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.
Where can I find the Department of Education's 2025 rulemaking, guidance documents, or Federal Register notices about degree classifications?
Executive summary
The Department of Education (ED) has been actively negotiating a new definition of “professional degree” tied to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), and it has circulated proposals that would limit which post‑baccalaureate programs qualify for higher federal loan caps—proposals that industry groups say exclude fields such as nursing, public health and social work [1] [2]. Negotiated rulemaking sessions and agency proposals — including ED’s multi‑criteria test (doctoral level, years of instruction, CIP code ties) — have led to media accounts and widely shared lists of reclassified degrees, but social posts sometimes conflate Department of Labor (DOL) changes with ED rulemaking; reporting shows ED has released a working proposal and is expected to publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [1] [2] [3].
1. What ED is doing now — a negotiated rulemaking and a draft proposal
The Education Department convened the RISE negotiated rulemaking committee to implement student‑loan provisions of OBBBA; during that process ED presented a detailed proposal for what counts as a “professional program,” including criteria such as being a doctoral‑level program (with certain exceptions), requiring at least six years of academic instruction (two post‑baccalaureate), demonstrating skills to begin practice, and being in the same four‑digit CIP code as one of 11 named professions [1] [4]. Inside Higher Ed and NASFAA coverage describe ED’s latest plan as narrower than some stakeholder proposals and note the department can issue its own proposal if negotiators fail to reach consensus [1] [4].
2. Which fields are being disputed — nursing, public health, social work and more
Multiple outlets and advocacy groups report that ED’s working definition would exclude or not explicitly include degrees such as nursing (MSN, DNP), public health (MPH, DrPH), social work (MSW), and several allied‑health and education master’s programs from the category that gets higher loan caps; public‑health groups warned the exclusion could limit students’ access to larger federal loans [2] [5] [6]. Newsweek, Nurse.org and the American Association of Colleges of Nursing (quoted in reporting) have registered concern that nursing was omitted from ED’s list and that the omission affects eligibility for the higher borrowing limits created under OBBBA [7] [5] [6].
3. How social posts and lists map — and where confusion appears
Viral social posts presenting long “lists of degrees ED will reclassify” are circulating widely, but some reporting cautions that the lists mix up ED rulemaking with other agency actions (for example DOL classification changes) and social amplification sometimes outpaces formal notices; a Threads post explicitly warns that a DOL reclassification is a separate action and that ED hadn’t posted a final notice at the time [3]. That means some popular lists reflect preliminary proposals, committee drafts or conflated agency actions rather than a formal Federal Register rulemaking document [3] [1].
4. Where to find the official rulemaking and guidance when it’s published
Available reporting says ED is expected to issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the coming weeks, which would open a 30‑day public comment period — that NPRM (and any subsequent final rule) would appear in the Federal Register; groups like ASPPH and NASFAA are tracking the process and summarizing ED’s proposal and committee discussions [2] [4]. If you need the primary documents, check the Federal Register for ED’s NPRM and ED’s rulemaking docket, and monitor the RISE negotiated rulemaking outputs and ED press pages summarized by outlets such as Inside Higher Ed and NASFAA [1] [4].
5. What the evidence does and doesn’t show — limitations and competing perspectives
Reporting agrees ED has advanced a narrower definition that would limit which programs can access expanded loan caps, and public‑health and nursing organizations have explicitly criticized the effect [1] [2] [5]. However, available sources do not include the actual Federal Register NPRM text in the search results provided here, so definitive legal language, exact program lists in a formal rule, or the final effective date are not shown in current reporting — some news pieces cite proposals or committee consensus rather than a finalized regulation [1] [2] [3].
6. Practical next steps for readers tracking this issue
Watch the Federal Register and the Department of Education’s rulemaking docket for an NPRM tied to OBBBA; follow NASFAA and professional associations (AACN, ASPPH) for timely summaries and public‑comment guidance, and treat viral lists as provisional until you can compare them against the NPRM text — reporters and trade groups in the coverage recommend using the CIP‑code logic and ED’s stated multi‑part test to interpret which programs may qualify [4] [1] [2].
If you want, I can monitor these dockets and notify you when the NPRM or the Federal Register notice is published and provide a line‑by‑line summary of the proposed regulatory language.