Tag: degree

  • The Rise of Degree Apprenticeships

    The Rise of Degree Apprenticeships

    Degree apprenticeships, programs that let students earn a college degree while gaining paid work experience, are a fast-growing model in education and workforce development. But new research from the think tank New America finds access to them remains limited and uneven.

    A report released this month by New America’s Center on Education & Labor found that about 350 institutions nationwide offered nearly 600 degree apprenticeship programs integrated with associate, bachelor’s or master’s degrees, preparing students for 91 different occupations.

    Among institutions that offer them, degree apprenticeships are concentrated in a small number of fields, with K–12 teaching and registered nursing accounting for the largest share.

    Ivy Love, a senior policy analyst at New America, said degree apprenticeships are especially valuable for states facing teacher or nurse shortages.

    “These are two rapidly growing professional areas for degree apprenticeships,” Love said. “There is an opportunity to make these paths into these professions more accessible.”

    Degree apprenticeships combine paid work experience, on-the-job training, employer-aligned classroom instruction and recognized credentials with an associate, bachelor’s or master’s degree. Learners participate in work-based learning while completing coursework—known as related technical instruction—at a college or university that aligns with what they are learning on the job.

    These programs are emerging at a moment of growing skepticism about the value of a college degree. In New America’s Varying Degrees 2025 survey, just 52 percent of adults—a slim majority—said a postsecondary credential is the minimum level of education they believe a close family member needs to ensure financial security.

    At the same time, New America found that earning a postsecondary degree remains the surest path to economic stability and family-supporting wages. In 2024, households with two adults needed to earn more than $100,000 a year to support two children—a level of pay that typically requires at least an associate degree, the report said.

    Lancy Downs, a senior policy analyst at New America, said one story that stood out in the report came from an administrator at an Alabama community college where more than half the students attend part-time. The administrator explained that this is because school is optional, but work is not.

    “We see [degree apprenticeships] as an effective way to upskill people into higher-paying jobs with more upward mobility,” Downs said. “They also help bring more people into professions well suited for this model, allowing students to earn a paycheck, attend school and take on minimal debt at the same time.”

    The findings: The report found that programs that prepare K–12 teachers made up 156 of the nearly 600 degree apprenticeships identified, while registered nursing programs accounted for 51. Other positions represented include electro-mechanical and mechatronics technologists and technicians, electricians, and industrial engineering technologists and technicians.

    With the exception of teaching, most degree apprenticeship opportunities are concentrated at the associate-degree level. Two-thirds of the programs awarded associate degrees, 29 percent awarded bachelor’s degrees and 4 percent awarded master’s degrees, according to the report. Most associate-level credentials were associate of applied science degrees.

    Love said occupational requirements are the main factor driving these patterns: Careers in teaching typically require a bachelor’s degree, while nursing careers can be started with an associate degree.

    “Community colleges have been really involved in degree apprenticeships, many of them for quite some time,” Love said. She noted that although some universities offer degree apprenticeships as well, community colleges’ “workforce orientation” gives them more familiarity with the model, and two-year institutions are more likely to have close connections to employers in technical fields.

    The report also found that rural and small-town colleges are disproportionately represented among institutions offering teacher apprenticeships, suggesting degree apprenticeships in teaching are shaped by local workforce needs.

    Downs said she suspects the prevalence of the “grow-your-own” model in teacher training explains this pattern.

    “It’s possible that the prevalence of those already in teaching contributed to the overrepresentation in many rural communities,” Downs said.

    The implications: Downs said degree apprenticeships’ small program size, reliance on public funding and other structural factors must be addressed for programs to succeed.

    “We don’t really fund degree apprenticeships the same way we fund K–12 schools or even higher education,” Downs said, noting that most funding comes from “one-off” federal grants.

    “More funding is needed to get [degree apprenticeship] programs up and off the ground and figure out how to run them sustainably,” she said.

    Beyond funding, Downs said the programs also need to be thoughtfully designed to meet the needs of the students they serve.

    “If you can get credit for what you’re learning on the job, you don’t have to sit in a classroom to learn the same thing again. It makes the programs more efficient for learners and employers, which we support,” Downs said.

    Love said the degree apprenticeship model allows students to combine the benefits of work and education in a single pathway.

    “This is a ‘yes, and’ strategy,” Love said. “Through [degree apprenticeship] programs, we hope to learn more in the coming years about how they open pathways to important professions while giving people another option that brings the best of both worlds together.”

    Get more content like this directly to your inbox. Subscribe here.

    Source link

  • Some Grad Schools Open to Admitting 3-Year Degree Holders

    Some Grad Schools Open to Admitting 3-Year Degree Holders

    Madeleine Green, executive director of the College-in-3 Exchange, called the findings “a positive indicator.”

    Photo illustration by Justin Morrison/Inside Higher Ed | Chris Ryan/OJO Images/Getty Images

    As a handful of colleges debuted 90-credit degrees this fall, one of the questions most top of mind for students, institutions and accreditors alike was whether graduate schools would admit students with these unusual degrees.

    Now, the College-in-3 Exchange, an organization that advocates for the creation of such programs, has compiled some evidence that they will. The nonprofit conducted a study interviewing 10 graduate school admissions leaders from a range of institution types about how they would hypothetically respond if an applicant had a bachelor’s degree with fewer than the traditional 120 credits. The study was led by Christa Lee Olson, a senior program specialist with College-in-3.

    The majority of respondents said their policies currently preclude reduced-credit degrees, but several said they could see that changing in the future, especially as three-year degrees become more common. Two of the interviewees reported that their institutions had changed their policies to accommodate international three-year degrees, which are common in countries like the U.K. Some also indicated that while they don’t accept reduced-credit degrees, they have mechanisms to make exceptions for specific applicants, especially at the request of a faculty member.

    It’s an important step for College-in-3. As accreditors and state higher education leaders evaluate whether to allow institutions to launch three-year programs, one of their top concerns has been whether employers and graduate schools will accept the shortened degrees. Madeleine Green, the executive director of College-in-3, said she believes this report will serve as evidence to institutions, accreditors and state leaders that graduate programs are open to considering these degrees.

