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 institutions were affected by the Department of Education's 2025 reclassification of programs to non-professional?
Executive summary
The Department of Education’s 2025 rulemaking would sharply narrow which graduate programs count as “professional degrees,” reducing the eligible set from roughly 2,000 programs to fewer than 600 and excluding many health and education fields — a change that would limit higher federal loan caps for affected students [1] [2]. Reporting and advocacy coverage highlights nursing, physician assistant, occupational and physical therapy, counseling, public health, education, social work and allied-health programs as likely affected; the proposal is contested and — as of current reporting — had not yet taken final effect [3] [2] [4].
1. What the Department proposed and the scale of the change
The Department’s final-rule language redefines “professional degree” to include a short list of doctoral-level fields (medicine, pharmacy, law, dentistry, osteopathy, optometry, podiatry, chiropractic, veterinary medicine, theology and clinical psychology) and programs sharing their 4‑digit CIP codes, shrinking the set of professional programs from about 2,000 to under 600 and making professional status contingent on doctoral-level training and licensure criteria [1]. NewAmerica’s review describes that the Department tied the definition to an existing regulation and CIP-code mapping that will exclude many graduate programs currently treated as professional [1].
2. Which institutions and programs reporters and advocates say would be affected
Multiple outlets and advocacy posts list advanced nursing (MSN, DNP, NP, CRNA, CNM, CNS, APRN), physician assistant programs, occupational and physical therapy, audiology, counseling and therapy fields, public health (MPH, DrPH), health administration, education specialties, social work, and speech-language pathology among programs that would lose professional status under the proposal [3] [2] [5]. Newsweek and The Independent specifically note nursing and numerous health-care-related programs being excluded from the Department’s professional-degree list [6] [3].
3. Short-term financial impact on students and institutions
Under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) framework the Department is implementing, graduate students in programs not classed as “professional” would face lower federal borrowing caps because the Graduate PLUS program was eliminated and new higher limits would be reserved for professional-degree students; advocacy outlets warn graduate nursing and allied-health students could lose access to the higher loan limits previously available [7] [1]. NASFAA and nursing-education commenters explicitly oppose reclassification of specific nursing degrees (MSN, DNP, CRNA, CNM, CNS, APRN), arguing it will curtail access to advanced training the health system needs [5].
4. Where reporting and fact‑checking disagree or add caveats
Fact-checking by Snopes cautions that it is incorrect to present nursing and other programs as already “reclassified” because, at the time of their write-up, the rule remained a proposal and had not been finalized into an effective reclassification; the Department indicated final rules would be released by spring 2026 at the latest [4]. That means current accounts often conflate the published proposal and its likely impacts with a completed policy change [4].
5. Institutional responses and advocacy
Professional associations — notably the American Association of Colleges of Nursing — publicly urged reversal or reconsideration, saying excluding nursing contradicts decades of parity across health professions and undermines workforce goals [6] [3]. NASFAA and individual commenters have submitted opposition specifically naming numerous nursing advanced-practice degrees and warning about patient-safety and workforce consequences [5].
6. Wider policy and administrative context
The Department framed its approach as reviving an older regulatory definition (34 CFR 668.2) and mapping professional status to a narrow set of disciplines and CIP codes; NewAmerica notes that the Department used the rulemaking to interpret OBBBA’s statutory changes, including immediate implementation of prorated limits for non‑professional programs [1]. The Department also announced other interagency shifts aimed at reorganizing responsibilities (e.g., partnerships with HHS, DOL), which illustrate a broader administrative reorientation though not directly tied to the professional‑degree definition [8].
7. What reporting does not settle
Available sources do not mention a definitive, agency-published list of every college or program name (institution-by-institution) that will lose or retain professional status once the final rule is set; many reports summarize program types (nursing, PA, OT, PT, etc.) rather than listing specific institutions [3] [2]. Also, the long-term impact on program enrollment, institutional finances, and workforce pipelines is discussed in advocacy terms but unavailable as settled empirical findings in the cited coverage [7] [5].
8. Bottom line and what to watch
The rulemaking would narrow professional-degree eligibility and materially change student loan access for many graduate health, education, and human-services programs if finalized; advocates and associations have mounted public opposition, and fact‑checkers note the distinction between proposed and final rules [1] [5] [4]. Watch for the Department’s final rule expected by spring 2026, and for agency-published CIP-code lists or program-level guidance that will clarify which institutions’ programs are included or excluded [4] [1].