Quantitative Workload Analysis of a 14-Week Accelerated BSN Program: A Time-Budget Study
Background: Accelerated Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BSN) programs compress traditional curricula into intensive formats, yet quantitative analyses of total workload demands remain limited.
Objective: To quantify the total time requirements of a 14-week summer BSN program and assess feasibility within human physiological constraints.
Methods: Comprehensive tracking of 407 academic tasks across four nursing courses from May-August 2025. Monte Carlo simulation (n=1000 iterations) assessed workload variability. Student archetype modeling projected total time requirements including evidence-based study multipliers.
Results: Mean direct task hours were 31.6 weekly (SD=11.7, range: 8.0-46.5). When incorporating required study time (2:1 ratio), projected total workload ranged from 67.1 hours/week for fast learners to 164.3 hours/week for at-risk students. Average students (70% of population) required 94.8 hours/week, leaving 6.7 hours for all non-academic activities after essential needs.
Conclusions: The program structure creates time demands exceeding physiological possibility for 85% of students when total workload is considered.
Keywords: nursing education, workload analysis, accelerated BSN, time management, student attrition
Introduction
Accelerated second-degree Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BSN) programs have emerged as a strategy to address nursing workforce shortages1. These programs, typically 12-18 months in duration, attract career-changing students with previous bachelor's degrees2. While reporting high NCLEX-RN pass rates, accelerated programs also experience elevated attrition rates compared to traditional programs3.
Previous research has examined academic outcomes and student satisfaction in accelerated programs4, but quantitative analyses of actual time demands remain scarce. This gap is concerning given evidence linking excessive workload to decreased learning effectiveness5 and increased medical errors during clinical practice6.
This study aimed to: (1) quantify direct academic task hours in a 14-week summer BSN program, (2) project total workload including required study time, and (3) assess feasibility within available time constraints.
Methods
Study Design
Prospective observational study with comprehensive task tracking over one complete program cycle (May 5 - August 7, 2025).
Setting and Sample
A 14-week accelerated summer BSN program at a private health sciences university in Florida. All assigned tasks (N=407) across four required courses were tracked: Adult Health Nursing (Adult_310), Obstetrics/Gynecology Nursing (OBGYN_330), Gerontological Nursing (Gerontology_315), and NCLEX Preparation (NCLEX_335).
Data Collection
Each academic task was logged with: course designation, date assigned, task type, and duration. Duration data were extracted from course syllabi, learning management system estimates, and clinical schedules.
Analysis
Primary Analysis. Descriptive statistics calculated weekly and total task hours. Distribution patterns assessed across the 14-week period.
Monte Carlo Simulation. Risk assessment employed Monte Carlo methods (1000 iterations per week) using log-normal distributions based on performance variability literature7: μ = 4.331, σ = 0.194.
Student Archetype Modeling. Four student populations modeled based on educational psychology research8,9: (1) Fast/Efficient Learners (15%): 0.85× task time; (2) Average Learners (70%): 1.00× task time; (3) Deliberate Processors (10%): 1.15× task time; (4) At-Risk/ESL Students (5%): 1.30× task time. Study time calculated using 2:1 ratio from nursing education literature10.
Time Budget Analysis. Weekly time allocation based on 168 total hours minus: Sleep: 49 hours (7×7 days) per AASM guidelines11; Meals: 10.5 hours (1.5×7 days); Hygiene/self-care: 7 hours (1×7 days).
Ethical Considerations
As a current student in the analyzed program, potential bias acknowledged. All data derived from publicly available course materials and syllabi.
Results
Task Distribution
Total program workload comprised 407 discrete tasks across four courses (Table 1).
| Course | Tasks | Hours | Percentage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adult_310 | 127 | 170.1 | 38.5% |
| OBGYN_330 | 94 | 150.1 | 33.9% |
| Gerontology_315 | 130 | 63.6 | 14.4% |
| NCLEX_335 | 56 | 58.6 | 13.3% |
| Total | 407 | 442.4 | 100.0% |
Weekly Workload Patterns
Mean weekly task hours were 31.6 (SD=11.7), with significant variation across weeks. Four weeks exceeded 40-hour thresholds: weeks 24 (40.8h), 25 (42.1h), 26 (46.5h), and 27 (46.1h).
Monte Carlo Simulation Results
Simulation revealed substantial uncertainty in workload estimates: mean uncertainty ±6.3 hours; maximum 95% CI: 65.0 hours; probability of exceeding 40h: >50% for 4 weeks.
Total Workload Projections
Application of study time multipliers dramatically increased total requirements (Table 2).
| Archetype | Population | Task Hours | Study Hours | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fast Learners | 15% | 26.9 | 40.3 | 67.1 |
| Average | 70% | 31.6 | 63.2 | 94.8 |
| Deliberate | 10% | 36.3 | 90.8 | 127.2 |
| At-Risk/ESL | 5% | 41.1 | 123.2 | 164.3 |
Time Budget Analysis
For average students (70% of population), time allocation revealed critical constraints (Table 3).
| Component | Hours | Cumulative Remaining |
|---|---|---|
| Sleep (7h/day) | 49 | 119 |
| Academic (average) | 94.8 | 24.2 |
| Meals (1.5h/day) | 10.5 | 13.7 |
| Hygiene (1h/day) | 7 | 6.7 |
| Remaining for all other activities | 6.7 |
Peak Week Analysis
Week 26 represented maximum workload: base task hours 46.5; fast learners total 88.4h; average students total 139.5h; at-risk students total 218.3h.
Discussion
This analysis reveals a fundamental mismatch between program demands and available time. While programs typically report only direct instructional hours (31.6 weekly average), total workload including required study time reaches 94.8 hours for average students.
The finding that 85% of students face workloads exceeding sustainable limits aligns with reported attrition rates in accelerated programs12. The mathematical impossibility of fitting required activities into available time suggests that program completion requires systematic sacrifice of essential needs.
Peak weeks (24-27) create particularly acute challenges, with average students requiring 20 hours daily for academic work. This finding has implications for both educational quality and patient safety during concurrent clinical rotations13.
Limitations
Study limitations include: (1) Study time estimates based on conservative 2:1 ratio; actual requirements may be higher; (2) Analysis excludes transportation, employment, and family responsibilities; (3) Single program limits generalizability; (4) Author enrolled in program may introduce bias despite objective data collection.
Implications
These findings suggest need for: transparent reporting of total workload expectations; restructuring of task distribution across weeks; recognition that current structures may systematically exclude capable students unable to sustain impossible schedules.
Conclusions
Quantitative analysis demonstrates that an accelerated 14-week BSN program creates time demands exceeding human physiological constraints for the majority of students. The 6.7 hours remaining weekly for all non-academic activities after essential needs represents a mathematical impossibility rather than a challenging but achievable goal.
Conflict of Interest
The author is currently enrolled as a student in the analyzed program. This research was conducted independently without institutional support or funding.