Here is a number worth sitting with: 1.9 million. That is how many healthcare job openings the Bureau of Labor Statistics projects each year in the United States through 2034. Not cumulatively. Per year. The figure includes new positions created by a growing and aging population, but the larger share comes from replacement—workers retiring, burning out, moving on. Hospitals post signing bonuses for nurses. Rural clinics close for lack of staff. Emergency departments run on mandatory overtime and traveling contractors billed at three times the normal rate.

And yet millions of Americans remain locked out of stable careers, stopped by the assumption that healthcare demands a four-year degree and the financial wreckage it so often entails.

This assumption is wrong. Not entirely—physicians and pharmacists and physical therapists do need extensive academic preparation. But the healthcare system is not composed solely of doctors and nurses. It is a vast, layered ecosystem of specialized roles, many of which can be entered through vocational programs lasting a few weeks to a few years. These programs represent what may be the most efficient bridge between American economic anxiety and American medical need. They are not a consolation prize. They are, at their best, a remarkably precise form of education: training that matches the contours of a specific job, equipping students with exactly the competencies they will use on Monday morning.

To understand their promise, and their limitations, requires looking beyond salary tables and job projections—though we will examine those in detail—into deeper questions about what we value in education, in work, and in the people who care for us when we are most vulnerable.

* * *

Before Flexner, After Flexner

The division between "vocational" and "professional" healthcare training is a relatively recent invention. Before Abraham Flexner published his landmark 1910 report on medical education, the boundary between a physician and a medical tradesperson was porous and often meaningless.

As the sociologist Paul Starr has documented, nineteenth-century America was deeply distrustful of expertise. There were no effective medical licensing laws, no regulation of education. Entrepreneurs set up medical schools as money-making ventures, admitting anyone who could pay. Flexner—a former schoolteacher with no medical training himself—surveyed these institutions for the Carnegie Foundation and found them catastrophically deficient: students who had never treated a patient, schools without laboratories, curricula based entirely on lectures and memorization. "The schools were essentially private ventures, money-making in spirit and object," he wrote. "No applicant for instruction who could pay his fees or sign his note was turned down."

The Flexner Report transformed American medicine by insisting that physician training be university-based, scientifically grounded, and rigorously standardized. It was, in most respects, a necessary and humane reform. But it also had profound side effects.

By elevating the physician to a figure of scientific authority, the report implicitly demoted everyone else in the healthcare ecosystem. The nurse, the midwife, the dental practitioner, the laboratory technician—all became subordinate categories, their training understood as something less than real education. The historian David Labaree has argued that Americans have long been caught between viewing education as a public good and treating it as a private commodity, a means of social advancement. Healthcare vocational training sits uncomfortably at this intersection. It serves the public good in obvious ways—every phlebotomist drawing blood competently, every surgical technologist maintaining a sterile field—yet it is often perceived as a lesser form of learning, a concession to those who couldn't clear the academic bar.

This perception is changing, though not as quickly as it should. The catalyst, as so often in American life, is economic necessity.

* * *

The Landscape: From Four Weeks to Three Years

Healthcare spending now accounts for over eighteen percent of the nation's gross domestic product, and the aging of the baby-boom generation is placing extraordinary pressure on a system already strained by pandemic-era burnout. The BLS's most recent employment projections, covering 2024 through 2034, tell a consistent story across virtually every healthcare occupation: growth that is faster than average, often much faster, creating openings in every state, every county, every zip code. Healthcare is, in the economist's language, essentially recession-proof. People get sick in booms and busts alike.

The range of vocational pathways into this labor market is striking. Consider them roughly in order of training time.

Phlebotomy is the fastest entry point—four to eight weeks for a certificate. The work is precise and intimate: finding a vein, calming a nervous patient, handling biological material safely, maintaining meticulous records. The BLS reports a median annual wage of $43,660 as of May 2024, with six percent projected employment growth through 2034 and roughly 18,400 openings per year. Certification is not federally mandated but is increasingly expected by employers; California, Louisiana, Nevada, and Washington require it by law. The primary credentials—Certified Phlebotomy Technician through the National Healthcareer Association or the American Society for Clinical Pathology—serve as proof of competence in a field where competence is not abstract but immediately, physically consequential.

Medical billing and coding occupies a different niche entirely—cerebral rather than clinical, requiring analytical precision rather than manual dexterity. These specialists translate the complex narrative of a patient encounter into standardized alphanumeric codes that drive the multi-trillion-dollar American healthcare reimbursement system. Training runs four to six months. The BLS categorizes these workers as medical records specialists, reporting a median annual wage of $50,250 and projected growth of seven percent. What makes this career distinctive is its compatibility with remote work—a feature that became especially attractive during the pandemic. Key certifications include the Certified Professional Coder (CPC) from the American Academy of Professional Coders and the Certified Coding Specialist (CCS) from AHIMA. The AAPC's salary surveys consistently show certified coders earning fifteen to twenty percent more than their uncertified counterparts.