    “Because College-in-3 is such a young movement, and we don’t have evidence of what happens to the graduates … this is suggestive evidence,” she said. “We plan to disseminate this, share it with the states, share it with our members and use it as a positive indicator.”

    The recent surge in three-year programs seems to have shifted the perspectives of some of the admissions leaders included in the report. One respondent noted that institutions near them are creating reduced-credit degrees; when asked if their institution will consider accepting these three-year degrees, “the respondent replied that the value of the bachelor’s degree is not based on the arbitrary length of the degree but rather on how the program enables a student’s learning and development,” the report noted.

    Three respondents also said that their own institution was considering or in the process of developing reduced-credit programs.

    But not every participant felt positively about three-year degrees; one “expressed caution” about the programs and said they’re taking their cues from accreditors, according to the study. (Many accreditors have begun accepting 90-credit degrees, although in some cases, the programs are considered pilots that will be evaluated for their efficacy in several years.)

    The question of whether graduate schools would admit students with a reduced-credit degree speaks to one of the most fundamental challenges of graduate admissions, said Julie Posselt, a scholar of higher education at the University of Southern California and the author of Inside Graduate Admissions: Merit, Diversity, and Faculty Gatekeeping (2016, Harvard University Press): How does one translate the information on a transcript into information about a student’s knowledge and abilities?

    Posselt told Inside Higher Ed she could imagine master’s programs—many of which are revenue generators for their institutions—being open to admitting students with three-year degrees. But she has doubts that doctoral programs, especially at selective institutions, would be as welcoming.

    “A fundamental challenge of selection is that no two humans are created equal or have fundamentally equivalent records. All we have is the information the applicant gives us. Professors have a tendency when making decisions, and admissions decision-makers of all kinds have a tendency, to rely on the metrics they have in front of them,” she said. “Especially in the current environment and in selective programs, I think it’s unlikely to be that any three-year program is likely to generate the same perceived competence, excellence and academic preparation.”

    For that to change, the degrees would not only have to become significantly more common, she said; they would have to crop up at institutions perceived as prestigious.

    One of the respondents in the College-in-3 report shared a similar perspective, emphasizing “the value of engaging high-profile institutions in this conversation to elevate the status of these degrees.”

    The report concludes with recommendations about how to support students in three-year programs who hope to pursue graduate education. Along with continuing to familiarize the higher education world with the idea of three-year degrees, the report’s author also encouraged programs to prepare their students to explain the structure of their degree to graduate schools. In addition, it floated the idea of creating agreements between three-year degree programs and graduate programs.

    “Conventional wisdom tells us that colleges and universities are very slow to change but change they do,” the report concludes. “Although ten interviews did not provide exhaustive information, the willingness of the respondents to consider different pathways to graduate studies suggests that master’s and even doctoral degrees will not be beyond the reach of 3-year degree program graduates.”

    Source link

  • Apparently, Civil Discourse Requires a Bachelor’s Degree

    Apparently, Civil Discourse Requires a Bachelor’s Degree

    I have to hand it to CC Daily; its article on the recent round of FIPSE grants had a killer closing sentence.

    The recent round of grants from the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education had focus areas in AI, accreditation and civil discourse. As CC Daily succinctly noted, “No community colleges received awards in the civil discourse category.”

    None. Not one, out of over 1,000 institutions across the country. Zero.

    I know it’s not for lack of applications.

    They were well represented among the awards focused on workforce training but were shut out when it came to addressing larger social issues.

    To be fair, FIPSE wasn’t alone in ignoring community colleges. As Karen Stout pointed out this weekend, The Chronicle’s quarter-century forecast drew on 50 experts from across higher education to talk about emerging trends; only one was from a community college. We have over 40 percent of the students in the country, but received 2 percent of the attention. Two is greater than zero, granted, but come on.

    Who is at the table will affect what gets considered important. From the Chronicle group, for instance, you wouldn’t know that dual enrollment has quietly but steadily redefined the barriers between secondary and postsecondary education around the country and that the funding structures and academic policies in many states (cough Pennsylvania cough) haven’t kept up. That has consequences in myriad ways, ranging from faculty credential requirements to residency-based tuition to the impact on grad school applications for students who got B’s at age 14. Business models based on a previous reality struggle under the emerging one. That’s invisible to people at think tanks who focus on disciplining “the woke left,” but it’s real and it matters.

    The civil discourse piece was just the latest in a long line of reminders that many policymakers see community colleges as workforce training centers and nothing else. Higher education, in their view, belongs to those who can afford it; our job is to produce skilled proles who will produce profit, do what they’re told and stay quiet.

    Well, no. Community colleges are, among other things, colleges; they embody the belief that nothing is too aspirational for anybody, including people from lower-income backgrounds. Workforce training is a key component of the mission, but it isn’t the entire mission—and it shouldn’t be. Our students have just as much dignity, humanity and perspective as anyone else’s.

    Last week I had the opportunity to see a new slate of officers of student government get sworn in. It’s always a happy occasion. Over the course of my career, though, I’ve seen the tone of those events shift. Twenty years ago, I heard students talk about making a difference. Ten years ago, I heard them talk about building their résumés. Now I hear them talk about making friends. That very human need for connection isn’t unique to four-year schools. Community colleges are, among other things, places where people from different backgrounds interact on equal footing, often for the first time. It’s where students learn to practice civil discourse on the ground. Interactions like those are crucial parts of educating a citizenry. That’s part of our mission, and I offer it without apology.

    An old saying suggests that if you aren’t at the table, you’re on the menu. Community colleges deserve to be at the table. When we aren’t, the entire conversation is distorted.

