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 specific degrees were reclassified as non-professional and when did these changes occur?
Executive summary
The Department of Education’s negotiated rulemaking in November 2025 proposed a much narrower definition of “professional degree” that would make many graduate programs ineligible for the higher loan caps created by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA); negotiators reportedly agreed to recognize only about 11 primary programs (plus some doctorates) as “professional” [1]. Several professional organizations — nursing, public health, and social work associations — say the proposal would exclude degrees such as MPH, DrPH, MSN, DNP, and the MSW, and that the draft reached consensus during RISE committee meetings in early–mid November 2025 [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [1].
1. What was changed and when — a short timeline
Negotiated rulemaking by the Department of Education’s Reimagining and Improving Student Education (RISE) committee took place in early November 2025; by November 6 ED had circulated a revised proposal for which programs count as “professional,” and by November 7–14 the committee reported reaching consensus on a much tighter list of eligible programs [7] [4] [1]. Reporting and organizational statements dated November 10–14, 2025 reflect reactions to the department’s draft and the committee’s consensus [3] [1] [4].
2. Which specific degrees organizations say were reclassified as “non‑professional”
Multiple professional associations have publicly asserted that common advanced health and human‑services degrees were left out of the department’s “professional” list in the draft rules. The Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health warns the MPH and DrPH were excluded from the professional‑degree category [2]. Nursing groups — the American Nurses Association, AACN, and state nursing leaders — say graduate nursing degrees including Master of Science in Nursing (MSN), Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP), and advanced practice pathways (e.g., nurse practitioner, CRNA) are excluded under the draft definition [3] [5] [6]. The Council on Social Work Education says the draft would exclude social work programs such as the MSW from professional‑degree treatment under ED’s framework [4].
3. How large the reclassification is said to be
Public commentary indicates the department’s new list drastically narrows program counts. One social post claimed the list fell from roughly 2,000 degrees to under 600; reporting and advocacy pieces describe ED moving from a broad initial list to recognizing only about 10–11 primary professional program types, plus some doctoral programs, for higher loan caps [8] [7] [1]. The American Enterprise Institute commentary notes negotiators settled on criteria that exclude many degree types (citing the negotiated consensus), emphasizing the shift in scale [9] [1].
4. What the department’s draft definition requires (and why it matters)
ED’s proposal links “professional” classification to elements such as preparation for licensure, a level of skill beyond a bachelor’s degree, and (in some versions) minimum program length or CIP code alignment; these criteria determine which students can access the larger borrowing caps under OBBBA [4] [7] [9]. Under the law, students in professional programs would be eligible for higher annual and aggregate loan limits, so reclassification changes borrowing capacity for affected students [9] [1].
5. Competing viewpoints and implicit agendas
Higher‑education and public‑policy voices differ. Advocacy groups for affected professions frame the change as an arbitrary downgrading that will reduce access to essential workforce training (nursing, public health, social work) and urge ED to revise the rule [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]. Some policy analysts and AEI argue the tightened definition is reasonable because many graduate degrees already borrow within standard limits and that focusing borrowing capacity on a shorter list of high‑need professions is defensible [9]. The Department of Education’s reported intent — to create clearer, consistent criteria and limit large borrowing for programs where most students don’t need it — aligns with the AEI framing [7] [9].
6. What this reporting does not say (limitations)
Available sources document the draft definition, negotiation dates in November 2025, and which programs organizations say were excluded, but they do not provide a single definitive, department‑published list showing every specific degree code reclassified as “non‑professional.” The exact, final list and the Department of Education’s forthcoming Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (and any 30‑day comment period) are referenced as next steps, so final determinations may change after publication and public comment [2] [7]. Therefore, claims about every single degree program reclassified should be treated as reporting of stakeholders’ interpretations unless the department’s formal list is released [7] [1].
7. What to watch next
Look for the Department of Education’s formal Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and the published professional‑degree list (expected after the RISE consensus); stakeholder comments and potential revisions will follow in the 30‑day public‑comment window referenced by ASPPH and in negotiators’ next steps [2] [7]. Legislative, advocacy, and higher‑education groups will likely press for changes based on workforce impact and borrowing data reflected in the AEI and university‑association analyses [9] [1].