24: ESSENTIALS OF DOCTORAL EDUCATION ■ 535AN ACADEMIC DEAN’S PERSPECTIVE
Many of the actual confluencing factors (e.g., expanding credit loads in master’s of nursing
programs and discussion of doctoral preparation in graduate- entry degrees across various
health professions) and details surrounding the preliminary work on the DNP degree in
the years preceding (chiefly 2004– 2006) the announcement that the DNP degree should
broadly replace the master’s, have been identified and discussed in Chapter 1 of this book
and in the previous edition. In the decade since publication of the 2006 The Essentials of
Doctoral Education for Advanced Nursing Practice by the AACN, a lot of water has crossed un-
der and over the bridge. Much of the opposition to the degree at the time is now supportive,
but there are stakeholders and certainly individual practitioners and academics who retain
their skepticism whether this was the right move at the time. This chapter is less about the
politics and more about the relevance of the 2006 document to contemporary doctoral ad-
vanced nursing practice. As a DNP clinician and practitioner, Dr. David Campbell- O’Dell
has presented a very internal perspective on the document and its meaning for actual DNP
practitioners (inclusive of all traditional APRNs). This second perspective is from an ac-
ademic dean’s point of view and as an administrator who has now launched two very
different DNP degrees in his career. First a DrNP at Drexel University, which focused on
scalable clinical research with sample sizes that could advance practice knowledge genera-
tion, and now a DNP forthcoming at The College of New Rochelle, which will focus on
advanced clinical care and is specifically designed to give the doctoral advanced practice
graduate more advanced skills beyond the master’s degree. And while the advancement of
practice evidence is still essential, time has added some wisdom to this administrator and
scholar, and more of the details surrounding “what is practice evidence?” have been filled
in by the profession and the AACN in its recent white paper on the DNP (AACN, 2015 ).
This second critique focuses chiefly on whether the eight 2006 DNP essentials are relevant
a decade later. This critique ends with a summary conclusion whether there are curriculum
elements that need to be added, deleted, modified, or whether more substantive change is
required and a new updated, document is needed.
Essential I: Scientifi c Underpinnings for Practice
From the essentials document, this domain of knowledge for DNP practice includes:
- The principles and laws that govern the life process, well- being, and optimal
function of human beings, sick or well - The patterning of human behavior in interaction with the environment in
normal life events and critical life situations - The nursing actions or processes by which positive changes in health status
are affected - The wholeness or health of human beings recognizing that they are in con-
tinuous interaction with their environments (AACN, 2006, p. 8)
The understanding of most thought leaders in DNP education is that this
essential encompasses the traditional scientific coursework for advanced nursing
clinicians:^1 advanced pathophysiology, advanced pharmacology, and advanced health
assessment. The NONPF, in their 2014 document Nurse Practitioner Core Competencies
Content, also includes advanced content in genetics and communication skills in this
domain (NONPF, 2014). It is an assumption that the accrediting and regulatory agen-
cies of the other advanced nursing clinician or other APRN organizations would
concur with this content. The disconnect, however, becomes apparent when one is
considering whether the curriculum is focused on the bachelor of science in nursing