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.
Which 11 professional degrees did the Department of Education add to its list in 2025?
Executive summary
The Department of Education’s negotiated proposal in November 2025 would recognize 11 “primary” professional programs eligible for the higher loan caps; those 11 are pharmacy, dentistry, veterinary medicine, chiropractic, law, medicine (MD), optometry, osteopathic medicine (DO), podiatry, theology, and clinical psychology — clinical psychology was the newly added program [1]. Multiple reporting outlets and stakeholder groups note the proposal would exclude many health and helping professions (nursing, public health, audiology, speech‑language pathology, physician assistant, occupational/physical therapy, social work, counseling, etc.) from professional‑degree status under ED’s narrow definition [2] [3] [4].
1. What the “11 programs” means in plain language
The Department-convened RISE committee reached consensus to restrict the set of degree programs that qualify for the higher “professional” loan caps to 11 primary programs — the 10 programs listed in H.R.1 plus clinical psychology as the add‑on — which determines who can access larger annual and lifetime graduate borrowing limits under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act [1] [5]. Under the law, “professional students” are eligible for larger caps (e.g., $50,000 annually, $200,000 aggregate in the Administration’s explanation), so the listing is effectively a gatekeeper for more generous federal borrowing [5].
2. Exactly which 11 programs the committee listed
The negotiated list cited by the Association of American Universities explicitly names pharmacy, dentistry, veterinary medicine, chiropractic, law, medicine, optometry, osteopathic medicine, podiatry, theology, and clinical psychology — with clinical psychology described as the newly added program [1]. Reporting across higher‑education outlets confirms negotiators agreed to recognize only those primary programs and some doctoral programs as “professional degree programs” for the purposes of the loan limits [1] [6].
3. What’s being excluded and why stakeholders are alarmed
Major categories of health‑care and human services degrees that many advocates expected to be treated as “professional” are omitted in ED’s draft: nursing (MSN, DNP), physician assistant, public health (MPH, DrPH), social work (MSW), occupational therapy, physical therapy, audiology, speech‑language pathology, counseling, and therapy fields are reported as excluded in summaries and fact checks — a move that could lower the loan caps available to students in those programs [2] [3] [4]. Professional associations (e.g., American Public Health Association, nursing organizations, ASHA) warn this could reduce access to graduate training and worsen workforce shortages in frontline professions [4] [7].
4. How ED explains its re‑definition
The Department says it is applying a narrow, long‑standing regulatory definition of “professional degree” (citing the CFR) and that the negotiators’ work was aimed at aligning program definition with that text; officials and supporters argue this makes loan policy more targeted and holds institutions accountable for outcomes [2] [7]. Inside Higher Ed notes the department’s proposal slightly expanded eligibility from an earlier 10‑degree list but remains more restrictive than some congressional proposals [6].
5. Competing perspectives and implicit agendas
Universities and professional associations frame the change as a threat to workforce pipelines and student access to necessary financing, especially in health care and public health [4] [7]. Policy advocates for tighter loan limits and some taxpayer‑interest negotiators argue limiting “professional” status protects borrowers and taxpayers from large debts for degrees that don’t reliably produce high earnings — an implicit cost‑control agenda reflected in the department’s push to narrow the list [7] [6]. These conflicting incentives — protecting borrowers/taxpayers vs. maintaining workforce capacity — underlie much of the debate [7] [1].
6. Where the rulemaking stands and what’s next
The Department expected to publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and accept public comments before issuing final rules, with ED saying it would release final rules by spring 2026 at the latest; negotiators’ consensus and public comment will shape the final outcome [2] [4]. Stakeholder groups plan targeted comment campaigns (ASHA, nursing and public‑health organizations) arguing to restore specific programs to the professional‑degree list [3] [4].
7. Limitations in available coverage
Current reporting and the negotiation summaries identify the 11 programs and list many exclusions, but available sources do not provide the full text of ED’s final regulatory language or a completed, legally binding federal rule as of the cited stories; the Department’s final rulemaking and any congressional or litigation responses are not in the present materials [1] [2]. If you need the exact regulatory text or later developments, check ED’s Federal Register notices and the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking when published (not found in current reporting).