    Source link

  • Lawmakers say advanced nursing should count as a ‘professional degree’

    Lawmakers say advanced nursing should count as a ‘professional degree’

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Dive Brief:

    • A bipartisan group of lawmakers is advocating for the U.S. Department of Education to classify graduate nursing degrees as “professional degrees” in response to potential regulatory language that would place a lower limit on how much advanced nursing students could borrow.
    • Under a proposed framework, advanced nursing programs would be classified as “graduate degrees” rather than “professional degrees,” which would cap student loans for new nursing borrowers at $100,000 total, rather than the higher limit of $200,000 that will be in place for professional programs.
    • In a letter sent to Education Under Secretary Nicholas Kent on Friday, lawmakers said the framework could exacerbate an existing worker shortage in the industry. “At a time when our nation is facing a health care shortage, especially in primary care, now is not the time to cut off the student pipeline to these programs,” the letter said.

    Dive Insight:

    This summer, Republicans passed a massive spending package that will cap graduate student loans to $100,000 for most programs but $200,000 for professional degrees. The Education Department recently brought higher education stakeholders for a process known as negotiated rulemaking to determine which programs would qualify as professional degrees, and they reached consensus on regulatory language that would exclude nursing. 

    The letter, signed by over 100 lawmakers and led by Sens. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., and Roger Wicker, R-Miss., and Reps. Jen Kiggans, R-Va., and Suzanne Bonamici, D-Ore., argues the proposed changes would undermine the “largest health care workforce in the United States.”

    Under the changes, students would receive higher borrowing limits — $50,000 annually —  for pursuing degrees like Doctors of Pharmacy, Dentistry, Medicine and Clinical Psychology that are deemed professional.

    Students pursuing other advanced nursing degrees like Masters of Science in Nursing, Doctors of Nursing Practice and Doctors of Philosophy in Nursing would be subject to lower aid borrowing limits of $20,500 annually or $100,000 in total.

    The Education Department argued the reforms — which also include eliminating other federal aid programs and sunsetting some student loan repayment plans — place “commonsense limits and guardrails” on student loan borrowing and simplify repayments.

    However, lawmakers say the lower aid caps will force new students to take out additional student loans and make it more difficult for nurses to join the healthcare workforce, which is already suffering from shortages exacerbated by burnout during the coronavirus pandemic.

    For example, the loan caps wouldn’t meet most Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetist programs, which can cost over $200,000.

    “CRNA programs have shown to be a critical return on investment, with default rates near zero percent, and a workforce that overwhelmingly provides anesthesia to rural and underserved communities where higher cost physicians do not practice,” the letter says.

    Jeopardizing advanced nursing degrees could also impact primary care, according to the letter. Over half of Medicare beneficiaries received primary care from a nurse practitioner or physician associate, according to research cited by the lawmakers. In rural communities, over 60% of Medicare patients receive those services from a nurse practitioner or physician associate.

    “Nurses and nurse faculty make up the backbone of our health system,” the lawmakers said. “As such, post-baccalaureate nursing degrees should be treated equally to other accredited post-baccalaureate health profession degrees.”

    Editor’s note: Natalie Schwartz contributed to this article. 

    Source link

  • Loan and Degree Insurance May Be Self-Defeating (opinion)

    Loan and Degree Insurance May Be Self-Defeating (opinion)

    Imagine you are the parent of an incoming college student who wants to study theology, ranked among the lowest-paid majors after graduation. You’re proud of their conviction, but also anxious because friends and family keep reminding you that theology is a major for which career prospects are uncertain at best. Then, in the thick of college decision season, you learn that the college your child is considering offers something called “degree insurance”: If your graduate doesn’t earn above a set threshold, the program will step in to cover part of the gap.

    The promise is meant to ease parents’ and students’ fears. Yet, it raises a deeper question: Why would a college degree, still the surest path to economic advancement and long-term financial stability, suddenly require insurance at all?

    Across the country, colleges and universities are rolling out a new suite of financial products targeting undergraduates, marketed as “loan” and “degree” insurance. Loan repayment assistant programs (LRAPs), sometimes also called loan repayment guarantees, are a form of loan insurance that protect students against default: If a graduate doesn’t earn above a certain threshold, their student loan payments are reimbursed to a certain amount. Degree insurance is a mechanism akin to public “wage insurance” programs, where if a graduate makes less than the average income in their field adjusted for regional differences, the insurance would “top up” the difference in wages for a period of time.

    These two tools have distinct origins and underlying rationales. Loan Repayment Assistance Programs (LRAPs) originated in Yale Law School in the 1980s, and spread to other law schools, as the rising cost of legal education began to deter graduates from pursuing lower-paying public interest careers. While they began as internal sources of funding, the privatization of LRAP offerings and search for profit have pushed the industry to expand into new markets, namely undergraduate education. Indeed, Ardeo Education Solutions, an early and prominent player in this sector, was founded by Yale Law graduate Peter Samuelson, who himself benefited from Yale’s loan assistance program. Ardeo positions itself as reassuring families about the risks of taking on debt in order to pay for undergraduate education, “increasing access to the life-changing impact of higher education,” and freeing students from having to choose “between their passions and a paycheck.”

    Degree insurance products take a different approach. Degree Insurance, which counts Augustana College in Illinois as a client, draws on the cultural cachet of the American dream to market itself as an income equalizer; its flagship product, “American Dream Insurance,” guarantees “equal pay for equal study,” where “no graduate will have to earn less than their peers, regardless of race or gender, because everyone will have the same safety net.” This is insurance against the uncertainties and inequalities of the labor market as well as against individual weaknesses of any particular candidate.

    While the current scope and reach of this sector is challenging to assess, Ardeo Education advertises that it’s provided LRAPs to more than 30,000 students at more than 200 American colleges and universities. Participating institutions range from a number of small, faith-based colleges like Lyon College and MidAmerica Nazarene University to a public research university like Eastern Michigan University. Eligibility for repayment assistance usually requires graduation from the offering institution, full-time work (30+ hours/week), and staying below the income cap.

