Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What degrees won't be counted as professional degrees anymore? With this, what changes will take place because of? Will there be less money given to people who go for these degrees?
Executive summary
The Department of Education’s proposed redefinition of “professional degree” programs would remove many health‑care and education degrees — including nursing (MSN, DNP), physician assistant, physical/occupational therapy, audiology, speech‑language pathology, social work, public health, and certain education degrees — from the professional bucket, shrinking the list from roughly 2,000 to under 600 programs [1] [2] [3]. That change matters because under the One Big Beautiful Bill / H.R.1 framework the highest loan limits (annual caps and a $200,000 lifetime cap for “professional” students) will be available only to programs the Department labels professional; other graduate students face lower annual and lifetime caps [4] [1] [5].
1. What degrees the DOE has proposed to stop calling “professional”
Reporting and fact‑checks list a consistent core of programs that would no longer be classed as professional under the Department’s proposal: advanced nursing programs (MSN, DNP), many education master’s degrees, social work (MSW, DSW), public health (MPH, DrPH), physician assistant programs, occupational therapy, physical therapy, audiology, speech‑language pathology, counseling/therapy degrees, and others that professional associations say were excluded [1] [6] [4] [3]. Several outlets and organizations say the DOE’s draft narrows longstanding practice and reduces the number of programs treated as professional from thousands to several hundred [2] [7].
2. Why this administrative change matters for student loans
Congress’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act and H.R.1 removed Grad PLUS and replaced previous rules with the Repayment Assistance Plan and strict borrowing caps: new annual and lifetime caps differ for “graduate” versus “professional” students — for example, proposed annual caps of $20,500 for many graduate students but higher limits for those in recognized professional programs, and lifetime caps of $100,000 for graduate students versus $200,000 for professional students — so whether a degree is labeled “professional” directly affects how much federal loan money a student can access [4] [1] [5]. The department says the change “places commonsense limits” and aligns with its definition, while critics say it will limit financing for costly programs [8] [4].
3. Immediate and likely financial effects on students
If a program loses professional status, students in that program lose access to the higher borrowing ceiling and the former avenue to borrow up to cost of attendance (Grad PLUS), meaning they could face lower annual borrowing allowances and a smaller lifetime ceiling — effectively less federal loan capacity to cover tuition and living costs [4] [1] [5]. Multiple nursing groups and university associations warn this will make advanced training more expensive or inaccessible, potentially deterring entrants to high‑need fields [9] [7] [10].
4. Who is pushing back — and why
Professional associations for nursing (American Nurses Association), public health (ASPPH), audiology and speech pathology (ASHA), and research universities (AAU) have publicly criticized the proposal, arguing it ignores workforce realities, will constrain pipeline development in underserved areas, and contradicts decades of precedent recognizing these degrees as professional credentials [9] [4] [3] [7]. The DOE spokesperson counters that the department’s longstanding definition is being clarified and that stakeholders were part of the negotiated rulemaking process [8] [4].
5. Broader context: budget pressure and higher‑education cuts
This regulatory change sits alongside larger federal and state funding shifts in 2025 — proposed cuts to Pell and research agencies, rescissions and other budget actions — that are already compressing higher‑education revenues and graduate support; analysts warn those pressures make students and universities more sensitive to any reduction in loan or grant access [11] [12] [13]. Universities and associations note the cumulative effect could be fewer graduate seats, rescinded offers, or program closures in some fields [14] [15].
6. What’s still unclear and what to watch next
Available sources show the DOE has proposed the narrower definition and list of excluded programs and tied that definition to loan caps, but the final regulatory text, the full official list, and how the department will handle edge cases (joint or interdisciplinary degrees, accreditation nuances) remain in flux; a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and public comment period is expected as part of the process [4] [2]. Watch for the Department’s formal NPRM, institution and association comments, and any congressional or legal challenges that could alter implementation [7] [9].
Bottom line: the reclassification reduces which graduate programs qualify for the highest federal loan limits; students in excluded programs would generally face lower federal borrowing capacity, a change that professional groups warn will raise costs, limit access, and risk workforce shortages in critical fields [1] [9] [7].