Nursing Education Perspectives

Comparative Descriptors of Applicants

and Graduates of Online and Face-to-Face
Master of Science in Nursing Programs
Nancy G. Cameron
doi: 10.5480/11-518.1

Abstract
Proper advisement of students about their programs of study requires knowledge of the applicants and confidence that
the recommended curricula will lead to success via graduation and certification.

aim

Two important strategies to deliver master of science in nursing (MSN) curricula include online and face-toface (F2F) formats.

background

A nonexperimental, descriptive study of archival data was used to examine and compare the characteristics of F2F
and online MSN applicants, admitted students, and graduates as well as family nurse practitioner (FNP) certification pass
rates at one eastern Tennessee college of nursing. Administration and FNP concentrations were studied.

method

results The average applicant grade point average (GPA) was higher for the F2F format but no difference in the average
admission GPA was found between formats. The online students had more years of RN experience than the F2F students.
conclusion

No significant difference was found between graduating GPAs or FNP certification pass rates.

The need for more registered nurses educated at the baccalaureate and graduate levels
is well documented (American Association
of Colleges of Nursing, 2010; Papes & Lopez, 2007; Pullen, Mueller, & Ashcraft,
2009; Waxman & Maxworthy, 2010). Because of greater emphasis on preventive care
and technologic advances, as well as more
Americans living with chronic illnesses, the
Bureau of Labor Statistics (2012) predicted
that there will be a 26 percent growth rate
in RN employment between 2010 and 2020.
The passage of the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act of 2010 is expected to
produce an even greater demand for health
care professionals and opportunities for
nurses with advanced degrees in practice
and leadership roles (American Nurses Association, 2010).
The nurse workforce needs within the
state of Tennessee are reflective of workforce

372

november/december 2013

needs across the country. A report released

by the Tennessee Center for Nursing (TCN,
2005) highlighted the need for more RNs in
the state and encouraged pre-licensure and
graduate schools to increase enrollments and
graduations. In 2008, the TCN re-examined
progress toward reaching workforce goals.
The expansion of existing programs and the
development of new online or web-based
masters programs resulted in an increase in
initial licensure and graduate enrollments
and graduations (TCN, 2008). However, although progress was made, the goals were
not fully met.
While the original goal of many online
nursing education programs was to reach
potential students who were physically distant from the university, enrollments have increased due to convenience and other factors
(McVeigh, 2009). Gibson and Harris (2008)
reported that students who preferred face-

to-face (F2F) education also preferred more

personal interactions between students and
faculty and favored a more structured study
program, while those who favored online education possessed a more independent learning style. Through their study on graduate
student attrition, Perry, Boman, Care, Edwards, and Park (2008) identified that online
education was not appropriate for all students
due to preferred learning styles. Today, many
more qualified individuals apply to nursing
schools than there are spaces available (TCN,
2008). Students should be guided toward a
program that will meet their individual needs
and promote successful completion of a graduate degree.
The nursing research literature lacks reports about the characteristics of applicants
to F2F and online graduate nursing programs. In 2007, Mills conducted an effectiveness study comparing variables in an online

Master's Education

and an F2F masters of science in nursing

program at the same school of nursing, beginning with admitted students. Admission
and graduation grade point averages (GPAs)
were compared, as were self-reports of postgraduation certification results. Mills did not
evaluate applicant variables. Tintos work
with F2F undergraduate student persistence
through college (Rovai, 2003; Tinto, 1997),
Metzner and Beans work with persistence in
nontraditionalage F2F students (Metzner &
Bean, 1987; Rovai), and Mills (2007) online
and F2F effectiveness study provided a basis
for this investigations framework.
METHOD

