New BBB Federal Reg. would bar student loans to degree programs that don't increase earning power; Some colleges call that an ‘Existential Threat’

essentialsaltes said:

A proposed policy would label college programs “failing”—and block federal student loans—if graduates don’t out-earn peers without the degree.

The One Big Beautiful Bill that Congress passed last year included a requirement for an earnings test on undergraduate and graduate programs to determine their eligibility for federal loans.

In dozens of meetings with [DC] lawmakers, [a college association] pleaded their case against a new Department of Education regulation they say could crater their programs. The regulation would label a bachelor’s or master’s program a “failure” if its graduates don’t earn more than their peers without the degree.

Students in these “failing” programs would be ineligible for federal financial aid.

By the government’s own estimate, 53 percent of bachelor’s degreesfor religion and religious studies would be considered “failing” under this new metric. Those programs, which would not qualify for federal loans, are projected to have the highest failure rate of any undergraduate program.

For master’s degrees, the outlook is especially bleak: The government estimates that 89 percent of religion or religious studies degrees would be considered failing.

Christian Colleges Call New Federal Regulation an ‘Existential Threat’​

View attachment 379588
View attachment 379589

Click to expand...

iluvatar5150 said:

Huh, wuddya know. Maybe the stopped clock IS right twice a day.

Click to expand...

essentialsaltes said:

The regulation would label a bachelor’s or master’s program a “failure” if its graduates don’t earn more than their peers without the degree.

Click to expand...

MarcusGregor said:

However, I don't think the students should really be punished. They should be incentivized, as should the schools, to offer more practical degree programs. BUT, I also think there should be some room for niche programs. We need that kind of stuff to keep progressing and moving forward as a society.

Click to expand...

MarcusGregor said:

I'll be honest... this regulation, on its face, doesn't really seem like a necessarily bad one. There certainly are degree programs that are questionable in their efficacy. A couple are mentioned in the article. If a person with a degree in a field doesn't attract a higher salary in their field than someone without the degree, then what was the point of the degree?

Click to expand...

MarcusGregor said:

However, I don't think the students should really be punished. They should be incentivized, as should the schools, to offer more practical degree programs. BUT, I also think there should be some room for niche programs. We need that kind of stuff to keep progressing and moving forward as a society.

Click to expand...

Pommer said:

I am still forming my opinion of this “policy”…why is it in the best interests of a government to limit a University's “output”?
Is it really Government’s job to guide institutions of higher-learning to make sure that the “clients” of said institutions are going to be productive (high-paid) members of society?
This seems like a move towards “big-government”; why is that “okay” with conservatives now?

Click to expand...

Pommer said:

College has never been “the norm” for the majority of (any, I’d argue) society, but the bastion of the rich & privileged to forge networks and continue their upward journey through their respective cultures. If we (as a people) would like to make sure that universities are serving the public interest, then the laws that govern them should be more than prescriptions dressed in headsman’s garb.

Click to expand...