Letter to the Editor| Volume 53, ISSUE 6, P269, November 2005


      We thank Dr O’Sullivan for this significant correction. Although this comment was made in open discussion at the annual meeting, we should have confirmed that the point did not move to the resolution stage.
      The risk remains of considering the degrees equivalent since both are terminal degrees, so we are pleased that the National Organization of Nurse Practitioner Faculties (NONPF) makes the distinction between a clinical practice-based advance degree and a research doctorate.
      With a relatively short research and academic tradition, nursing will need to continue to develop strong research programs. We worry that the DNP would take a similar path as the practice doctorate in education (EdD), emphasizing administration and policy. Studies in administration and policy cannot substitute for developing advanced practice roles.

      Linked Article

      • Letter to the Editor
        Nursing OutlookVol. 53Issue 6
        • Preview
          On behalf of the National Organization of Nurse Practitioner Faculties (NONPF), I am writing to clarify an inaccurate statement that appears in the article “Reflections on the Doctor of Nursing Practice” by Dracup et al in the July issue of Nursing Outlook.1 This article incorrectly attributes a 2005 resolution to adopt a position acknowledging parity between the PhD and the practice doctorate in nursing to NONPF. Our organization did not have such a resolution introduced this year during our annual business meeting, nor have we ever had a resolution addressed on this issue by the membership.
        • Full-Text
        • PDF