    The extension of LRAPs and degree insurance into undergraduate programs represents a new dimension of risk management in higher education, which has gone through several phases since it began in earnest in the late 20th century when colleges and universities started responding to increased personal injury and campus safety litigation. These risk management programs, tailored to protect institutions, eventually expanded to include Title IX, Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements, environmental regulations, reputation management, crisis communications, cybersecurity and, most relevantly for this topic, financial sustainability. Loan and degree insurance represent the latest iteration of such efforts.

    For now, colleges typically pay for these programs, though it is unclear how much of the cost is passed on to students through tuition. How students are selected for inclusion in these programs is also opaque. Institutions are free to determine which students and majors are offered the program. Augustana College’s website, for example, says that it offers degree insurance at no direct cost to the student, but participation is on an invitation-only basis.

    There are, of course, reasons to defend these programs. Scrutiny of the student loan system, which has resulted in a student debt crisis, has intensified across the political spectrum, as policymakers from both parties recognize the harm it has caused (even as they disagree on the solutions). LRAPs and degree insurance may decrease the rate of loan default and reassure low-income families who were unable to save for college and are averse to taking on loans to pay for college.

    In an environment marked by increasing competition for students, admissions professionals see offering LRAPs and degree insurance as a competitive advantage. Loan repayment and degree insurance plans also encourage students not only to enroll in college in general but to pursue degrees with more challenging career prospects, which are also often the ones at risk of being cut due to low enrollment. This is increasingly relevant given the almost daily news of program closures.

    The arrival of these financial instruments is perhaps an understandable response to the rising cost of a college education, increased competition for students, overall wage stagnation and shifting public views about the purpose, value and outcomes of higher education. The adoption of these tools, however, is not simply driven by the current circulation of the idea of college education as a risk; it also further reinforces that view.

    These programs are not simply a new and neutral financial option for students. By extending the logics of institutional risk management to the economic futures of students, these tools cement the troubling, and potentially self-defeating, idea that a college degree itself is a financial risk requiring protection rather than the most reliable path to upward mobility and a critical component of our continued economic and cultural prosperity. Their adoption by colleges and universities is a reflection of the “short-termism” that has increasingly marked higher education strategy. As more institutions inevitably adopt these programs, it is unclear how long they will remain a competitive advantage. Furthermore, as the trend spreads, we may see the labor market respond, with employers lowering entry-level salaries even further as they take into account insurance payouts. Indeed, like many aspects of higher education today, it feels like a race to the bottom.

    Comparisons between insurance products and other forms of income or employment assurances are difficult to make. Should families prioritize colleges with strong outcomes (e.g., graduation rates upward of 70 percent and reassuring post-graduation employment statistics), robust alumni networks, or loan and insurance programs? It is also too early to tell what the consequences of transferring the risk to third parties, a common higher education risk management strategy, might be for students and institutions in the long term. And, it further financializes education, such that in the process of character formation, managing risk, rather than other values or logics, becomes central to identity.

    Colleges and universities might want to ask themselves whether treating college degrees as a risk serves their long-term interests. Loan and degree insurance products may deliver short-term enrollment gains, ease families’ anxieties, and even encourage students to pursue majors often viewed as less “marketable.” In the long-term, however, these strategies relieve the pressure to address underlying structural challenges such as rising costs, stagnant wages and a flawed loan system. Ultimately, they undermine our ability to make the case for higher education as a public good, thus putting the future of the entire endeavor at risk.

    Margarita Rayzberg is an assistant professor of sociology and criminology at Valparaiso University.

    Source link

  • What would education’s omission as a ‘professional degree’ mean?

    What would education’s omission as a ‘professional degree’ mean?

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Pursuing a doctoral degree in the social justice for education program at the University of San Diego was an opportunity that second-year student Reyan Warren long thought would never be afforded to her.

    So when Warren — who also currently teaches high school English in a rural school community in Adelanto, California — heard that the U.S. Department of Education is proposing the omission of education from programs considered to be a “professional degree,” she said the proposal made her feel sad. 

    A negotiating committee convened by the Education Department agreed to a proposal this month that excludes education — among other programs — from being considered a “professional degree,” according to the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators. 

    A lowered cap on federal student loans available to certain graduate students was approved in the “One Big, Beautiful Bill,” which established the term “professional degrees” to be used internally by the agency to distinguish programs that qualify for higher student loan limits, according to an Education Department fact sheet released Nov. 24. The law also directed the Education Department to identify “professional degree” programs that will be eligible for the higher federal lending limits.

    The definition as it applies to those federal loan limits is not final and will be open for discussion and public comment when a proposed rule is published in the Federal Register as the agency finalizes the regulation early next year, according to the department.

    Only graduate and doctoral students pursuing professions under this proposed definition — such as medicine, dentistry or law — would be eligible for higher federal lending limits capped at $200,000. Students outside of those defined professions would be capped at $100,000 in federal loans for their graduate or doctoral programs. 

    The new limits will begin in July 2026 for new borrowers, with an annual cap at $20,500 for graduate students and $50,000 for professional students.

    Undergraduate students would “generally” not be affected by these new lending limits, the Education Department said in its fact sheet. 

    How this could impact the K-12 pipeline

    During the 2022-23 school year, there were 90,710 bachelor’s degrees in education conferred nationwide compared to 143,669 master’s degrees, according to an analysis of federal data by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. 

    A separate AACTE analysis of the most recent federal data from 2019-20 found that doctoral students in education are the most likely to borrow near or over the proposed $100,000 federal loan cap. Doctoral students in the 75th percentile of borrowers typically took out about $89,000 in cumulative loans, while the 90th percentile took out $115,000. 

    For those pursuing education master’s degrees in 2019-20, students in the 75th percentile borrowed nearly $39,000 in total graduate school loans, compared to $61,500 in the 90th percentile, according to AACTE. 

    Still, the median amount borrowed five years ago was well below the new $100,000 limit for all graduate and doctoral students in the 50th percentile of borrowers, AACTE found. 

    The proposed exclusion of education from being considered a professional degree could jeopardize the pipeline for high-quality teachers as well as school and district leaders, said Jacqueline King, consultant for research, policy and advocacy at AACTE. 

