Comparison of Select Outcomes Between Traditional and Accelerated BSN Programs: A Pilot Study

doi: 10.5480/12-988.1With the increase in the number of accelerated post-baccalaureate nursing (ABSN) programs, research has been conducted on student recruitment, student profiles, and best practices in clinical and didactic instruction. Predictors of successful completion of an ABSN program, such as grade point average (GPA) and prior degree earned, are well documented (Abbott, Schwartz, Hercinger, Miller, & Foyt, 2008; Stuenkel, Nelson, Malloy & Cohen, 2011). However, there is a paucity of sound research that directly compares traditional baccalaureate and ABSN program outcomes. Therefore, the purpose of this pilot study was to compare select student outcomes between traditional and accelerated BSN programs.BACKGROUND/LITERATUREAs most nursing programs change to meet not only the needs of nursing graduates, but also a nursing industry shortage, accelerated programs can be an attractive method by which to educate students. However, little research has been conducted comparing students/graduates from ABSN programs to those from traditional BSN programs, and there is no consensus among studies on the differences in outcomes. Korvick, Wisener, Loftis, and Williamson (2008) compared academic performance between traditional BSN (n = 32) and ABSN (n = 29) students enrolled in an identical course within the same semester. The researchers found that students in the accelerated program had statistically significantly higher grades than their traditional counterparts (p Bentley (2006) developed a retrospective correlational study to determine if there was a difference between traditional (n = 172) and accelerated (n = 52) students based on selected academic variables (number of Cs in program, Health Education Systems, Inc. [HESI(TM)] examination scores, and science grade point average [GPA]) and NCLEX-RN® performance. Bentley reported that the accelerated program students had significantly higher exit HESI scores, and these students also had a higher NCLEX-RN first-time pass rate, but the latter was not statistically significant (p = .3888). Aktan et al. (2009) surveyed graduates of either a traditional (n = 33) or an accelerated (n = 40) program from a single institution between 1991 and 2006. The graduates self-reported NCLEX pass results, number of times needed to the pass NCLEX, and GPA in the major. Although the accelerated group had a significantly higher GPA in the major when compared to the traditional students (p = 0.01), no statistical difference was found in self-reported NCLEX pass rates. Based on previous studies that associated higher GPAs with higher passing rates on the NCLEX (Collins, 2002; Roncoli, Lisanti, & Falcone, 2000), this finding was unexpected. The lack of association in the Atkin et al. study may imply that a potential pedagogical difference exists between the traditional and accelerated programs at the institution, or that self-reporting of NCLEX pass results was not a true reflection of student performance.In summary, it is essential to evaluate educational outcomes between traditional and accelerated programs in order to ensure the successful education of qualified professionals. Analyzing outcomes using appropriate research techniques will provide a better understanding of pedagogical ideals, including the evaluation of equivalence between programs.METHODProject Population and SettingThis study was conducted at a private school of nursing in the southwestern United States. The population for this study consisted of students who graduated with their BSN from one of the last three traditional or accelerated cohorts. Applicants for both the ABSN and traditional program completed 66 hours of prerequisite courses with a minimum GPA of 3.0 in science courses and took a nursing entrance test (HESI or NET). The average prerequisite GPA for the traditional and accelerated students was 3.44 and 3.62, respectively; this difference was significant (p