The U.S. Department of Education has proposed a rule that will dramatically reshape who can afford to become a social worker in this country. By excluding the Master of Social Work and Doctor of Social Work from its definition of “professional degree” programs, the department would cap federal borrowing for future social workers far below what students in fields such as law, medicine, and pharmacy can access. This is not a technical footnote. It is a direct threat to a profession that millions of Americans rely on every day.
Under the proposed rule, social work students would be limited to borrowing roughly $20,500 a year, far below the actual cost of an accredited MSW program requiring advanced coursework, skill development, and hundreds of hours of supervised practicum. Meanwhile, students in medicine, law, dentistry, and clinical psychology would retain access to loan limits of up to $200,000. The department insists this is not a value judgment. It is impossible to read it any other way.
Becoming a social worker is not a casual academic pursuit. MSW students must complete more than 900 hours of supervised fieldwork — essentially a residency in its time demands, though without the compensation that comes with medical training. This is paired with specialized coursework and licensure exams. Calling this anything less than professional education ignores the training, regulation, and expertise the role requires.
As someone who has taught in MSW programs for nearly 30 years, I have seen the extraordinary commitment our students bring. Many work full-time, raise families, and complete demanding practicum hours in agencies that cannot afford to pay them. They come from the communities most affected by inequity and trauma, and they choose social work because they want to give back.
The consequences of this reclassification would fall hardest on exactly these students: those from low-income families, first-generation college attendees, students of color, LGBTQ students, and adult learners who disproportionately rely on federal loans because they lack financial safety nets. Forcing them into high-interest private debt — or out of the field altogether — will make social work less diverse and less effective.
This comes at a moment when the nation already faces severe shortages of social workers across child welfare, mental health, substance use treatment, schools, hospitals, veterans services, and housing programs. Restricting entry into the profession will shrink the pipeline further, meaning longer waitlists for mental health care, fewer clinicians in rural areas, higher caseloads, greater burnout, and reduced support for vulnerable people everywhere.
During COVID-19, social workers were designated essential workers for a reason. Since then, America’s reliance on trained social workers has only intensified.
If the department genuinely aims to reduce student debt, real solutions exist: addressing runaway tuition, expanding loan forgiveness for public service careers, investing in paid field placements, and strengthening workforce incentives in high-need communities.
By every reasonable measure, MSW and DSW programs are professional education. They prepare students for regulated practice, require advanced training, and serve as essential pathways to licensure. This proposal must be withdrawn. The regulation will soon be open for public comment, and I urge anyone who cares about mental health access, child welfare, or social services to make their voice heard.
America needs more social workers — and a pathway into the profession that expands opportunity, not one that shuts people out. Restricting federal loans for an already underpaid, urgently needed workforce will not reduce debt. It will only reduce opportunity.
Kilmnick is a clinical assistant professor at the University of Montana’s School of Social Work.