    Warren agreed with that concern and said the proposed loan limits could also lead to “fewer candidates, fewer future leaders, fewer diverse voices, fewer doctoral students, fewer highly educated and highly prepared educators in our classrooms.” Warren added that her incurred loans since graduate school alone are also encroaching on a total of roughly $100,000. 

    Data from the Education Department also shows that 90% of education graduate students borrow below the annual loan limit and would not be affected by the caps, the agency told K-12 Dive on Tuesday. 

    Source link

  • ED’s Problematic “Professional Degree” Definition (opinion)

    ED’s Problematic “Professional Degree” Definition (opinion)

    In early November, following extensive debate by the RISE negotiated rule-making committee, the U.S. Department of Education proposed a definition of “professional degree” for federal student aid that could deter talented students from pursuing health-care careers. The proposed rule, stemming from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, would leave students in many fields critical for our future health-care workforce subject to a $20,500-per-year federal student loan cap.

    Physician assistant/associate programs stand to be strongly affected. These programs are intensive, highly structured and clinically immersive. Students complete rigorous professional-level coursework while rotating through multiple clinical sites to gain hands-on experience. Unlike in many graduate programs, PA students cannot work during their studies, as clinical rotations are full-time and often require travel across multiple locations. Within this context, federal student aid is not optional; it is the lifeline that allows students to stay in their programs and complete the training they have worked for years to achieve. Without it, some students will have no choice but to abandon the profession entirely.

    The financial gap under the department’s proposal is striking. Tuition alone —not including expenses like housing, food and other needs—for PA programs often exceeds $90,000 for the duration of the program due to the unique costs associated with health professional education, such as simulation technology and clinical placement expenses. Under the department’s proposal, federal student aid would only cover a fraction of this amount. For students without access to private resources, the gap will likely be insurmountable.

    These challenges are not hypothetical. A student accepted into a PA program may face a choice to take on crippling private debt or leave the career track entirely. Students in nurse practitioner, physical therapy and occupational therapy programs face the same reality. Each of these programs combines intense academic and clinical requirements, preparing graduates for immediate entry into practice. Federal policy must recognize this reality if it hopes to support the next generation of health-care professionals.

    The consequences extend far beyond individual students. PA students, along with other health professions students, are essential to addressing workforce shortages, especially in rural and underserved areas. Every student forced to forgo pursuing a PA program due to financial barriers represents a future provider absent from the health-care system. At a time when demand for care is rising, federal policy that fails to recognize these students risks worsening shortages and limiting access to care for patients who need it most.

    The Department of Education has the opportunity to correct this in the final rule. Explicitly including PA students, along with nurse practitioners, physical therapists, occupational therapists and other professions that meet the statutory criteria for professional degrees would ensure that aid reaches students fully committed to intensive, licensure-preparing programs. Recognition will reduce financial stress, allow students to focus on becoming high-quality health-care providers and maintain the pipeline of skilled professionals critical to patient care.

    Including PA and other health professions students in the department’s final rule is both necessary and prudent. It allows students to complete programs they cannot otherwise afford, protects the future health-care workforce and ensures that communities continue to have access to vital services. The Department of Education can achieve clarity, fairness and meaningful impact by explicitly recognizing these professional students.

    Sara Fletcher is chief executive officer of the PA Education Association.

    Source link

  • I earned my associate degree while still in high school, and it changed my life

    I earned my associate degree while still in high school, and it changed my life

    by Maxwell Fjeld, The Hechinger Report
    December 1, 2025

    Earning an associate degree alongside my high school diploma was an ambitious goal that turned into a positive high school experience for me. By taking on the responsibilities of a college student, I further prepared myself for life after high school.  

    I needed to plan out my own days. I needed to keep myself on task. I needed to learn how to monitor and juggle due dates, lecture times and exams while ensuring that my extracurricular activities did not create conflicts. 

    All of this was life-changing for a rural Minnesota high school student. Dual enrollment through Minnesota’s PSEO program saved me time and money and helped me explore my interests and narrow my focus to business management. After three years of earning dual credits as a high school student, I graduated from community college and was the student speaker at the commencement earlier this year in May — one month before graduating from high school. 

    As a student earning college credits while still in high school, I gained exposure to different career fields and developed a passion for civic engagement. At the beginning of my senior year, while taking courses at the local community and technical college, I was elected to serve as that school’s first cross-campus student body president. 

    Related: A lot goes on in classrooms from kindergarten to high school. Keep up with our free weekly newsletter on K-12 education.  

    While most states have dual-enrollment programs, Minnesota’s support for its PSEO students stands out. As policymakers consider legislative and funding initiatives to strengthen dual enrollment in other states, I believe that three features of our program could provide a blueprint for states that want to do more. 

    First, the college credits I earned are transferable and meet degree requirements.  

    Second, the PSEO program permitted me to take enough credits each semester to earn my associate degree. While the number of dual-enrollment credits high school students can earn varies by state and program, when strict limitations are set on those numbers, the program can become a barrier to higher education instead of an alternate pathway.  

    Third, Minnesota’s PSEO program limits the cost burden placed on students. With rising costs and logistical challenges to pursuing higher education credentials, the head start that students can create for themselves via loosened restrictions on dual-enrollment credits can make a real financial impact, especially for students like me from small towns. 

    Dual-enrollment costs vary significantly from state to state, with some programs charging for tuition, fees, textbooks and other college costs. In Minnesota, those costs are covered by the Department of Education. In addition, if families meet income requirements, the expenses incurred by students for education-related transportation are also covered.  

    If I did not have state support, I would not have been able to participate in the program. Financial support is a crucial component to being a successful dual-enrollment student. When the barrier of cost is removed, American families benefit, especially students from low-income, rural and farming backgrounds.  

    Early exposure to college helped me choose my major by taking college classes to experiment — for free. When I first started, I was interested in computer science as a major. After taking a computer science class and then an economics class the following semester, I chose business as my major.  

