swann829 wrote:Well my friend just informed me that half her class has failed out, including her. This is very discouraging for me. I'm not even sure
if it's worth it for me to even try. I mean i have to pay for these classes, I'm not eligible for grants.
Ditto. I just grad-u-ma-tated, and am waiting to take boards. Loans all the way. I will say, there are those that can
do, but cannot
teach, those that cannot
do but can
teach, and a limited few who are capable of
both. This is a primary reason i have little patience for the current BSN+ standard paradigm.
I work for a university, I have worked for universities/teaching hospitals for most of my 20 years, and will unequivocally say it is more about publication(at the University level) and tuition than substantive teaching. If a program needs a "weeding out" model, the Dean and staff have poorly designed the entrance criteria.
This isn't Hell Week. We don't have to urinate on ourselves and our cohorts to fight off hypothermia, and we don't have to deactivate IEDs after 36 hours without sleep. Pretending that this is so is simply that: pretend.
Abusive docs and staff? Please. I have no problem calling security
or PD and following through on charges. Institutional rules may not
legally preclude your right to physical safety. Using so-called instruction as a method to teach tolerance of such behavior is inappropriate and socially/psychologically degrading.
If you feel your program is bad, the best I can suggest is to check with their accrediting body, and see where you may have grounds for complaint (generally things like incomplete syllabii, unprofessional conduct-has to be documented, inappropriate grading, i.e., shifting a curve to pass/fail w/o providing reasons specified in either the syllabus or institutional SOPs). Follow the chain of command (professor-program coordinator-Dean-accrediting agency), but save your most evidentary info for either the Dean or the Accreditor. If you don't have something that can be put on paper, you have to suck it up...
I had to edit and say: this may purely be gender bias, but much of the difficulty (at least what I experienced) was significant confusion in the staff over trying to teach a "model of caring," i.e., professors determined to show the complex physical-emotional framework. Most nursing tasks are physical. They are readily taught, easily drilled, and when taught in context of tiered disease/trauma models, not terribly hard to select in decision making. Differing personalities will have different care models (which is why different personalities gravitate to various specialties). Most care giving decisions can be made based on Maslow and Erickson. It becomes convoluted when schools or professors stress their own variations and attempt to use post-grad models to teach "critical thinking". This demonstrates the brilliance of the professor, not the students' ability to prioritize and assess.