The purpose of this study was to compare the

online and F2F formats within a single nursing colleges MSN programs in terms of applicant differentiating characteristics, graduate admission and graduating GPAs, and
family nurse practitioner (FNP) certification
first-time examination pass rates. To achieve
this purpose, three research questions were
posed: 1) Is there a difference in mean applicant GPA (BSN cumulative GPA), years
of RN experience, and overall admission
application evaluation score between online
and F2F MSN applicants? 2) Is there a difference in admission GPA (BSN cumulative
GPA) and graduation GPA between online
and F2F MSN graduates? 3) Is there a difference in pass rates on the American Nurses Credentialing Centers FNP certification
examination between online and F2F MSN
graduates?
The college of nursing (CON) is part of a
public university located in eastern Tennessee, with a population of more than 15,000
students. The CON has a variety of undergraduate and graduate nursing programs,
including traditional pre-licensure BSN, licensed practical nurse to BSN, RN to BSN,
MSN, doctor of philosophy in nursing, and
doctor of nursing practice.
The online MSN is comprised of FNP,
education, administration, and informatics
concentrations, and a post-masters certificate for FNP. The F2F masters program is
comprised of FNP, gerontologic nurse prac-

titioner, psychiatric/mental health nurse

practitioner, administration, and clinical
nurse leader concentrations. The only concentrations in both formats are the FNP and
administration concentrations. To directly
compare application characteristics, admission and graduation GPAs, and FNP certification examination first-time pass rates, this
study was limited to the FNP and administration concentrations of the MSN degree
and did not include any post-MSN certification program data.
The online program is part of a collaborative formed by six nursing schools or colleges
at six universities within the university system (Regents Online Campus Collaborative,
n.d.). Students are taught by faculty across the
system and take online classes with students
across the system. The F2F programs are offered only to students admitted to the F2F
programs at the local university.
The online format (FNP and administration) consists of online, asynchronous courses. The F2F format for FNP and administration consists of traditional classroom style
courses with access to online materials, discussion boards, and submissions. Classroom
sessions are conducted F2F.
The university and college admission
criteria and requirements for the online and
F2F MSN programs are identical. The tool
used by the admission committee to score the
applicant is also the same. Applicants to both
programs are evaluated for admission by multiple graduate faculty on the committee.
The admission application scoring tool
contains the following categories: BSN GPA,
years of RN experience, type of RN experience, any completed graduate course work
and grades, additional degrees, continuing education or certification, professional honors or awards, personal essay on the
applicants career objectives and abilities,
compatibility of stated career objectives and
requested concentration area, and references. Each criterion is weighted. The weighted scores are summed for a total score, with
possible scores ranging from 0 to 22. The
admission committee annually reviews the
criteria for appropriateness. Applicants scor-

ing equal to or above the required score for

admission are offered admission into the
program.
Measurable differentiating characteristics were selected based on availability of
same or similar variables used in studies by
Metzner and Bean (1987), Mills (2007), and
Tinto (1997). For applicants, BSN GPA,
number of years of RN experience (a direct
comparison of applicant age was not available), and total admission application scores
(to encompass academic, social, and professional integrations) were used. Cumulative

Today, many more

qualified individuals
apply to nursing schools
than there are spaces
available. Students
should be guided
toward a program
that will meet their
individual needs and
promote successful
completion of a
graduate degree.
BSN GPA and cumulative MSN GPA were
used to differentiate between online and F2F
graduates. Format outcomes were measured
by comparing FNP certification examination
pass rates between nurses who graduated
from the F2F and online programs. Administration certification has a required practice
time component and was not a practical comparison criterion for this study.
Each semester, individual applicant evaluation data (i.e., BSN GPA, years of RN experience, faculty application evaluation tool
score, format choice [i.e., online, F2F], and
MSN concentration choice) are compiled
into an aggregate table. Individual applicant
evaluation score sheets are then destroyed,

Volume 34 Number 6

373

Nursing Education Perspectives

Table 1: F2F and Online MSN Applicant Analysis (N = 507)

F2F (n = 310)
n (%)

Online (n = 197)
n (%)

282 (91.0)

185 (93.9)

28 (9.0)

12 (6.1)

2010

125 (40.3)

123 (62.4)

2009

63 (20.3)

46 (23.4)

2008

15 (4.8)

8 (4.1)

2007

45 (14.5)

17 (8.6)

2006

31 (10.0)

2005

31 (10.0)

3 (1.5)

M SD (range)

M SD (range)

3.47 0.37 (2.24.0)