Note the pattern already emerging: short training, real wages, and a certification premium that rewards investment in credentials.

Medical assisting and dental assisting, each requiring nine to twelve months of training, represent the broad middle of the vocational healthcare landscape. Medical assistants earned a median of $44,200 in May 2024 and enjoy one of the highest growth projections in healthcare—twelve percent through 2034, translating to 112,300 openings annually. They perform a dual function: clinical tasks like taking vital signs and preparing patients for examinations, and administrative tasks like scheduling and records management. Dental assistants earned $47,200 at the median, with six percent growth. Their work is physical and collaborative—preparing instruments, assisting with procedures, managing infection control—and it exists at the intersection of oral health and systemic health, a connection that research has deepened as data linking gum disease to cardiovascular conditions has accumulated.

Pharmacy technicians represent yet another variation: a career that can be entered with a high school diploma and on-the-job training, though postsecondary programs of six to twelve months are increasingly the norm. The BLS reports a median wage of $43,460 and six percent projected growth. What distinguishes this field is scale—nearly 490,000 jobs in 2024—and the range of settings: retail chains, hospital compounding labs, mail-order operations. Certification through the Pharmacy Technician Certification Board has become a de facto requirement even in states that don't formally mandate it. And the role is evolving: as pharmacists take on more clinical responsibilities like administering vaccines, pharmacy technicians are absorbing more dispensing and inventory functions.

Then there are the higher-tier programs.

Surgical technologists earned a median of $62,830 in May 2024, with five percent projected growth. Their training typically takes twelve to twenty-four months and culminates in the Certified Surgical Technologist credential from the National Board of Surgical Technology and Surgical Assisting. The work demands physical endurance, emotional composure, and an almost ritualistic attention to protocol. A single lapse in sterile technique can introduce infection with devastating consequences. Seventy-one percent of surgical techs work in hospitals; shifts may include nights, weekends, holidays, and stretches longer than eight hours.

Dental hygienists and radiation therapists occupy the upper reaches of what can be achieved without a four-year degree, and their compensation reflects it. Dental hygienists earned a median of $94,260—nearly double the national median wage for all occupations—with seven percent projected growth. Radiation therapists earned $101,990, placing them firmly in six-figure territory. Both require an associate's degree, typically two to three years, and both involve licensure in most states.

These are not jobs that anyone should condescend to. A radiation therapist operates equipment that would have been unimaginable a generation ago, administering precise doses of ionizing radiation to cancer patients—work that is cognitively demanding, emotionally significant, and extremely well compensated. A dental hygienist's scope of practice is expanding; some states now allow hygienists with additional training to perform restorative services that were once exclusively the dentist's domain.

* * *

The Accreditation Question

Compensation and job projections, however encouraging, conceal a critical variable that can determine whether a vocational healthcare investment pays off or becomes an expensive mistake.

That variable is accreditation.

In few sectors of education does accreditation matter as much as it does in healthcare. The Commission on Accreditation of Allied Health Education Programs (CAAHEP) and the Accrediting Bureau of Health Education Schools (ABHES) serve as the primary programmatic accreditors for allied health education. Graduating from a program accredited by one of these bodies is often a prerequisite for sitting for national certification exams. The Certified Medical Assistant credential from the American Association of Medical Assistants requires graduation from a CAAHEP- or ABHES-accredited program. The Certified Surgical Technologist credential requires a CAAHEP-accredited surgical technology program. Radiation therapy programs must be accredited by the Joint Review Committee on Education in Radiologic Technology.

The practical consequence is stark. A student who enrolls in an unaccredited program may complete the same coursework, pass the same classes, develop the same skills—and then discover that she is ineligible for the credential employers require. The money is spent. The time is gone. The career door remains shut.

The landscape is further complicated by so-called accreditation mills—entities that mimic the language and appearance of recognized accreditors without having undergone evaluation by the U.S. Department of Education or the Council for Higher Education Accreditation. Students can verify accreditation status through the Department of Education's database, but doing so requires awareness that the problem exists. Many first-generation students navigating vocational education for the first time lack this awareness. As one allied health educator put it bluntly: "Buyer beware."

The broader lesson is that healthcare vocational education is heavily regulated not because regulators are paternalistic, but because the stakes are uniquely high. A coding bootcamp that teaches JavaScript imperfectly produces bad software. A medical program that trains phlebotomists imperfectly produces contaminated blood samples and missed diagnoses.

* * *

The Ladder: Stackable Credentials and Their Limits

Perhaps the most intellectually interesting feature of healthcare vocational education is its architecture of stackable credentials—the idea that each certificate or diploma is not a terminal destination but a platform from which to reach the next level.