    The ability to explore different fields of study was cost-saving and game-changing for me and is an opportunity that could be just as beneficial for other students. 

    Targeted investments in programs like this have benefited many students, including my father in the 1990s. His dual-enrollment experience allowed him to get a head start on his education and gain valuable life skills at a young age and is a great example of dual enrollment’s potential generational impact. 

    Related: STUDENT VOICE: I’m thriving in my dual-enrollment program, but it could be a whole lot better 

    When dual-enrollment students receive guidance and support, it can be transformational. Early exposure to college introduced me to college-level opportunities. As student government president, I went to Washington, D.C., to attend a national student summit. I was able to meet with congressional office staffers and advocate for today’s students and for federal investment in dual-enrollment programs, explaining my story and raising awareness. 

    The daily life of high school is draining for some and can be devastating for others. I had many friends who came to believe that the bullying, peer-pressure and culture they experienced in high school would continue in college, so they deemed higher education “not worth it.” 

    Through dual enrollment, I saw the difference in culture; students who face burnout from daily high school life can refocus and feel good about their futures again. 

    Congress can help state legislatures by establishing strong dual-enrollment programs nationwide. With adequate government support, dual-enrollment programs can help students from all walks of life and increase college graduation rates. If all states offer access to the same opportunities that I had in high school, our next generation will be better prepared for the workforce and more successful. 

    Maxwell Fjeld is pursuing his bachelor’s degree at the University of Minnesota Twin Cities’ Carlson School of Management after earning an associate degree upon high school graduation through dual enrollment. He is also a student ambassador fellow at Today’s Students Coalition. 

    Contact the opinion editor at [email protected]. 

    This story about dual-enrollment programs was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for Hechinger’s weekly newsletter. 

    This <a target=”_blank” href=”https://hechingerreport.org/student-voice-i-earned-my-associate-degree-while-still-in-high-school-and-it-changed-my-life/”>article</a> first appeared on <a target=”_blank” href=”https://hechingerreport.org”>The Hechinger Report</a> and is republished here under a <a target=”_blank” href=”https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/”>Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src=”https://i0.wp.com/hechingerreport.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/cropped-favicon.jpg?fit=150%2C150&amp;ssl=1″ style=”width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;”>

    <img id=”republication-tracker-tool-source” src=”https://hechingerreport.org/?republication-pixel=true&post=113590&amp;ga4=G-03KPHXDF3H” style=”width:1px;height:1px;”><script> PARSELY = { autotrack: false, onload: function() { PARSELY.beacon.trackPageView({ url: “https://hechingerreport.org/student-voice-i-earned-my-associate-degree-while-still-in-high-school-and-it-changed-my-life/”, urlref: window.location.href }); } } </script> <script id=”parsely-cfg” src=”//cdn.parsely.com/keys/hechingerreport.org/p.js”></script>

    Source link

  • What to Know About the Definition of Professional Degree

    What to Know About the Definition of Professional Degree

    The Trump administration is soon expected to propose a plan that would cap loans for a number of advanced degrees—including master’s and doctoral degrees in nursing—and it’s gone viral on social media.

    From TikTok to Instagram, to local news headlines, the plan set off a storm of online criticism as influencers and advocacy groups take issue with the supposed declassification of certain degrees. But defining programs as professional or graduate isn’t a debate about social prestige or cultural characterization; it’s a debate about access to student loans, and now the Education Department is saying it’s time to “set the record straight.”

    “Certain progressive voices have been fear mongering about the Department of Education supposedly excluding nursing degrees from being eligible for graduate student loans,” the department said in a news release Monday. “This is misinformation.”

    The commentators are concerned about an upcoming federal rule, prompted by Congress’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, that could limit student loan access depending on what post-baccalaureate program a student enrolls in. Certain advanced degrees like dentistry, law or a masters in divinity will be eligible for higher student loans. (An advisory committee approved a draft of the rule in early November, which is slated to be formally proposed on the Federal Register in early 2026.)

    Inside Higher Ed has been reporting on the new loan limits for months and closely followed the negotiations over which programs should be considered as professional. So, here’s what you need to know about how the loan limits really work.

    Graduate v. Professional Is a Technical Term

    Many public critics of the proposal argue that not considering careers like nursing, speech pathology, teaching and social work as professionals would be a disrespectful blow to the dignity of students, many of whom are women, and the perceived value of the pathways they are pursuing. Some have even made uninformed suggestions that this could interfere with a students’ ability to gain licensure or a job after graduation. But those arguments imply that the terms have to do with a student’s level of competency or the capacity of a degree program, which they don’t.

    @vickichanmd

    Starting July 2026, “professional” students will be eligible for 50K a year in federal loans, while “nonprofessional” students $20,500. Coincidence that the fields chosen to get less than half the support are predominantly female? 🤔 ETA: I know I forgot some degrees, especially public health. So sorry for the oversight, 😥 should have been at the top of the list after the pandem¡c.

    ♬ original sound – dj auxlord

    Instead, the department would use the labels of professional and graduate, as defined in the department’s draft rule, to determine how much students can borrow.

    Here’s how that will work. If a degree falls in one of the 11 main categories deemed professional, a student pursuing it can take out up to $50,000 a year for four years or $200,000 total. Meanwhile, a student in any other graduate degree program can only borrow $20,500 per year or $100,000.

    The lifelong limit for all borrowers is $257,500 and that includes any loans from a bachelor’s degree. So, if a student were to pursue both a Master’s in public health and a medical degree, or any other combination of degrees from the two categories, they would not be able to combine the loan limits to access $300,000 total.

    Before the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, students in any post-baccalaureate program could borrow up to the cost of attendance through a program known as Grad PLUS. Students in a master’s or doctoral program who already took out a Grad PLUS loan prior to July 1, 2026 will maintain access to loans for up to the full cost of attendance as long as they stay within the same program, under the draft plan.