3.38 0.36 (2.54.0)

Of those with experience,

RN years (N = 449)

6.81 6.65 (0.228.0)

8.54 7.41 (0.532.0)

Admission score

12.97 2.50 (5.719.7)

12.38 2.17 (6.217.3)

Concentration
Family nurse practitioner
Administration
Year

BSN cumulative GPA

Table 2: Admission and Graduation Grade Point Average of

F2F and Online MSN Students (N = 151)
F2F (n = 114)
n (%)

Online (n = 37)
n (%)

2010

9 (24.3)

2009

40 (35.1)

17 (45.9)

2008

24 (21.1)

4 (10.8)

2007

26 (22.8)

6 (16.2)

2006

24 (21.1)

1 (2.7)

M SD (range)

M SD (range)

BSN GPA

3.42 0.37 (2.14.0)

3.37 0.41 (2.64.0)

MSN GPA

3.70 0.20 (3.14.0)

3.74 0.18 (3.34.0)

Calendar year

while the aggregate tables are archived. Archived aggregate applicant data tables from
the initiation of the online program in 2005
through 2010 served as data sources for the
first research question. Graduate compari-

374

november/december 2013

son data, addressed in the second research

question, were retrieved from applicant
archival data and the graduates university transcripts. FNP certification examination data, addressed in the third research

question, were retrieved from the American Nurses Credentialing Center report on
FNP certification examination pass rates,
each graduates self-reports of pass-fail, and
the colleges graduate database of program
admissions. The universitys institutional
review board reviewed and approved the
project.
The chi-square test was used to determine any significant association between the
format and the concentration of choice and
between the format and success on the FNP
certification examination. An independent
t-test was used to determine if a significant
difference exists in the mean GPA for the
format of choice, mean RN years of experience, mean admission score, and difference
in mean graduate MSN GPA.
RESULTS

Applicants to the online and F2F MSN programs apply first to the School of Graduate
Studies. Fully completed application packets
meeting the School of Graduate Studies admission criteria are forwarded to the CON.
Select data from all applications reaching the
CON between 2005 and 2010 were examined
(849 cases).
One of the goals of the analysis was to
compare specified variables between the applicants to the online program and applicants
to the F2F program. Cases with missing data
or study concentrations outside the scope of
this study were removed from the original
849 cases, leaving 507 (59.7 percent) cases
with admission GPAs, years of RN experience, and admission evaluation scoring in the
categories of online and F2F FNP or administration concentrations leading to the MSN
degree. Of the 507 cases, 197 (38.9 percent)
applied to the online program and 310 (61.1
percent) applied to the F2F program; 467
(92.1 percent) chose the FNP concentration
(F2F 282 [60.4 percent], online 185 [39.6 percent]) and 40 [7.9 percent] chose the administration concentration (F2F 28 [70 percent],
online 12 [30 percent]). The chi-square test
showed no significant relationship between
the program format and concentration of
choice ( 2 = 1.43, df = 1, p = .231).

Master's Education

Research Question 1

Comparisons of F2F and online applicants

are provided in Table 1. A statistically significant difference was found between the mean
BSN GPA of those students who applied to
the online programs (n = 197) versus those
who applied to the F2F programs (n = 310),
with the F2F applicants reporting higher
BSN GPAs (i.e., a difference of 0.1 point; t
= 2.95, df = 505, p = .003). The applicants for
the online program averaged 1.7 years of additional RN experience (20052010) than the
F2F program applicants (t = 2.58, df = 477, p
= .010). F2F applicants had a higher admission score than online applicants (t = 2.76, df
= 505, p = .006).
Research Question 2

Differences between admission and graduation GPAs of F2F and online students are
reported in Table 2. No difference was found
between the average BSN GPA of those admitted to the online (n = 37) and F2F (n =
114) programs (t = 0.62, df = 149, p = .543).
When graduate outcomes were examined, no
significant difference in the mean graduating
MSN GPA between the online and F2F programs was found (t = -1.24, df = 149, p = .216).
Research Question 3

The 2008 and 2009 FNP certification examination pass-fail results in the online and F2F
formats were reviewed. Over the two-year
period, 20 graduates from the online format
took the FNP certification examination; 18
passed the examination. A total of 36 F2F
graduates took the examination, with 35 passing. Chi-square testing showed no significant
association between the program format and
passing the FNP certification examination
( 2 = 1.32, df = 1, p = .250).
DISCUSSION

This study was a secondary data analysis and

only limited data were retained regarding applicants, admitted students, and graduates.
The primary limitations of the study were the
few variables available to study. Several concentrations within the MSN programs were
offered. However, only the FNP and administration concentrations were offered in both
online and F2F formats.

