The U.S. Department of Education has released new rules that narrow which graduate programs qualify as “professional degrees,” a change that would significantly reduce the number of programs eligible for higher federal loan limits.
Health advocates, educators and health care workers seeking advanced education are pushing back, warning that excluding fields such as nursing and other specialized programs could create new financial barriers for students pursuing essential careers.
As for nursing, concerns have been raised that the policy shift could cause a domino effect by restricting loan access, worsening workforce shortages across health care settings and making clinical training more expensive for students.
Meanwhile, BDOPro held a lengthy conversation with Dr. Shawnte’ Elbert, owner of Elbert Innovative Solutions and a health education professor. She said that the changes should not be taken lightly, even as the Trump administration has released a fact sheet about the proposal.
Elbert, known as Dr. E, expounded on the controversy surrounding the policy shift tied to the GOP‑backed One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which overhauls federal student loans.
“The controversy is that many health-related fields—such as nursing graduate programs and public health degrees like the MPH and DrPH—have been placed in the lower, non-professional tier, even though they’re required for regulated, high-skill careers,” Elbert said. “That means students in those fields lose access to higher federal loan limits and to Grad PLUS, raising serious concerns about affordability and workforce supply.”
She added, “Starting July 1, 2026, graduate students will no longer have access to Grad PLUS loans, which used to cover the full cost of attendance. Instead, there will be strict caps on how much they can borrow with standard federal loans. Under current rulemaking, ‘professional’ programs (like medicine and law) can borrow up to about $50,000 per year and $200,000 total, while all other graduate students are capped at $20,500 per year and $100,000 total.”
Focusing on the ‘real problems’
Critics argue that the DOE is focusing on the wrong issue. When asked why they view the policy as a distraction from more pressing problems, Dr. E said the “real problems we should be solving” include the high cost of graduate education, “predatory, low-quality programs” and the “underfunding of public health, nursing, behavioral health and education pipelines,” among others.
“The Department says this is about preventing ‘over-borrowing’ and pushing programs to lower their costs. But tuition is set by institutions, not by students, and the law doesn’t actually require schools to reduce prices,” Dr. E said. “What it does is limit how much students can borrow, especially in programs now labeled ‘non-professional.’ “
She added, “Public health and nursing organizations argue that excluding their degrees from the professional category does nothing to address degree mills and instead makes accredited, high-quality programs harder to access. So yes, it’s a distraction.”
DOE defends its decision
Elbert argued that the new rules create “the appearance of fiscal responsibility while sidestepping the deeper structural issues in higher education finance and quality control.”
As for the DOE’s fact sheet, which argues the policy does not devalue any field, Elbert pushed back, saying the department’s own framing misses the real‑world impact.
“The Department’s Myth vs. Fact sheet stresses that ‘professional degree’ is just an internal loan category and ‘not a value judgment’ about a field,” she said. “But in practice, when the federal government gives medicine and law access to double the borrowing capacity, eliminates Grad PLUS across the board, and places nursing, public health, social work, counseling and other critical health fields in the lower tier, the message students, universities and the public hear is: ‘These fields are not worth the same level of federal investment.’”
She added that “professional associations” have warned that “excluding nursing and public health from the professional category ‘jeopardizes efforts to strengthen and expand the workforce’ and ‘threatens access to federal loans’ needed for these careers.’”
Dr. E said: “So, regardless of the FAQ language, the policy signals lower status and priority for these professions in both perception and policy.”
Black and brown communities impacted
The groups most affected by the policy shift are graduate students in public health (MPH/DrPH), nursing, social work, counseling and other health professions now treated as nonprofessional for loan purposes, according to Elbert.
She also pointed to students of color and those from low-income backgrounds, “who are more likely to rely heavily on federal loans and to enroll in these programs,” saying they will be especially threatened by the changes. “Public health groups explicitly warn that the change will ‘increase financial barriers for students from diverse and historically excluded communities,’ “ Dr. E said.
Nurse shortages
Nurse unions such as National Nurses United and other health care advocates have long warned that public health and nursing shortages are already straining the U.S. workforce.
According to Elbert, financial aid experts and health organizations caution that the policy could “deter students from entering or completing these degrees, push others toward high‑interest private loans with fewer protections, and lead some institutions to shrink or close programs if enrollment drops.”
“The U.S. is already facing deep workforce shortages in nursing and public health. Multiple analyses project that over a million RNs will retire or leave practice by 2030, and public health agencies report tens of thousands of vacant positions nationwide,” Elbert said. “In short, fewer people can afford to get trained, just as more senior professionals are retiring. That’s how shortages deepen.”
Could the Trump administration reverse this policy?
Elbert said a full reversal would be difficult because the changes are already written into federal law. She noted that the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed in July 2025, ends Grad PLUS and creates separate loan caps for graduate and professional students starting July 1, 2026.
Changing that structure, she said, would require Congress to amend or replace the law.
Because of that, she explained, the real window for influence is now — during the rulemaking process and while Congress is still hearing from affected communities.
“Could the Trump administration revise its definition before implementation? Yes. The department could change course in response to public comment, stakeholder pressure, or political negotiations,” Dr. E said.
“Public health and nursing organizations are actively urging revisions to include their degrees in the professional category. However, unless there is a significant policy shift, the core structure—elimination of Grad PLUS and new loan caps—will take effect for new federal graduate borrowers on or after July 1, 2026.”