She explained to me that she went through an accelerated RN program which only took 1 year to complete. This program was for people who already held an undergraduate degree or above.
Indeed there are accelerated BSN programs that range from 12-18 months. Understand that these programs are 5-7 days a week and there may only be 1-2 breaks in the whole program. The program was created to "ease the nursing shortage" based on the idea that those who have demonstrated their ability to complete undergraduate or graduate degrees may be able to handle a more intense undergraduate nursing program. Nevertheless, statistically, accelerated BSN graduates have a more difficult time finding their first job versus a traditional BSN program (18-24 months). I am unaware of any statistics regarding performance differences.
I do not think anyone is trying to argue that a BSN is clinically superior to an ADN.
There is a range to all things. There are some ADN programs that are better than some BSN programs. On the average, and over the long term, employers are choosing BSN RNs because 1. they can at little additional cost 2. studies show improved outcomes with higher proportions of BSN nurses 3. certifications and the like.
In many areas, there is probably little difference, at least at first. In some areas, there seems to be an ADN advantage at first. In many areas, there seems to be a BSN advantage after 6-12 months. I personally think, that the individual provider makes makes more of a difference than the difference between programs... at least most of the time:
In my stste, as in many states, there is an overabundance of RNs, particularly new RNs. This matches a huge increase in number and size of RN programs. It is to the point where several schools cannot get hospital placements for their clinical rotations. Thus, many ASN (ADN) programs and for-profits are rotating their students in non-acute care settings for many rotations. For this reason, hospitals are requiring clinical rotation details on new grad resumes in addition to either requiring a BSN for new graduates or strongly preferring a BSN degree.
The extra classes of a BSN are theory and management based not clinical.
Depends on the program... yes there are some leadership and management based classes, but some of the theory classes are extremely important when it is education depth relating to clinical judgement or whether it is an (extremely applicable) ethics class.
However, there are additional clinical rotations such as public health that broaden the scope of knowledge and experience. My community health placement was home based primary care which was actually quite enlightening and definitely involved EMS at points. My program also offered a summer externship course with classroom topics and an additional 400 hours of rotation in an ICU. I was also able to take an Emergency Nursing elective course with rotations in a Level 1 ED.
So, in my state, you see non-profit BSN programs with 900-1400 clinical hours versus most of the ASN and for-profit programs with the state minimum of 750. Then consider whether that clinical time is in a hospital setting etc. It is easy to see why in some markets BSN graduates are more competitive vs other new graduate RNs for their first job.
ADN and BSN programs require the same amount of basic science. And I argue that taking more biology or chemistry does make you a better practitioner. There is a difference between being able to tell your patient their medication is for high blood pressure and actually understanding how their medication works and educating patients on a higher level.
I agree, and more, it can help you get the big picture on your patients, determine what is going on inside, and let you intelligently choose and prioritize interventions.
