four years, if one starts there. However, I have seen BSN completion programs (the one at my undergraduate college was one) that allows a current RN to earn the BSN in 1.5 years (again potentially accelerated to 1 year). Such programs are usually derided as forcing "good" nurses to "waste" their time basically earning the liberal arts credits which were not required during the more technically skills based nursing school/associate degree programs.

    [I once worked with a man, who seeing the potential, left bartending, completed a quick AAS, started working and earning his BSN nights. He openly admitted his motive was to quickly move into upper management. He was right. Within 1.5 years, he had his BSN and left our small suburban hospital to become a nurse manager at a hospital in a major city.]

    As for the MSN and DNP curricula, I have posted entire courses of study from program websites in other threads.

    This is generally the rationale upon which the NP credential is based.
    However, there is a pretty large gaping hole in it.

    ODs (Doctors of Optometry) -- much like dentists -- specialize in a VERY narrow area of practice. ODs provide eye exams, prescribe eye glasses, and have access to a very limited prescription privilege -- usually nothing more than eye drops used in diagnostic procedures or minor treatments (allergies, conjunctivitis). Anything more serious, they must send the patient to a MD ophthalmologist.

    NPs, on the other hand, in many states, have unlimited prescription privileges and the only scope of practice I am aware from which they are currently limited is surgery.

    We already have two full fledged physician credentials -- MD and DO (Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine). Few people know what a DO is and fewer students choose that pathway to becoming a physician. (For the curious, a DO essentially follows the same program of study as an MD, but they also believe in the utility of manipulating bones and joints. Think of combining an MD and a chiropractor. However in the US, most osteopaths -- though trained in "osteopathic manipulative medicine" -- few practice it once they complete training.)

    Yes, medicine and nursing come from two very different historical/philosophical perspectives. The concept of nursing dates back to practically the dawn of humanity, where it has roots in the concept of a woman "looking after" another woman's child (i.e. wet nurse). The modern profession -- interestingly enough -- arose at about the same time as modern medicine, the beginning of the 20th century. Now, most every nursing association has modified its definition of "nursing" to encompass the independent practice of nurse practitioners, but for much of its recent past nursing was defined by its provision of collaborative care. While it cannot be denied that nursing was belittled in many cases by medicine in recent history, it seems peculiar that nursing is abandoning its philosophical/historical foundation -- being the ones who provide direct care, monitoring, and comfort to the sick -- in order to "rise up" and provide physician-like care.


    I would wholeheartedly agree that there should be some form of consistency in nursing training. But you bring up a good point that nursing has offered a few doctorates over its history, most of which have died away. But, today, with the ascendancy of the NP, it seems the DNP represents the last barrier before nurse practitioners become, once and for all, "doctor nurses".

    If you are attempting to convince of the rigor and time commitment necessary to become an NP, why would (could) you have completed THREE separate programs?
     
  13. Jeremy

    Jeremy New Member

    Few quick comments

    Most of the 2 year allied health degrees (nursing, x-ray ect) are two years once you enter the program. The prereqs usually take a year to cover anatomy, physiology, chemistry, math, english ect.. Given the sheer number of schools out there your area may be different but all that I am aware of require classes done before enterint a 2 year program.

    I have completed 3 NP programs due to the nature of the education. Unlike MD/DO/PA-C education is broad based. NP education is more similar to OD/DDS/DPM in that we have narrow focus based upon a population. Pediatric primary care, pediatric acte care, geriatric, adult, acute care(adult), neonatal, family, woman's health, psych (broken into family or adult). I wanted to have additional training in multilpe areas to build upon my practice.

    The refrence to an OD is actually accurate in my opinion, they are primary care providers for eye health. They can do a fair number of procedurs and rx a diagnostic and therapy medicaitons for their practice. NPs are great for high frequency low to moderate complexity cases. And they can dagnose and rx for conditions they treat. And no health care provider should rx meds for conditions they are not qualified to treat even if legaly they can.

    Back to the original question is the DPT, AUd, DNP needed if they add quality to training and improe outcomes sure if not then not really in my opinion.
     
  14. PsychPhD

    PsychPhD New Member

    Curiouser and curiouser

    Thanks for the expanded explanation ...

    I now find it even more incredible that a specialty NP still gets nearly unlimited prescription privileges in most states. I mean, good for you for seeking to expand your education, expertise and marketability.