    And prior to the legislation, the term professional had little substantial meaning. The federal definition in the Higher Education Act served more as a guideline for colleges as they decided whether to self-identify their doctoral programs as professional and to distinguish between degrees that led to a career in the field or in academia. Master’s degrees, like a master’s of science in nursing, had no reason to call themselves professional.

    It’s not clear how the loan caps will affect students. Critics of the plan argue they’ll make financing education more difficult and lead to a shortage of employees, and some research has suggested that students will have to turn to private loans to pay for the program. However, suggesting that certain job titles are being “declassified” or will “no longer” be deemed credible is misleading.

    @reygantawney Replying to @Kayla Perkins NP programs are NOT included in the DOEs proposed “professional degree” definition, meaning NP students fall under lower loan caps. This proposal isn’t final, but the implications could be massive for students and the healthcare workforce. #departmentofeducation #nursepractitionerstudent #nursepractitioner #healthcare #healthcareworker ♬ original sound – REYGAN TAWNEY

    What Programs Count as Professional?

    So, the real question then becomes which programs count as professional and how did the Trump administration decide that definition?

    Currently, 11 main degrees would be considered professional under the draft rule. Those degrees, almost all of which are doctoral, include: medicine, osteopathic medicine, podiatry, chiropractic, optometry, pharmacy, dentistry, veterinary medicine, law, theology, and clinical psychology. All but one—clinical psychology—were noted in the HEA definition.

    Clinical psychology was added during the negotiating process, which wrapped up in early November. One member of the negotiating committee argued that there was a high demand for medical providers to treat patients with mental health challenges, particularly veterans diagnosed with PTSD.

    @urnurseguru NPs weren’t ‘removed’ from anything except a loan bucket they never belonged in 😂💅 Stop confusing LOAN categories with your PROFESSIONAL status. #nursingtiktok #nursepractitioner #studentloans #npschool #urnurseguru ♬ original sound – URNurseGuru

    Similar arguments were made for other health care roles like nurses, audiologists and occupational therapists and some committee members warned that adding one category and not others could make the proposal vulnerable to legal challenges. But the Trump administration wanted to keep the new legal definition almost as narrow as possible.

    Multiple sources familiar with the negotiation process told Inside Higher Ed that committee members warned the department that certain industry groups would push back.

    “I was absolutely expecting something like this,” one source said. “The only question was which profession would break through. But among the politically savvy people I talked to we were betting nurses.”

    Why Did ED Define Professional This Way?

    Education Department officials repeatedly said during the negotiations that the narrow definition reflected Congress’s intent—to limit federal spending on graduate student loans.

    Between 2000 and 2020, the number of Americans who had taken out federal student loans doubled from about 21 million to about 45 million and the amount they owed skyrocketed from $387 billion to $1.8 trillion, according to a 2024 report from the Brookings Institute, a nonpartisan D.C. think tank.

    And research from multiple sources shows that much of that increase in debt can be traced back to graduate students. A 2023 report from the Department of Education showed that while the amount of undergraduate loans decreased between 2010 and 2021, the amount of graduate student loans steadily grew. And though individual graduate students only make up about 21 percent of all borrowers, they could soon be responsible for the majority of all outstanding debt.

    Another study from the Georgetown Center on Education and the Workforce shows that between 2000 and 2024, the median net tuition and fees among graduate degree programs have more than tripled and the median debt principal among graduate borrowers has grown from $34,000 to $50,000.

    The Trump administration and Republicans on Capitol Hill say that results from a lack of limits on federal loans. They argue that with essentially unlimited graduate loans, colleges and universities have no incentive to keep costs low and students are convinced to take out more debt than they can handle. By ending Grad PLUS and limiting larger loans to a narrow group of degrees, they say, the goal is to drive down college costs and lower government spending.

    “Placing a cap on loans will push the remaining graduate nursing programs to reduce their program costs, ensuring that nurses will not be saddled with unmanageable student loan debt,” the department’s fact sheet noted.

    What Consequences Could It Cause?

    But the online critics and other advocates question whether the loan caps will actually reduce student debt and drive down college costs.

    They are worried that instead of lowering college costs, it will force more students—particularly low-income, first generation students and students of color—to depend on the private loan market.

    For many of those borrowers, depending on private lenders could mean higher interest rates and more debt to be paid off. But some, especially those with low credit scores or no credit history, might not be able to access any loan and then wouldn’t be able to pursue certain degrees.

    Critics also argue that the loan cap will not only limit opportunities for socioeconomic mobility, but also cause workforce shortages in high-demand, high-cost careers such as nursing, physical therapy and audiology as well as high-demand, low-return careers such as social work and education.

    @addieruckman The US Department of Education is considering new rules that would significantly change the definition of what is deemed a “professional degree,” affecting graduate programs and potentially capping federal loan amounts for those not meeting the new definition. This debate over which programs qualify for “professional” status could likely impact students’ access and ability to afford their education. What we do is so important, even if the government doesn’t recognize it!! #departmentofeducation #slp #slpsoftiktok #CapCut ♬ original sound – ｃａｓｅｙ

    “At a time when healthcare in our country faces a historic nurse shortage and rising demands, limiting nurses’ access to funding for graduate education threatens the very foundation of patient care,” said Jennifer Mensik Kennedy, president of the American Nurses Association, which is a vocal critic of the draft rule. “In many communities across the country, particularly in rural and underserved areas, advanced practice registered nurses ensure access to essential, high-quality care that would otherwise be unavailable.”

    The Education Department countered that internal data indicates 95 percent of nursing students borrow below the $20,500 annual loan limit and wouldn’t be affected by the new cap. They also added that this loan cap only applies to post-baccalaureate degrees; about 80 percent of the nursing workforce just has an associate’s degree in nursing or a bachelor’s of science in nursing—both of which can lead to certification as a registered nurse.

    The department’s proposal could still be amended before it takes effect. The public will have at least 30 days to comment on the plan once it’s posted to the Federal Register. After the public comment period ends, ED officials will have to review and respond to the comments before issuing a final rule. But most higher ed experts don’t expect anything in the proposal to change no matter how many critiques ED receives.