The CONs online MSN program has increasing enrollment and is reflective of the
general increase in online programs across
the state and country. The study focuses on
the two concentrations within the college
that were offered in both an online and F2F
format. The complete cycle from application
through certification was statistically examined in comparing online and F2F formats.
The commonality of the formats and the
identified differences in the complete cycle
may aid the student adviser in working with
incoming students and applicants. Advisers
need to have confidence that the online and
F2F programs are similar in terms of admission and graduating GPA expectations and
certification attainment.
The demographics and preferences
of the students in each program were not
studied. The online and F2F comparisons
began at the point of program application,
continued to acceptance into the program,
where strong equivalent GPAs were identified, and carried through to the end of the
chosen format by certification analysis. The
results demonstrated that a strong student
accepted into either the online or F2F format had a statistically similar potential for
success. Advisers should see both the online
and F2F formats as effective tools in the
CONs programs to meet student needs and
preferences.
No difference was found between F2F
and online admission GPAs or graduating
GPAs. These findings are consistent with
Mills (2007).
The 2006-2010 university graduate catalogs were examined for similarities or differences in expected student performance in
the online and F2F formats, including maintenance of GPA, no course grade less than 2.0
on a 4.0 scale (2.0 is equal to a course grade
of C), and completion of the program within matriculation limits. Expected student
performance was identical in each format.
Although this study did not evaluate other
specific program quality indicators, the FNP
certification outcome supports the effectiveness of both programs in terms of achieving
certification after graduation.

Mills (2007) found that online nurse practitioner students were approximately six years
older than similar F2F students. Although
this study did not examine age directly, one
could surmise that an older applicant would
be more likely to have more years of experience. Students in the online format had a
mean 5.86 years of additional RN experience
than F2F students in 2005 (t = 1.474, df = 27,
p = .152). The difference between online and
F2F mean years of RN experience narrowed
each year and, in 2010, online students had
only 1.10 mean years of additional RN experience (t = 1.143, df = 221, p = .254). Online
programs were more attractive to more experienced nurses in the past; however, now
more newly graduated nurses with less experience are attracted to online courses. This is
reflective of state and national trends in online programs.
CONCLUSIONS

The need for MSN-prepared nurses has

been clearly reported through various researchers and agencies. Graduate nursing
program advisers have many opportunities
to discuss online and F2F programs with
potential and actual applicants. Applicants
sometimes ask if it is easier to be admitted
to one program than the other or if one program is easier to complete than the other.
The results of this study provide several
points that can be shared. The requirements for entry into the online and F2F
programs at this college of nursing were
the same. No differences in admission and
graduating GPAs were found between the
two formats, indicating that the expectations of student performance are equivalent. This study also found no difference in
the first-time pass-fail of the FNP certification examination pass rate between the two
formats, indicating that the graduates from
both formats were well prepared with the
knowledge needed to pass the certification
examination. In the past, more experienced
nurses applied to the online programs, but
that trend is changing and less experienced
nurses are now applying to both programs
in fairly equal numbers.

