Why rush will keep the DNSc

Joyce K. Keithley, Deborah Gross, Mary E. Johnson, Judith McCann, Sandra Faux, Maureen Shekleton, Betty Horton, John E. Traufant

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

3 Scopus citations


Surveys of research-intensive doctoral programs in nursing reveal few differences between the doctor of nursing science (DNSc) and the doctor of philosophy (PhD) degrees in nursing. Yet the proportion of DNSc programs relative to PhD programs in nursing has declined progressively over the past 10 years. Recently, Rush University College of Nursing formed a task force to examine whether Rush should continue to offer the DNSc degree or change to a PhD in nursing program. Task force members interviewed 21 nurse leaders representing 18 universities granting doctoral degrees in nursing about their perceptions of the DNSc and PhD in nursing degrees, the focus of their doctoral programs, why their nursing school chose the degree it currently offers, and whether Rush should retain the DNSc degree. This article describes the results of those interviews, how their comments helped the task force re-evaluate its goals for doctoral education, and the rationale for ultimately choosing to retain the DNSc degree.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)223-229
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Professional Nursing
Issue number4
StatePublished - Jan 1 2003
Externally publishedYes


  • Doctoral education
  • Nursing
  • Research doctorate

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nursing(all)


Dive into the research topics of 'Why rush will keep the DNSc'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this