I am frequently asked questions relating to the number of students admitted into the College of Nursing. The most frequent questions are: have we decreased the number of students admitted into the nursing program; are our students able to get jobs; and is there a nursing shortage. The conversations generally focus on the awareness that many healthcare facilities across the country are hiring very few new graduates, as they do not have any practice experience outside of educational clinical experiences. All of these are good questions.
It is true that in the past couple of years, new graduates from all nursing programs have experienced a delay in obtaining employment upon graduation. Seventy-four percent of our graduates are employed within 4-6 months after graduation. This rate is much higher than the reported national rate for university graduates. Multiple factors influence the decline in job opportunities for new nursing graduates. The most significant contributor is the declining economy that resulted in nurses delaying retirement. The reaction of health care agencies to the changing economy have led to hiring freezes and hiring nurses with two or more years of experiences into the limited vacancies. Changes in health care delivery and funding are changing the arenas of practice from hospitals to other settings such as clinics, home health, and community settings. Also, the clinical area of nursing practice is moving from generalized practice to specialized practice (e.g. emergency room, intensive care, psychiatric settings).
The College of Nursing has not decreased the number of students enrolled in nursing. Reality is that due to an improving economy, more than half of the current nursing workforce is poised to retire en masse between now and 2022.
The term Tsunami: RN Retirement is being used when describing this mass exodus from the practice and educational setting. In 2013 the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics updated its nursing employment projections for 2012-2022. It is now predicted that employment of nurses is projected to grow 19 percent, which is higher than the projected employment growth of 11% in all occupations. The magnitude of the looming nurse shortage is problematic. A demand for healthcare services will increase due to the aging population resulting in an increased population who are living with chronic health problems such as diabetes, hypertension, arthritis, and cardiovascular disease. There is also a high demand for nurse practitioners, and for faculty and Deans in programs of nursing.
The College of Nursing will continue to offer nursing programs that are responsive to nursing workforce needs, needs of our community of interest, and changing trends in healthcare delivery. We will continue to graduate entry-level nurses, family nurse practitioners, psychiatric nurse practitioners, nurse anesthetists, researchers, faculty, and administrators.
Suddenly, news related to climate change seems everywhere. (Remember when – it wasn’t long ago at all –you couldn’t turn around without tripping over a climate change denier?) Often, and for good reason, the likely health impacts of climate change are now central to the discussion.
Much is at stake – lives, the quality of life itself, and potentially overwhelming demands on already strained public health systems. It is no surprise, then, that the subjects of “mitigation,” “resilience,” and “adaptation” have moved to the front burners of concern. The federal government is intent on encouraging states and communities to prepare for climate change by developing resilience and mitigation plans. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) in particular, through its Climate-Ready States and Cities initiative, has developed a “Building Resilience Against Climate Effects” (BRACE) framework for preparedness.
Yet, high stakes and federal encouragement notwithstanding, there is no evidence that Mississippi has begun to think seriously about, let alone plan for, the health implications of climate change. One may search the Department of Health’s website in vain for any mention of climate change. This is no knock on the strapped department itself, which day-to-day has more than its hands full and must plead to the legislature for every dollar, even to address such desperate problems as a far-too-high infant mortality rate. It does nonetheless point to the urgent need to for advocates to get cracking on the issue.
The consequences of inaction are grave. Inattention to climate change is not merely bad policy practice. It is, and becomes more so with each “new, alarming” scientific report illuminating our collective plight, morally unconscionable.
If ever there were a time for even a poor state like Mississippi to raid Louisiana’s public colleges and universities for good faculty, now may be it. Already beaten down by seemingly endless rounds of cuts, Louisiana schools may now be staring into the face of true catastrophe, as state government looks at a projected next-year budget deficit of $1.4 billion. Higher ed administrators have been told to prepare for reductions as high as $384 million, which is almost $80 million higher than the state’s allocation on the entire community/technical college system.
The real culprit here is not cut-happy politicians (though in the past there appeared to be no shortage of those, beginning with Gov. Jindal), but the falling price of oil, the financial life blood of the Bayou State. Every $1 drop in the price of a barrel of crude means a $10-$12 million loss of revenue for the state. Which means that the deficit projection is likely to grow only larger, making any expenditure that can be cut that much more vulnerable to the budgetary axe.
If anything is likely to help shield Louisiana higher education from utter devastation, it’s that this is an election year in the state, as it is in Mississippi. Neither closing schools outright, nor gutting their budgets to the point where they can’t maintain accreditation, let alone prosper, is likely to prove a popular reelection campaign proposition.
Just in time to turn up the heat on legislative debate on education funding even higher, Mississippi has scored one more “51st out of 51″ K-12 education system rankings. According to the Education Week’s Quality Counts report, as reported in today’s Hattiesburg American, that’s an unqualified F in “academic achievement,” and a D+ in “chance for success,” folks. Ouch. No doubt there’s room to quibble about just how bad off we are, but the primary metrics are hard to argue with. Mississippi students performed well below the national average in the 2013 NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) scores for fourth- and eighth-grade reading and math. And fewer than 4 percent of Mississippi students who took an AP exam scored a passing grade of 3 or higher, compared to a national average of 25.7 percent.
Looking for a bright side to this educational blight, one might argue that both Gov. Bryant and state Supt. Wright at least deserve a B+ in making politically innocuous statements. Bryant called the latest findings “troubling,” but evident support for “transformational public education reforms like the third-grade gate and new opportunities for public charter schools.” Wright opined that “We know that many factors influence student achievement, and we hope the leadership in our state and communities will make decisions that will provide better opportunities for students to take advanced placement courses.”
All we can do is hope, I suppose.
After years of denial, climate change and its deleterious impacts are now squarely on the political agenda of a growing number of Americans. Many of those impacts are directly or indirectly health related, from increasingly destructive weather events and shifting disease vectors, to disruption of agricultural production and water scarcity. Coming home are brutally simple truths – climate change is real; people (not to mention myriad other species) will suffer and die as a result; it’s still possible to mitigate at least some climate change impacts, but the clock is working against us.
Look for battles to shape up in both traditional and non-traditional venues. If legislatures, regulatory bodies, and courts fail to act to curtail climate change contributors, expect rising rates of street demonstration and civil disobedience aimed at disrupting “business as usual.”