Why rush will keep the DNSc

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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

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
Volume19
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2003
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Nursing
Advisory Committees
Nursing Schools
Nurses
Interviews
Education

Keywords

  • Doctoral education
  • Nursing
  • Research doctorate

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nursing(all)

Cite this

Keithley, J. K., Gross, D. A., Johnson, M. E., McCann, J., Faux, S., Shekleton, M., ... Traufant, J. E. (2003). Why rush will keep the DNSc. Journal of Professional Nursing, 19(4), 223-229. https://doi.org/10.1016/S8755-7223(03)00068-1

Why rush will keep the DNSc. / Keithley, Joyce K.; Gross, Deborah Ann; Johnson, Mary E.; McCann, Judith; Faux, Sandra; Shekleton, Maureen; Horton, Betty; Traufant, John E.

In: Journal of Professional Nursing, Vol. 19, No. 4, 07.2003, p. 223-229.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Keithley, JK, Gross, DA, Johnson, ME, McCann, J, Faux, S, Shekleton, M, Horton, B & Traufant, JE 2003, 'Why rush will keep the DNSc', Journal of Professional Nursing, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 223-229. https://doi.org/10.1016/S8755-7223(03)00068-1
Keithley JK, Gross DA, Johnson ME, McCann J, Faux S, Shekleton M et al. Why rush will keep the DNSc. Journal of Professional Nursing. 2003 Jul;19(4):223-229. https://doi.org/10.1016/S8755-7223(03)00068-1
Keithley, Joyce K. ; Gross, Deborah Ann ; Johnson, Mary E. ; McCann, Judith ; Faux, Sandra ; Shekleton, Maureen ; Horton, Betty ; Traufant, John E. / Why rush will keep the DNSc. In: Journal of Professional Nursing. 2003 ; Vol. 19, No. 4. pp. 223-229.
@article{e34b2879884a4724ae9e4a6b9373e78c,
title = "Why rush will keep the DNSc",
abstract = "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.",
keywords = "Doctoral education, Nursing, Research doctorate",
author = "Keithley, {Joyce K.} and Gross, {Deborah Ann} and Johnson, {Mary E.} and Judith McCann and Sandra Faux and Maureen Shekleton and Betty Horton and Traufant, {John E.}",
year = "2003",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1016/S8755-7223(03)00068-1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "19",
pages = "223--229",
journal = "Journal of Professional Nursing",
issn = "8755-7223",
publisher = "W.B. Saunders Ltd",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Why rush will keep the DNSc

AU - Keithley, Joyce K.

AU - Gross, Deborah Ann

AU - Johnson, Mary E.

AU - McCann, Judith

AU - Faux, Sandra

AU - Shekleton, Maureen

AU - Horton, Betty

AU - Traufant, John E.

PY - 2003/7

Y1 - 2003/7

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - Doctoral education

KW - Nursing

KW - Research doctorate

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0141517083&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0141517083&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S8755-7223(03)00068-1

DO - 10.1016/S8755-7223(03)00068-1

M3 - Article

C2 - 12964144

AN - SCOPUS:0141517083

VL - 19

SP - 223

EP - 229

JO - Journal of Professional Nursing

JF - Journal of Professional Nursing

SN - 8755-7223

IS - 4

ER -