    After that, Congress could still make changes to the law or a new administration could opt to rewrite the definition. But that would take time and likely more Democrats in office, so significant change isn’t anticipated any time soon.



    Source link

  • As more question the value of a degree, colleges fight to prove their return on investment

    As more question the value of a degree, colleges fight to prove their return on investment

    This story was produced by the Associated Press and reprinted with permission. 

    WASHINGTON – For a generation of young Americans, choosing where to go to college — or whether to go at all — has become a complex calculation of costs and benefits that often revolves around a single question: Is the degree worth its price?

    Public confidence in higher education has plummeted in recent years amid high tuition prices, skyrocketing student loans and a dismal job market — plus ideological concerns from conservatives. Now, colleges are scrambling to prove their value to students.

    Borrowed from the business world, the term “return on investment” has been plastered on college advertisements across the U.S. A battery of new rankings grade campuses on the financial benefits they deliver. States such as Colorado have started publishing yearly reports on the monetary payoff of college, and Texas now factors it into calculations for how much taxpayer money goes to community colleges.

    “Students are becoming more aware of the times when college doesn’t pay off,” said Preston Cooper, who has studied college ROI at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank. “It’s front of mind for universities today in a way that it was not necessarily 15, 20 years ago.”

    Related: Interested in more news about colleges and universities? Subscribe to our free biweekly higher education newsletter. 

    A wide body of research indicates a bachelor’s degree still pays off, at least on average and in the long run. Yet there’s growing recognition that not all degrees lead to a good salary, and even some that seem like a good bet are becoming riskier as graduates face one of the toughest job markets in years. 

    A new analysis released Thursday by the Strada Education Foundation finds 70 percent of recent public university graduates can expect a positive return within 10 years — meaning their earnings over a decade will exceed that of a typical high school graduate by an amount greater than the cost of their degree. Yet it varies by state, from 53 percent in North Dakota to 82 percent in Washington, D.C. States where college is more affordable have fared better, the report says.

    It’s a critical issue for families who wonder how college tuition prices could ever pay off, said Emilia Mattucci, a high school counselor at East Allegheny schools, near Pittsburgh. More than two-thirds of her school’s students come from low-income families, and many aren’t willing to take on the level of debt that past generations accepted.

    Instead, more are heading to technical schools or the trades and passing on four-year universities, she said.

    “A lot of families are just saying they can’t afford it, or they don’t want to go into debt for years and years and years,” she said.

    Education Secretary Linda McMahon has been among those questioning the need for a four-year degree. Speaking at the Reagan Institute think tank in September, McMahon praised programs that prepare students for careers right out of high school.

    “I’m not saying kids shouldn’t go to college,” she said. “I’m just saying all kids don’t have to go in order to be successful.”

    Related: OPINION: College is worth it for most students, but its benefits are not equitable

    American higher education has been grappling with both sides of the ROI equation — tuition costs and graduate earnings. It’s becoming even more important as colleges compete for decreasing numbers of college-age students as a result of falling birth rates.

    Tuition rates have stayed flat on many campuses in recent years to address affordability concerns, and many private colleges have lowered their sticker prices in an effort to better reflect the cost most students actually pay after factoring in financial aid.

    The other part of the equation — making sure graduates land good jobs — is more complicated.

    A group of college presidents recently met at Gallup’s Washington headquarters to study public polling on higher education. One of the chief reasons for flagging confidence is a perception that colleges aren’t giving graduates the skills employers need, said Kevin Guskiewicz, president of Michigan State University, one of the leaders at the meeting.

    “We’re trying to get out in front of that,” he said.

    The issue has been a priority for Guskiewicz since he arrived on campus last year. He gathered a council of Michigan business leaders to identify skills that graduates will need for jobs, from agriculture to banking. The goal is to mold degree programs to the job market’s needs and to get students internships and work experience that can lead to a job.

    Related: What’s a college degree worth? States start to demand colleges share the data

    Bridging the gap to the job market has been a persistent struggle for U.S. colleges, said Matt Sigelman, president of the Burning Glass Institute, a think tank that studies the workforce. Last year the institute, partnering with Strada researchers, found 52 percent of recent college graduates were in jobs that didn’t require a degree. Even higher-demand fields, such as education and nursing, had large numbers of graduates in that situation.

    “No programs are immune, and no schools are immune,” Sigelman said. 

    The federal government has been trying to fix the problem for decades, going back to President Barack Obama’s administration. A federal rule first established in 2011 aimed to cut federal money to college programs that leave graduates with low earnings, though it primarily targeted for-profit colleges.

    A Republican reconciliation bill passed this year takes a wider view, requiring most colleges to hit earnings standards to be eligible for federal funding. The goal is to make sure college graduates end up earning more than those without a degree. 

    Others see transparency as a key solution.

    For decades, students had little way to know whether graduates of specific degree programs were landing good jobs after college. That started to change with the College Scorecard in 2015, a federal website that shares broad earnings outcomes for college programs. More recently, bipartisan legislation in Congress has sought to give the public even more detailed data.

    Lawmakers in North Carolina ordered a 2023 study on the financial return for degrees across the state’s public universities. It found that 93 percent produced a positive return, meaning graduates were expected to earn more over their lives than someone without a similar degree.

    The data is available to the public, showing, for example, that undergraduate degrees in applied math and business tend to have high returns at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, while graduate degrees in psychology and foreign languages often don’t.

    Colleges are belatedly realizing how important that kind of data is to students and their families, said Lee Roberts, chancellor of UNC-Chapel Hill, in an interview.

    “In uncertain times, students are even more focused — I would say rightly so — on what their job prospects are going to be,” he added. “So I think colleges and universities really owe students and their families this data.”

    The Associated Press’ education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

    The Strada Education Foundation, whose research is mentioned in this story, is one of the many funders of The Hechinger Report.

    The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn’t mean it’s free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.

    Join us today.

    Source link