Catch up on what you missed with our Education newsletter, sent weekly.
This month, the U.S. Department of Education began rolling out a new accountability test that most colleges and universities will soon have to pass.
The test itself is simple: If an undergraduate program's graduates don't earn more than workers who never went to college, that program could be cut off from federal student loans. The same goes for any graduate program whose graduates earn less than someone with only a bachelor's degree.
"If a program cannot show that it leaves its graduates financially better off than if they had never enrolled, it should not be underwritten by federal taxpayers," said Under Secretary of Education Nicholas Kent in a recent statement.
But this new test, known as "do no harm," raises some thorny questions about the purpose of college. Like: Is it just about making more money?
Some advocates for postsecondary arts education think not.
"Earnings is only a small piece of that puzzle," said Lee Ann Scotto Adams, executive director of the Strategic National Arts Alumni Project (SNAAP), a nonprofit that studies the careers of arts graduates.
She and Doug Dempster, the president of SNAAP, worry the new test might lead colleges and universities to preemptively slash low-earning creative arts programs in music, theater, studio art and design. Dempster says that could lead to a further devaluing of jobs that are critical to a well-functioning society.
"We know we need nurses. We know we need journalists. We know we need early childhood educators," he said. "We don't know how many artists we need, but I can guarantee that if you eliminate access, we will impoverish our cultural life nationally."
How the new standard will work
The new earnings test comes courtesy of last year's One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which included a slew of big higher education policy changes meant to address rising concerns over the cost and value of college.
Higher education experts across the political spectrum told NPR the test sets a pretty reasonable expectation: In many states, federal data shows, graduates of bachelor programs will have to earn a minimum of about $30,000 to $41,000 a year for their program to pass.
"This is really a very low floor," said Christopher Madaio, a senior adviser at the nonprofit The Institute for College Access & Success. "I mean, high school earnings is not an exceedingly high metric for a program to meet."
Programs fail the test when they don't meet the earnings requirement for two out of three consecutive years.
The current test does not take student loan debt into account, which means there's no way to distinguish between a graduate who is struggling with low pay while being debt-free and a graduate who is struggling with low pay while also paying off tens of thousands of dollars in loans.
The Education Department says it will begin calculating the first year of graduate earnings in early 2027, and "some programs could be designated as low-earning outcome programs beginning in the 2028-2029 [financial aid] award year."
The kinds of programs that are likely to fail
According to Education Department estimates, the vast majority of undergraduate and graduate programs should easily pass the new earnings test.
But more than 800,000 students attend a program that would likely fail the measure, according to department data. Roughly half of those students are enrolled in for-profit schools, which already have a reputation for shortchanging students.
Other takeaways from the department's data:
- About 18% of undergraduate certificate programs, which often bill themselves as career-focused fast tracks, would fail the earnings test. Specifically, certificate programs in cosmetology and somatic body work have the highest predicted failure rates.
- Two-year associate degree programs have the next highest failure rate, at 6%. Associate programs that train specialized educators, including early childhood educators, are the most likely to fail.
- Most traditional, four-year bachelor programs fare well, with roughly 1% failing the earnings test. When these programs do fail, it's often in areas like theater, music and studio art.
- About 4% of master's degree programs would fail, with the highest failure rates for programs teaching mental and social health services.
For one music teacher, it was "never about the money"
Some of the United States' most prestigious music programs — known for training the country's most talented young musicians — are among the 14% of bachelor music programs predicted to fail the new earnings test, according to Education Department data. That includes The Juilliard School in New York City, the New England Conservatory in Boston and Indiana University Bloomington's Jacobs School of Music.
The undergraduate music program that Cindy Flores attended at Portland State University (PSU) also wouldn't pass. Flores teaches mariachi music to middle and high school students at Salem-Keizer Public Schools in Oregon's Willamette Valley.
Cindy Flores smiles as she teaches mariachi to students at McKay High School in Salem, Oregon. "If it wasn't for PSU and the loans I could get … I wouldn't be a Mexican American mariachi teacher for my Mexican American students," she said. Eli Imadali/OPB hide caption
Her path to becoming a full-time music teacher started with studying music education at PSU; then she got an educators license from Western Oregon University — and she used federal student loans to help pay for all of it.
She now holds close to $55,000 in federal student loan debt.
Flores said she wouldn't be where she is now without that access to federal aid.
"If it wasn't for PSU and the loans I could get … I wouldn't be a Mexican American mariachi teacher for my Mexican American students," she said.
But given the new federal test, future PSU music students might not have the same access to federal student loans that Flores did.
She said she feels lucky to have found a job that she's passionate about and that pays a living wage. But, for her, a career in music was about much more than a paycheck.
"It is never about the money," she said. "I realized I wanted to have a career in music when I was in the eighth grade, because every music teacher I had were such good role models in my life and I wanted to be part of that community."
Defining success in the arts
SNAAP's Lee Ann Scotto Adams said the federal government's one-size-fits-all accountability approach doesn't make sense for students graduating from creative arts programs because wages aren't the only measure of success for studio artists, musicians and designers.
"Yes, you need to earn money to make a living, but we see our creative workers want the ability to have independence in their work. They want jobs that are socially conscious. They want to make an impact culturally," Scotto Adams said. "These are all metrics that fall outside of just straightforward earnings metrics."
She also takes issue with looking at earnings in the first few years after graduation. Scotto Adams points to SNAAP survey data that shows arts graduates often have unpredictable incomes at the beginning of their careers, but their pay tends to stabilize and increase over time.
"Looking at earnings as the sole metric of success is very limited, and that's because artists have nonlinear careers," Scotto Adams said. "For the most part, people who graduate from these programs move into careers that they're personally satisfied with."
Students considering any of the at-risk programs won't immediately lose access to federal aid. While the accountability test is being rolled out this month, its implementation will be phased in over the next couple of years.