The Department of Education’s exclusion of audiology from its new federal “professional degree” designation under RISE could prompt the profession to explore collaborative solutions and intensify advocating for policy change.
On May 1, the U.S. Department of Education published its final rule on federal graduate student loans and repayment plans, called Reimagining and Improving Student Education (RISE). Despite years of advocacy from audiology associations and numerous healthcare organizations, audiology was among those excluded from the federal government’s list of “professional degree” programs under this new rule. This decision could have significant financial implications for students entering the field, and therefore significant implications for the field of audiology as a whole.
While it’s disappointing, it might bring about a shift in thinking.
Implications for the Profession
Beginning July 1, 2026, students enrolled in 11 designated professional degree programs such as medicine, dentistry, pharmacy, optometry, and clinical psychology will be eligible for substantially higher federal student loan limits. These students can borrow up to $50,000 annually and $200,000 over the course of their education. In contrast, students pursuing degrees not classified as professional programs—including doctor of audiology—will be limited to $20,500 per year and $100,000 total.
For audiology students pursuing a doctor of audiology (AuD) degree, the exclusion is troubling. Today’s audiologists complete rigorous doctoral-level education, extensive clinical training, and state licensure requirements before entering practice. Yet under the new rule, audiology students will not have access to the higher loan thresholds reserved for students in “professional” graduate programs.
The immediate concern is affordability. As I’ve discussed here before, many AuD students already face significant educational costs, including tuition, clinical placements, and living expenses during years of study. For some prospective students, the financial barriers could become a deciding factor in whether they pursue audiology at all.
The long-term implications could extend beyond individual students. Professional organizations have warned that limiting access to affordable financing may reduce enrollment in audiology programs, contributing to a shortage of audiologists. There are already not enough audiology students graduating each year to replace the number of audiologists leaving the profession. At a time when demand for hearing and balance care continues to grow, fewer graduates entering the profession could ultimately affect patient access to services.
Now is the time to think about how to keep that from happening.
Drawing Support from Colleagues in the Field
Audiologists have very valuable skills, knowledge, and expertise that fulfill unique needs. However, they do not live in a vacuum. Many audiologists already work alongside audiology assistants and hearing instrument specialists, in addition to otolaryngologists. Can the field of audiology find more and better ways for people in these complementary roles to work together toward the larger goal of meeting people’s hearing care needs? I hope so.
Can the field of audiology find more and better ways for people in these complementary roles to work together toward the larger goal of meeting people’s hearing care needs? I hope so.
For audiology students, the story is not over. The Professional Student Degree Act (H.R. 6718), which was introduced to expand the definition of “professional degrees” under the Higher Education Act to include audiology and other professions, could pass. And multiple healthcare organizations and coalitions have already challenged the new rule through legal action, while several states have filed lawsuits over the exclusion of certain healthcare professions from the professional degree designation.
Whether those efforts will lead to policy changes remains uncertain. In the meantime, it’s important for all HCPs to work toward safeguarding hearing care access.
What do you think are the best ways to approach this challenge?
— Melanie Hamilton-Basich
