What are now (as of 20 Nov 2025) considered professional degrees?

1. What the Education Department has proposed — a narrower definition with big financial stakes

The Department’s negotiated‑rulemaking work under OBBBA produced a proposed, narrower definition of “professional degree” that would limit which programs qualify for the higher RAP borrowing bands; news reporting and trade groups list a number of programs the department’s interpretation would not treat as “professional,” including many nursing degrees, public health doctorates and masters, social work, physician assistant, physical and occupational therapy, audiology, speech‑language pathology and certain education degrees — a change that directly affects access to higher lifetime loan limits ($200,000 for professional students vs. lower caps for other graduate students) ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

2. Who’s raising alarms — professional associations and universities

Multiple professional associations and universities are publicly opposing the proposal because it could make expensive, workforce‑critical graduate programs harder to afford. The Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health called the exclusion of MPH and DrPH degrees “deeply concerning” and warned the move could weaken the public‑health workforce pipeline ^[4]. The American Speech‑Language‑Hearing Association mobilized members to urge that audiology and speech‑language pathology be recognized as professional degrees, citing the regulatory consequences for loan eligibility ^[3]. Universities are simultaneously still labeling certain newly created programs “professional” in institutional communications, which illustrates a split between institution usage and the Department’s regulatory interpretation ^[6].

3. What exactly changes for students — loan caps and program classification

OBBBA reworked graduate borrowing by eliminating Grad PLUS and creating a Repayment Assistance Plan (RAP) with annual and lifetime caps tied to whether a program is classified as “professional.” Reporting cites proposed annual limits (e.g., $20,500 for many graduate borrowers; $50,000 for those in designated professional programs) and lifetime distinctions that materially alter how much federal borrowing is available for programs deemed non‑professional under the department’s reading ^{[2] [7]}.

4. Disagreement over precedent and interpretation of the 1965 regulation

The Department says it is applying a longstanding federal regulatory definition dating to 1965 (34 CFR 668.2), but observers note that the regulatory examples listed in 1965 were not exhaustive and that the department’s present interpretation is narrow; news outlets and stakeholders emphasize the ambiguity and historical precedent that many professional groups cite to argue they’ve long been treated as professional programs ^{[1] [2] [8]}.

5. Which programs are specifically named in reporting as excluded or at risk

Contemporary coverage repeatedly lists nursing (including MSN and DNP), public health (MPH, DrPH), social work (MSW, DSW), physician assistant, occupational/physical therapy, audiology and speech‑language pathology, counseling and some education master’s programs as among those not being counted as “professional” under the department’s proposal ^{[1] [2] [3] [9]}.

6. Political and advocacy context — why this is contested

The reclassification ties directly to a politically charged law (OBBBA) enacted in 2025 and to the department’s implementation choices; professional organizations frame the move as short‑sighted and harmful to workforce formation (ASPPH called exclusions “alarming”), while the Department contends it is following regulatory text — an interpretation that critics say narrows previously broader practice ^{[4] [1]}.

7. Limits of current reporting and what remains unresolved

Available reporting documents the Department’s proposed interpretation and lists affected programs, plus stakeholders’ objections, but sources do not provide a single, final official federal list that is universally accepted as definitive beyond the Department’s current proposal and rulemaking discussions; follow‑up rulemaking, negotiated‑rulemaking minutes, or a final Federal Register rule are the next authoritative steps not fully covered in these items ^{[5] [1]}.

Bottom line: as of 20 Nov 2025, major media and professional groups report that the Department of Education’s proposed definition would exclude numerous health, education and allied‑health programs from “professional degree” status — with significant loan‑eligibility consequences — and those exclusions are being actively contested by affected professions and schools ^{[2] [4] [3]}.