The most well-known example is the nursing career ladder. A certified nursing assistant can complete training in as little as six weeks and begin working immediately, earning a median of $39,530 per year. From there, with roughly twelve months of additional education, a CNA can become a licensed practical nurse. An LPN can then pursue an associate degree in nursing—one to two more years—and become a registered nurse. Bridge programs have proliferated at community colleges precisely because they allow workers to earn while they learn, climbing each rung without sacrificing the income they need.

The concept is elegant. It works—for some.

A study cited by the New America Foundation found that only about twenty percent of certified nursing assistants in California went on to earn a higher credential within six years. Only about ten percent became registered nurses. The reasons are structural, not motivational. Nearly twenty percent of nursing-home CNAs live below the poverty line. Forty percent rely on public assistance. Their schedules are unpredictable patchworks of part-time shifts and mandatory overtime, leaving little time or energy for coursework.

The demographics sharpen the picture. Over half of CNAs are people of color, with more than a third identifying as Black—compared to a registered-nurse workforce that is seventy-five percent white. The promise of stackable credentials, in other words, is real but unevenly distributed, shaped by the same economic and racial inequities that pervade American life.

This does not mean the model should be abandoned. It means the model needs support: employer-sponsored tuition, flexible scheduling, childcare, cohort-based programs that move groups of workers through the pipeline together. Some institutions are experimenting. Pima Community College in Arizona offers a fully stackable nursing model—CNA through RN without switching institutions, with the option of a concurrent bachelor's degree through partner universities. The key insight is that stackability is not merely an educational design principle. It is a labor-market intervention, and it works only when the conditions surrounding education—wages, benefits, work schedules, family obligations—are addressed alongside the curriculum itself.

* * *

What Counts as Education?

There is a deeper question here, one that reaches beyond policy.

What does it mean to be educated for a healthcare career? The philosopher John Dewey argued that all genuine education comes through experience—that learning is not the passive absorption of information but the active transformation of experience into understanding. By this measure, vocational healthcare programs may be among the most authentically Deweyan forms of learning in American life. A surgical technology student who spends hours in a simulation lab practicing instrument passes, then moves into a clinical practicum in a real operating room, is engaged in learning that is simultaneously intellectual, physical, and moral. The stakes are palpable. The feedback is immediate. The connection between what is learned and what is done could not be more direct.

The sociologist Randall Collins has argued that much of what passes for education in modern societies is actually a mechanism for sorting people into status hierarchies—that degrees function less as evidence of competence than as signals of social position. Healthcare vocational training offers an interesting counterexample. A dental hygienist's license is not a status signal; it is evidence that the holder can perform a specific set of procedures safely and effectively. The credential and the competence are, if the program is well designed and properly accredited, genuinely aligned.

This is not true of all credentials in American life. Not of many bachelor's degrees, and certainly not of many graduate degrees. There is something almost refreshingly honest about a system in which the question "What can you do?" takes precedence over "Where did you go to school?"

And yet, honesty about the limitations of these pathways is equally important. A phlebotomist earning $43,660 per year is above the poverty line but not comfortably middle class, especially in high-cost metropolitan areas. A pharmacy technician at $43,460 faces similar constraints. These are dignified jobs with meaningful work, but they are not, on their own, tickets to economic security in the way that a registered nursing degree or a dental hygienist's license can be.

The promise of vocational healthcare education is most fully realized when it functions as a beginning, not an ending. The phlebotomist who discovers a love for laboratory science and pursues a medical laboratory technician degree. The medical assistant who uses clinical experience as a springboard to nursing school. The dental assistant who, inspired by daily proximity to oral health, earns a dental hygiene degree and nearly doubles her salary. These are not hypothetical scenarios. They are the lived trajectories of thousands of healthcare workers who entered through the narrowest vocational door and kept moving.

* * *

What Comes Next

The future of these careers is not without uncertainty. The BLS itself notes that the increasing adoption of AI-powered solutions may affect demand for medical coding specialists—one of the few healthcare vocational careers vulnerable to automation, precisely because it deals in the translation of information rather than the provision of physical care.

But for the vast majority of vocational healthcare roles, the outlook is shaped by a simple demographic reality: human bodies age, sicken, and require the attention of other human beings. No algorithm draws blood. No robot passes a scalpel in the correct orientation at the correct moment. No software calms a child who is terrified of the dentist's chair. The irreducible physicality and relationality of healthcare work is, for now and for the foreseeable future, its greatest protection against displacement.

We return, then, to the number with which we began. 1.9 million openings per year. Every year, people who might fill them are told—implicitly or explicitly—that they need a four-year degree they cannot afford and, in many cases, do not need.

The philosopher Simone Weil wrote that attention is the rarest and purest form of generosity. Healthcare vocational workers practice this generosity daily: in the steady hand that finds a vein, in the meticulous code that ensures a patient's treatment is covered, in the sterile field maintained through hours of standing. Their education may be brief. It is not shallow. It equips them to do something that matters, to do it well, and to do it immediately.

In a society that often confuses the length of education with its value, that is a distinction worth attending to.

Sources