Where can I find the official DOE 2025–2026 guidance document or appendix that lists professional degree titles?

1. Where to find the official DOE guidance: read the proposal and agency fact sheet

The Department of Education published its proposal and accompanying materials as part of negotiated rulemaking and press guidance — the agency’s own “Myth vs. Fact” fact sheet outlines the definition work and the department’s public rebuttals to claims about nursing and other programs ^[6]. Inside Higher Ed and other outlets summarize the ED proposal presented by Under Secretary Nicholas Kent that lists explicit eligibility criteria and a limited list of degree types that would automatically count as “professional” ^{[1] [3]}. For the precise regulatory text and any appendix listing program titles, the ED releases and negotiated‑rulemaking documents are the primary official sources cited in reporting ^{[1] [2]}.

2. What the official materials actually say about lists vs. criteria

Reporting shows the department emphasized criteria (e.g., skills beyond a bachelor’s degree, typical doctoral‑level outcome, licensure requirements) rather than a single exhaustive catalogue; ED’s proposal provides a short list of core program types and then applies criteria to other fields ^{[1] [3]}. Several organizations that attended the negotiated rulemaking say the committee agreed to recognize about 11 primary programs, with additional fields eligible if they meet the stated criteria, meaning ED’s approach is a hybrid of named programs plus criteria‑based qualification ^{[2] [3]}.

3. Competing interpretations: narrower list vs. agency denial of “exclusion” intent

Advocates and higher‑education groups report that the department’s approach would substantially reduce programs treated as professional (reporting cites reductions from roughly 2,000 to under 600), and they warn of downstream loan‑eligibility consequences for many health professions ^{[4] [2]}. The Department of Education pushes back, calling some claims misinformation and stressing that loan limits affect graduate borrowing amounts rather than an assertion that professions like nursing aren’t “professional” in any other legal sense ^[6]. Both positions appear in the record: critics point to practical exclusion via the new criteria ^{[2] [4]}; the agency emphasizes the statutory loan framework and disputes characterizations that it denigrates specific fields ^[6].

4. Where news outlets summarized an official appendix or list

Newsweek and other outlets published what they described as the “full list” of degrees not classed as professional under the administration’s reading; those pieces cite the regulatory text and experts but are summaries rather than copies of an ED appendix ^[7]. Inside Higher Ed and CNBC reported the department’s short named list and the criteria for additional programs — these are the most direct second‑hand routes to seeing which program types ED explicitly named in its proposal ^{[1] [3]}.

5. Practical next steps if you need the official appendix or list

Available sources advise consulting the Department of Education’s published proposal, negotiated‑rulemaking materials, and the ED fact sheet for the definitive language and any appendices the agency issued; reporting indicates the department planned follow‑up guidance to institutions (e.g., a Dear Colleague letter) to clarify legacy provisions and program classifications ^{[1] [8]}. If you need the formal appendix text as published by ED, current reporting points you to the ED proposal and negotiated rulemaking documents rather than to a separate, centrally published exhaustive catalogue ^{[1] [2]}.

Limitations and what’s not in the reporting: available sources do not include a downloadable PDF appendix with a complete, line‑by‑line national list of every program title made public by the Department of Education; instead, ED’s published proposal, its “Myth vs. Fact” page, and negotiated‑rulemaking summaries are the authoritative items referenced in coverage ^{[6] [1] [2]}.