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 doctoral and master’s degrees were included in the Education Department’s 2025 non-professional reclassification?
Executive summary
The Department of Education’s 2025 rulemaking dramatically narrows which graduate programs count as “professional degrees,” shrinking the list from roughly 2,000 programs to fewer than 600 and singling out a core set of 11 fields plus related CIP-code programs as qualifying — a change that would remove advanced nursing, public health, many education master’s, social work, allied‑health and other graduate degrees from professional status under the draft [1] [2]. Stakeholders from nursing, public‑health schools and research universities warn this will limit access to higher federal loan caps and has prompted public comment and opposition [3] [4] [5].
1. What the reclassification says — a much smaller “professional” list
The Department’s negotiated rulemaking proposes to limit “professional degree” status to about 11 primary program areas and closely related programs in the same four‑digit CIP codes; that approach reduces the pool of qualifying programs from roughly 2,000 to under 600, according to reporting and social posts summarizing the draft [1] [2]. New America’s read of the Department’s final language highlights that it explicitly names a core set of fields (and Clinical Psychology) and then allows inclusion of other programs only if they share the same four‑digit CIP code as those named fields [2].
2. Degrees widely reported as being reclassified (what people are circulating)
Social posts and contemporary reporting list numerous graduate and doctoral degrees that would lose “professional” status under the draft: advanced nursing degrees (MSN, DNP, NP, CRNA), physician assistant, occupational and physical therapy, counseling and therapy fields, public health degrees (MPH, DrPH), many education master’s and specialist programs, social work (MSW, DSW), audiology, speech‑language pathology, and various business and engineering master’s programs [1] [6] [7]. Threads and other reposts echo a similar list; these compilations appear to be crowd‑sourced summaries of the negotiated‑rulemaking outcome rather than an official single‑page list [1] [7].
3. Who’s raising alarms — nursing, public health, universities
National nursing organizations and higher‑education groups are vocally opposed. The American Association of Colleges of Nursing and other nursing advocates have launched petitions and public comment campaigns arguing that excluding post‑baccalaureate nursing undermines parity across health professions and will harm workforce pipelines [8] [3]. ASPPH (public‑health schools) warned that excluding MPH and DrPH programs will restrict student access to higher federal loan limits and weaken the public‑health workforce [4]. Leading research universities also flagged the proposal as a threat to access to professional‑degree programs tied to H.R.1 loan limits [5].
4. Financial mechanics at stake — loan limits and program eligibility
Under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) implementation, only programs designated “professional” can access higher annual borrowing caps (for example, an expanded $50,000 annual limit has been discussed in advocacy pieces), and reclassifying many graduate programs would reduce the number of students eligible for those higher caps or for former Grad PLUS coverage, shifting how students borrow and repay [3] [2]. New America notes that while the definition is clearer, other regulatory tests in the Department’s multi‑part framework mean fewer students will actually qualify in practice [2].
5. Confusion in public conversation — social posts vs. official text
Much of the online circulation is a mixture of direct summaries, reposted lists and commentary; several widely shared lists appear to be derived from negotiated‑rulemaking drafts rather than a single official, final Department list [1] [7]. Some posts conflate Department of Education action with earlier Department of Labor classification changes, which has caused additional confusion in social threads [7]. Rights News Time and local outlets reinforce that healthcare and education programs are the most affected in public discussion [9] [10].
6. Limitations and next steps — what reporting does and does not show
Available reporting establishes the scope of the negotiated‑rulemaking draft and the main fields involved, but does not provide a single, definitive, Department‑issued master list in these sources; much of the degree enumeration comes from social reposts, stakeholder summaries and synthesis pieces [1] [6] [7]. The Department expected to issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would open an official public comment period — that formal NPRM would be the place to find the Department’s final language and any authoritative list [4] [2]. Sources do not mention a finalized, Department‑published checklist in the provided material [1] [2].
7. What to watch and how stakeholders are responding
Expect continued public comment and advocacy from nursing and public‑health organizations, university groups signaling potential litigation or policy pushback, and clarifying guidance from the Department when the NPRM is posted; stakeholders are already submitting opposition comments urging retention of advanced nursing and allied‑health programs within the professional category [3] [11] [5]. If you rely on this for personal planning, follow the Department’s forthcoming NPRM and formal guidance rather than only social reposts [2] [4].