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 programs were removed from the Department of Education's professional degree list in 2025?
Executive summary
The Department of Education’s negotiated rulemaking in November 2025 narrowed which graduate programs count as “professional degrees,” cutting the long public list substantially and recognizing only a limited set of programs as eligible for the higher professional-student loan limits (for example, the negotiated draft recognized 11 primary programs and some doctoral programs) [1]. Reporting and advocacy groups say this change would remove many health and public‑health programs — including advanced nursing, physician assistant, occupational therapy, audiology, clinical psychology, and the MPH/DrPH — from professional‑degree status, but available sources do not publish a single exhaustive list of every master’s and doctoral program removed [2] [3] [4] [5] [1].
1. What the Department actually did: a much smaller “professional” list
According to negotiators’ documents and institutional statements, the Reimagining and Improving Student Education (RISE) committee reached consensus on a tightly circumscribed definition of “professional degree,” recognizing just 11 primary programs plus select doctoral programs as professional under the draft rules — a dramatic reduction from the roughly 2,000 programs previously treated as professional in federal materials [1] [2]. NewAmerica’s explainer also notes the department relied on the statutory/regulatory definition that historically listed degrees such as pharmacy and dentistry as examples of professional degrees [6].
2. Which programs advocates say were excluded — and why that matters
National associations and social‑service/public‑health organizations say the proposed definition excludes several health‑service and public‑health credentials long treated as professional, including advanced nursing (nurse practitioner/advanced practice degrees), physician assistant programs, occupational therapy, audiology, clinical psychology, and public‑health degrees like the MPH and DrPH [2] [3] [4] [5]. Those groups warn the exclusions would lower federal loan limits for students in those programs — potentially reducing access to graduate education in key workforce areas [5] [2].
3. How the DOE justified narrowing the list
The Department and negotiators sought a clear, consistent test for what counts as a professional student/program tied to criteria such as whether the program “awards a professional degree,” uses CIP codes to group programs, is doctoral level in some cases, and has a path to licensure — a framework intended to reduce ad hoc distinctions and limit eligibility to programs that match those elements [7] [8] [9]. Forbes reports ED officials pushed for a limited list and insisted some concessions could be reversed absent consensus, reflecting administrative pressure on negotiators [9].
4. Conflicting framings: “removed” vs. “never listed”
Advocates and social posts frame the policy as “removing” or “excluding” many programs from professional status; news outlets likewise reported that nursing and other fields were no longer counted as professional degrees [4] [10]. But the department’s approach is better described as adopting a narrow, new definition and a much shorter list of recognized professional programs; whether a specific program was “removed” depends on its prior federal listing and how ED maps CIP codes to the new categories — details that the available sources have not published as a definitive master list [1] [6]. Therefore, available sources do not mention an authoritative, item‑by‑item catalog of every master’s and doctoral program that lost professional status [1] [2].
5. Stakes and likely impacts emphasized by critics
Higher‑education groups (AAU, CSWE, ASPPH, associations representing nursing and other professions) warn the rule will reduce access to the higher professional aggregate loan limit (often cited as $200,000 vs. lower caps for other graduate students), forcing students toward private loans or making attendance unaffordable — a particular concern for workforce areas already experiencing shortages [1] [7] [5] [2]. NewAmerica and others note litigation and further regulatory action are likely, meaning the practical effects could shift before July 2026 implementation dates cited in coverage [6].
6. What’s missing and how to follow up
Reporting and trade groups document which fields believe they are excluded, but none of the provided sources publishes an exhaustive, official list enumerating every master’s and doctoral program removed from “professional degree” status; the department’s final rule text mapping CIP codes to eligibility is the missing authoritative source [1] [9]. To get a definitive roster, check the Department of Education’s final negotiated‑rule documents and any CIP‑code tables it publishes, and watch statements from professional accreditors (CSWE, ASPPH) and university systems for program‑level determinations [7] [5].
Bottom line: multiple credible organizations report that many advanced health and public‑health programs were excluded from the Department’s tightened “professional degree” definition and that negotiators recognized only 11 primary programs plus some doctoral programs [1] [2] [5]. But an itemized federal list of every master’s and doctoral program removed is not provided in the available reporting, so a program‑by‑program confirmation requires consulting the Department’s final rule and CIP mappings [1] [9].