Volume 34 Number 6

375

Nursing Education Perspectives

Any significant differences noted in the

selected variables between the applicants to
the online and the F2F programs might imply an advisement direction, if the two programs have similar success. The study indicates that the experience difference between
the applicants to the two programs is declining. The admission GPA difference was
not significant between the two programs.
Therefore, an adviser could feel confident
recommending either format to prospective
students.
This study is significant not in the differences identified but in the similarities.
Recognizing the characteristics of applicants,
admitted students, graduates, and program
outcomes provided advisers and other graduate nursing education personnel with insight

into program and student successes. Therefore, advisers may use this knowledge in the
future to coach, encourage, and assist applicants and students to balance their needs,
goals, and strengths.
Exploring applicant, admitted student,
and graduate preferences would enhance the
knowledge base and add depth to what is
known about those seeking graduate education. Additional exploration of the differences in BSN GPAs in applicant pools may help
identify gaps in undergraduate knowledge
of graduate education requirements. Larger
studies involving multiple MSN programs
and a larger number of applicants and graduates would broaden the researchers ability
to generalize study conclusions. Additional
studies on the retention of students would

further efforts to maximize retention and

graduation rates. Identification of additional
correlations between graduate student characteristics and program outcomes could also
benefit educational research.
About the Author

Nancy G. Cameron, DNP, RN, NEA-BC, is

a professor, East Tennessee State University
College of Nursing, Johnson City. For
more information, contact Dr. Cameron at
cameronng@etsu.edu.
Key Words

Online Distance Education Face-To-Face

Traditional Education FNP Certification
Graduate Nursing Applicants Graduate
Nursing Program

References

American Association of Colleges of Nursing. (2010, March 4). New

AACN data show growth in doctoral nursing programs [Press
release]. Retrieved from http://www.aacn.nche.edu/news/
articles/2010/enrollchanges
American Nurses Association. (2010). New care delivery
models in health system reform: Opportunities for nurses
and their patients. Retrieved from http://nursingworld.org/
MainMenuCategories/Policy-Advocacy/HealthSystemReform/
HealthCareReformResources/Care-Delivery-Models.pdf
Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. (2012).
Occupational outlook handbook, 2012-13 edition, registered nurses.
Retrieved from www.bls.gov/ooh/healthcare/registered-nurses.
htm
McVeigh, H. (2009). Factors influencing the utilisation of e-learning
in post-registration nursing students. Nurse Education Today,
29(1), 91-99.
Metzner, B. S., & Bean, J. P. (1987). The estimation of a conceptual
model of nontraditional undergraduate student attrition. Research
in Higher Education, 27(1), 15-38.
Mills, A. C. (2007). Evaluation of online and on-site options for
masters degree and post-masters certificate programs. Nurse
Educator, 32(2), 73-77.
Papes, K., & Lopez, R. (2007). Establishing a method for tracking
persistence rates of nursing students: One schools experience.
Journal of Professional Nursing, 23(4), 241-246.

376

november/december 2013

Perry, B., Boman, J., Care, W. D., Edwards, M., & Park, C. (2008).
Why do students withdraw from online graduate nursing and
health studies education? Journal of Educators Online, 5(1), 1-11.
Pullen, L. F., Mueller, S. S., & Ashcraft, J. L. (2009). Nursing the
numbers through faculty recruitment and student retention. Nurse
Educator, 34(3), 132-136.
Regents Online Campus Collaborative. (n.d.). Master of science in
nursing. Retrieved from http://www.rodp.org/degree-programscourses/masters/masters-science-nursing
Rovai, A. P. (2003). In search of higher persistence rates in distance
education online programs. Internet and Higher Education, 6(1),
1-16.
Tennessee Center for Nursing. (2005). Curing the crisis in nursing:
A master plan for Tennessee. Retrieved from http://www.
centerfornursing.org/Curing%20the%20Crisis%20in%20
Nursing%20Education.pdf
Tennessee Center for Nursing. (2008). Curing the crisis...progress and
prognosis. Retrieved from www.centerfornursing.org/Curing%20
the%20Crisis%20-%20Progress%20%20Prognosis%2002-08.pdf
Tinto, V. (1997, November-December). Classrooms as communities:
Exploring the educational character of student persistence.
Journal of Higher Education, 68(6), 599-623.
Waxman, K. T., & Maxworthy, J. (2010). The doctorate of nursing
practice degree and the nurse executive: The perfect combination.
Nurse Leader, 8(2), 31-33.

Copyright of Nursing Education Perspectives is the property of National League for Nursing
and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without
the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or
email articles for individual use.