• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of nursing education >A commentary on degree requirements.
【24h】

A commentary on degree requirements.

机译：学位要求的评论。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

After reading the article Faculty Retirement: Stemming the Tide" by Foxall, Megel, Grigsby, and Billings in the March 2009 issue (Vol. 48, No. 9, pp. 172-175), it occurred to me that in all the literature searches I have performed during my 6-year academic career in nursing, advocacy for liberality in degree requirements for nurse educators receives little support. Although I found this article's points on correcting the nurse educator shortage to be beneficial, older faculty will, in fact, have to retire; the profession's best bet is to attract new faculty. Why is making exceptions about degree requirements associated with decreased quality? Can it be said that, in general, nurses with a baccalaureate degree make better clinicians than nurses with an associate degree? If not, is it then appropriate to make the same judgment between nurses with and without a graduate degree in nursing education regarding their efficacy as educators?
机译：在阅读了Foxall，Megel，Grigsby和Billings于2009年3月发行的文章《学院退休：扼杀潮流》（第48卷，第9期，第172-175页）之后，我发现在所有文献中在我从事护理的6年学术生涯中进行的搜索中，倡导护士教育者学位要求的自由得到的支持很少。尽管我发现本文有关纠正护士教育者短缺的观点是有益的，但事实上，年龄较大的教师会必须退休;该行业的最佳选择是吸引新的教职员工，为什么对质量下降而导致的学位要求有所例外呢？可以说，具有学士学位的护士通常比具有副学位的护士更好的临床医生吗？如果不是，那么是否适合在有和没有研究生学历的护士之间就他们作为教育工作者的功效做出同样的判断？

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号