THESE TIMES CALL FOR CURRICULUM REDESIGN. And current calls are reminiscent of entreaties from the last 60 years - for example, to move nursing education into collegiate settings in the 1950s and 1960s, and to increase nursing graduate programs and new roles in advanced practice in the 1970s. The 1980s saw calls for growth in nursing doctoral programs, along with a devaluing of the nurse educator role. And in the 1990s we had calls for the advancement of nursing research within doctoral education, followed by a move in the last decade to standardize advance practice program expectations. Surely it is time to reflect on the lessons we have learned from these efforts in curriculum redesign. There is no doubt that serious undertakings to prepare the nation's workforce have led to multiple avenues to investigate nursing science and provide nursing care unimaginable in the 1950s. But while there is also no doubt that some change is harmful, we rarely talk openly about the harm that we see. I believe one of the biggest mistakes of recent years has been the de-emphasis in graduate programs on preparation for nurse educators. The argument to drop such preparation was that nursing is a practice discipline, and, as with doctors, preparation for the educator role is unnecessary. However, medical education has never been a stellar educational example for preparation for entering a profession. There are documented skills, attributes, and specific knowledge within the science of nursing education that contribute to program outcomes. Ignoring these data results in nursing graduates who are poorly prepared to teach and educate the next generation of nurses. Fortunately, a small number of nursing programs, along with the NLN, have lobbied against popular trends and encouraged a focus on quality nurse educator preparation. The resurgence of nurse educator preparation was strengthened by the Institute of Medicine's Future of Nursing report. Hopefully, we will never again abandon the key preparation needed to respond to the health needs of our nation. A case in point is the growing clamor to change the preparation of advanced practice nurses to a single pathway: the doctor of nursing practice. Viewed as similar to preparation for other practice disciplines, such as physical therapy and pharmacy, the DNP has dominated policies, discussion, and funding. What we seem to miss is that those disciplines differ from nursing in a fundamental way: they are not autonomous but dependent practices. By contrast, nursing is a separate practice, willingly interdependent with others. Nursing has spent decades demonstrating the worth and valuable outcomes of our advanced practice roles, which have been predominately at the master's preparation level. We have graduated competent, cost-effective nurses who have had a positive impact on the health of our nation. …