    But we have PhD psychologists with an additional post-doctoral Master's degree being denied the limited ability to prescribe only mental health drugs. Yet a specialty NP (adult, family, ortho, pediatric, psychiatric, etc.) still gets the access to the whole pharmacopeia with a fraction of the training of a psychologist.
     
  15. jek2839

    jek2839 New Member

    Salute goes out to APNs and RNs.


    Hi Jeremy,

    I agree with you and your correct in regards to nursing education! I too have been an RN for a long time.

    The nursing profession looks to be an easy profession to someone unaware of the day-to-day duties and responsibilities of the RN and/or NP. Until our fellow members of the health care team, learn to take the time to "walk in the shoes of the RN or NP" that team member will remain, uninformed of the importance of the nurse or advanced practice nurses role in health care.

    Why does the nursing profession have a high burnout or turnover rate? It's because uninformed or unprepared individuals become nurses for the wrong reason (financial gain) and eventually, they find out "just how many hats the RN has to wear" and they leave nursing.

    I do not agree with the implementation of the DNP requirement for advanced practice nursing and for personal, as well as professional reasons, I will not discuss it.

    The NP has earned prescriptive authority in a variety of U.S. territories, because of their proven history of being the primary patient advocate throughout time and the belief in the legal process of lobbying and fighting for what the nursing profession deserves verses waiting for the health care profession to give them a handout!

    The MD and nurse have been partnering in health care for a long time. The Nurse Midwife delivered babies and provided "unsupervised" maternal care in the home, well before the title OB/GYN, Physician Assistant, Psychiatrist, or the Psychologist were ever created.


    RN EDUCATION:

    -LVN/LPN to RN-ADN: (1 year to 18 months with clinical time required). "One year LVN/LPN experience required for admission."

    -Associates Degree-RN: (3 years with no prerequisites, 2 years with prerequisites, and clinical time is required)

    -RN to BSN: (18 months, clinical time is required). "One to two years of RN experience required for admission."

    -BSN to MSN: (1 year to 18 months, non-clinical requirement, but educator or administrator rotations required) Nurse educator or Nursing Administration certification option.

    -BSN to MSN or MSN Post-Master's Certificate: for NP, Clinical Nurse Specialist (CNS), Certified Midwife (18 months to 2 1/2 years with mandatory clinical requirements and national certification required) certification. "Minimum of two years of RN experience required and two years of specialty nursing experience in the area of intended practice"

    I salute my fellow RNs and NPs for our achievements, throughout history!!
     
  16. Ian Anderson

    Ian Anderson Active Member

    Riverside CC in California has three year associate degrees

    The NP program requires at least 37 semester units as prerequisites
    http://www.rcc.edu/academicPrograms/physicianAssistant/prerequisites.cfm
    The program requires an additional 89 units plus 2000 hours of paid work experience. [With a total of 126 units this would appear to be equiv to a BS degree but California CCs can't award degrees.]

    Similarly the RN program has prerequisite courses plus an additional 72 more units to earn an ADN (Associate Science Degree Nursing) degree.

    To practice both PAs and RNs need to pass state exams.
     
  17. cookderosa

    cookderosa Resident Chef

    As currently constructed, one could arrive at the DNP thus:
    1 - 1 1/2 years nursing school/associate's degree
    1 - 1 1/2 years "transitional" BSN
    1 - 1 1/2 years MSN
    2 - 3 year DNP
    >>


    Just a bit of nit-picking, but the undergrad timetable is more tied to how you get your RN than the degree progression....but anyway, doing it the way you explain: earning an associate degree in nursing in 1-1 1/2 years isn't happening. First, associate degree programs require 4 semesters of clinical (2 years) and the pre-req/gen ed list takes a new college student no less than 2 years. Technically, you'll sometimes see programs that list this as concurrent, but that's not the norm. The sciences are more and more often pre-reqs, and the science sequence is minimum 3 semesters IF you walk in with existing high school/college science credit. *all this changes for the returning college student who already has a BA, but I'm going on the assumption that someone is starting at step 1.
    Anyway, the road to an ADN is much closer to 4 years, 3 would be speedy.

    (edit: I should have read ahead)
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 13, 2009
  18. cookderosa

    cookderosa Resident Chef

    >>

    I knew it. lol
     
  19. PsychPhD

    PsychPhD New Member

    Nit picking indeed

    As people seem fixated on making claims of ONE additional year in the AA program, I'll find the program curriculum for the school I read and confirm it.

