The U.S. Department of Education is considering changing the definition of who is considered a “professional” student. Experts say that could have dramatic consequences for the health care industry.
When Congress passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act last summer, included in the bill was a slate of new provisions aimed at updating the federal student aid system. The most contentious of these changes was putting new limits on how much graduate students can borrow in federal loans to fund their education.
Students pursuing master’s degrees will have a borrowing limit of $20,500 a year and $100,000 over a lifetime. Those working toward a professional degree — now limited to 11 specific degree paths — will have a higher annual limit of $50,000 and $200,000 in total in federal loans. The bill also eliminated the Grad Plus program, which allowed graduate students to borrow up to their full cost of attendance.
Those degree paths include medicine, pharmacy, dentistry, optometry, law, veterinary medicine, osteopathic medicine, podiatry, chiropractic, theology and clinical psychology.
Kristina Eitel works with students in her Pre-Nursing level 1 class at Tolles Career & Technical Center in Plain City. The U.S. Department of Education is considering changing the definition of who is considered a “professional” student. Experts say that could have dramatic consequences for the health care industry.
The federal definition of “professional” students in the Higher Education Act has traditionally served more as a guideline for colleges than a hard-and-fast rule. University officials could use it to deem their doctoral programs as professional and to distinguish between degrees that led to careers in the field or in academia.
“‘Professional student’ is not meant to say that only those with certain degrees are ‘professionals.’ It’s an arcane term that categorizes certain types of programs, and has taken on new importance because it will now affect how much a student can borrow in the federal program,” said Michele Zampini, associate vice president of federal policy and advocacy at The Institute for College Access & Success.
The proposed changes sparked a flurry of online criticism and misinformation late last year, with influencers, working professionals and advocacy groups taking issue with the narrowed definition of professional degrees. Some of the loudest opponents of the change were those in the nursing field.
“When I first heard that we were no longer considered ‘professional,’ I gasped,” said Valerie Fuller, president of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners.
Though nursing was not included in the Higher Education Act’s original language, Fuller said it was always been understood as a professional program because the list was non-exhaustive. She noted that other health care professions like occupational therapy, physical therapy and audiology were also excluded from the definition.
The Education Department has since clarified that the definition is not a value judgment on any profession, but rather as a way to determine which programs should qualify for higher loan limits.
In a “Myth vs. Fact” article published last year, the department said it is “important to remember that the loan limits are limited to graduate programs and have no impact on undergraduate nursing programs.” The vast majority of the current nursing workforce — 80%, according to Education Department figures — does not have a graduate degree.
While Fuller said that is true, she said the impact of this decision will be felt by both undergraduate and graduate students.
For one, undergraduate nursing students will be affected if there are fewer nursing faculty members available to teach, she said. Nursing faculty are required to hold at least a master’s degree, according to state law. Fuller said its estimate that more that 60,000 undergraduate student nurses nationwide could be turned away because of a lack of faculty.
Fewer nurses, nurse practitioners and physicians assistants means a narrower health care pipeline as Fuller said more health care professionals are retiring or otherwise leaving the field. That could be especially trying for states like Ohio with vast rural health care deserts, she said, where about 65% of medical needs are met by nurse practitioners and physician assistants instead of doctors.
Advertisement
The Bureau for Labor Statistics lists nurse practitioners, physician assistants and nursing instructors among the fastest growing occupations over the next decade.
“Our nation and our workforce can’t afford this,” she said.
The American Hospital Association also expressed concerns about other health care professions being excluded from the professional student definition.
“If adopted, this overly narrow definition would subject students in these fields to significantly lower borrowing limits, increasing out-of-pocket costs and deterring qualified applicants at a time of persistent health care workforce shortages,” the organization wrote in submitted testimony to the Education Department.
Higher education experts estimate a significant portion of students pursuing master’s degrees will be affected by the new limits. A recent analysis by the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia found that a third of graduate students with federal loans borrowed beyond the new limits. Students pursuing both professional and master’s degrees in health professions would be among the most affected, according to the study.
The Education Department said in January that the new loan caps “will compel colleges and universities to prioritize students, and incentivize institutions to reduce tuition and fees, making higher education more affordable and preventing students from being burdened with unmanageable debt after graduation.”
Zampini said it’s possible, but she doesn’t have high hopes. Rather, she expects more students to turn to the private borrowing market instead.
Fuller said this change has the potential to inhibit the future of advanced practice nursing.
“I couldn’t have done these degrees with this loan cap,” she said.
Education Department officials concluded with a 30-day public comment period on March 2 allowing stakeholders to voice their concerns. All that’s left for department officials to do is review those comments before finalizing the new rule, which is expected to go into effect July 1.
Zampini said the Education Department has leeway in its definition through the rule-making process and could make changes based on public comments.
“The department has some leeway in how it implements the change, especially since Congress itself didn’t make changes to the definition, only the implication of the definition, since the termination of the Graduate PLUS program that means some students will have access to more loans than others as a result of this definition,” she said. “We hope to see the department respond to concerns about how their proposal could limit access for students who can’t afford to pay for their graduate program without taking on loans.”
Higher education reporter Sheridan Hendrix can be reached at shendrix@dispatch.com and on Signal at @sheridan.120. You can follow her on Instagram at @sheridanwrites.
This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: New federal grad student loan limits could hit health care workforce