    Nevertheless, adding one whole year of study is enough to overcome the other shortfalls in content in the entire training cycle?

    Knew what, lol?
     
  20. PsychPhD

    PsychPhD New Member

    Side by side

    Don't know where others are getting their information but ...

    AAS program (Hudson Valley Community College)
    FIRST TERM
    BIOL 205 Microbiology 4
    BIOL 270 Anatomy & Physiology I 4
    ENGL 101 Composition I 3
    NURS 095 Orientation* 0
    NURS 101 Nursing I 4
    Term Total 15
    SECOND TERM
    BIOL 271 Anatomy & Physiology II 4
    ENGL 102 Composition II 3
    NURS 102 Nursing II 6
    PSYC 205 Dev. Psychology 3
    Term Total 16
    THIRD TERM
    NURS 201 Nursing III 10
    PSYC 210 Abnormal Psych. 3
    Social Sci. Elect. 3
    Term Total 16
    FOURTH TERM
    NURS 202 Nursing IV 10
    Humanities Elect. 3
    Term Total 13

    Total Credits Required 60

    BSN program (Utica College)
    Freshman Year
    Fall Semester:
    BIO 101 and lab - Human Anatomy and Physiology I
    ENG 101 - Written Communication I

    Spring Semester:
    BIO 102 and lab - Human Anatomy and Physiology II
    ENG 102 - Written Communication II
    NUR 101 - Introduction to Professional Nursing

    Either Semester:
    PSY 101 - Introduction to Psychology
    SOC 151 - Human Society
    Core/Electives

    Sophomore Year
    Fall Semester:
    CHE 211 and lab - General Chemistry
    BIO 205 - Human Nutrition
    NUR 201 - Health Assessment and the Nursing Process

    Spring Semester:
    BIO 203 - Microbiology and lab
    BIO 208 - Pharmacology and Pathophysiology
    NUR 206 - Fundamentals of Nursing Practice
    NUR 206C - Fundamentals of Nursing Practice - Clinical
    Either Semester:
    HLS 245 - Human Development Process
    or
    PSY 223 - Life-Span Development Psychology
    Core/Electives

    Junior Year
    Fall Semester:
    NUR 334 and lab - Nursing Care of the Adult I
    NUR 334C - Nursing Care of the Adult I - Clinical
    NUR 336 and lab - Nursing Care of the Chronically Ill Client
    NUR 336C - Nursing Care of the Chronically Ill Client - Clinical

    Spring Semester:
    NUR 372 and lab - Childbearing Family Nursing
    NUR 372C - Childbearing Family Nursing - Clinical
    NUR 375 and lab - Psychiatric-Mental Health Nursing
    NUR 375C - Psychiatric-Mental Health Nursing - Clinical

    Either Semester:
    PHI 107 - Ethics
    or
    PHI 108 - Professional Ethics
    ANT 415 - Cultures, Health and Healing
    MAT 112 - Basic Statistics
    or
    PSY 211 - Statistics in the Behavioral Sciences
    Core/Elective

    Senior Year:
    Fall Semester:
    NUR 435 and lab - Nursing Care of the Adult II
    NUR 435C - Nursing Care of the Adult II - Clinical
    NUR 447 and lab - Childrearing Family Nursing
    NUR 447C - Childrearing Family Nursing - Clinical
    NUR 472 - Trends and Issues in Professional Nursing
    HLS 445 - Clinical Research

    Spring Semester:
    NUR 474 and lab - Community Health Nursing
    NUR 474C - Community Health Nursing - Clinical
    NUR 475 and lab - Nursing Management in the Community
    NUR 475C - Nursing Management in the Community - Clinical
    NUR 478 and lab - Critical Care Nursing
    NUR 478C - Critical Care Nursing - Clinical

    Either Semester:
    Core/Electives

    128 credits are required for graduation.
    Sixty of these credits must be in the liberal arts and sciences.

    ===

    So, I stand corrected, an AAS does indeed take two full years.
    However, I'm wasn't a math major, but 60 credits (AAS) vs. 128 credits (BSN) sure sounds like half as long (2 vs. 4 years.)

    Additionally Utica College offers a RN -> BSN program which is 90% online, meaning one could step out with an AAS-RN, start practicing, and then with minimum disruption, be a BSN in a couple of years.

    Seriously, with such a option, why would anyone attend a full-time campus-based BSN program?
     

Share This Page