Bulgaria - AI in Education Strategy

Draft Strategy for the Development and Integration of Artificial Intelligence in Bulgarian Education

Проект на стратегия за развитие и интеграция на изкуствения интелект в българското образование

Bulgaria

RAI-BG-NA-DSDIAXX-2025
Draft(Being written or scoped)
PolicyGovernance and OversightData Protection and PrivacyConformity Assessment and Registration
Export PDF

A proposed national strategy to guide the safe, equitable and effective development and integration of artificial intelligence (AI) across Bulgarian education (pre‑primary, primary, secondary, vocational and higher education). The draft focuses on governance, teacher training, curricula updates, safe technical deployments, data protection for minors, pilot projects with national research partners and alignment with EU AI policy.

Overview

The Draft Strategy for the Development and Integration of Artificial Intelligence in Bulgarian Education (proposed May 2025) is a national policy instrument intended to provide a structured, rights-respecting pathway for the deployment of AI across pre‑school, school, vocational and higher education. It proposes an outcomes-focused approach that balances opportunities (personalized learning, administrative efficiency, new pedagogies) with systemic risks (privacy and child protection, bias in automated assessment, cybersecurity). The draft explicitly references and seeks operational alignment with Bulgaria’s national AI Concept and recent government-level action on AI. Official foundational documents and partnerships highlighted during the strategy’s formulation include the government’s national AI concept (Government Concept for AI to 2030) and nationally developed language-model and AI research capacity (e.g., INSAIT’s BgGPT project) that are referenced as strategic assets for education-focused deployments (INSAIT: BgGPT announcement). The overview foregrounds the draft’s dual goals: to (1) create a safe, transparent regulatory and operational context for AI in education; and (2) build capacity and infrastructure so that Bulgarian schools and higher education institutions can benefit from domestically aligned AI solutions.

Definitions

The draft proposes clear, education-specific definitions to avoid ambiguity: "Artificial Intelligence (AI) in education" covers algorithmic systems and tools that perform tasks normally requiring human cognition (e.g., language generation, predictive analytics, classification) when used in pedagogical, administrative or evaluative contexts. "High-stakes educational decision" is defined as any automated decision that materially affects student progression, certification, access to programmes, or disciplinary outcomes. "Provider" means any commercial or non-commercial entity supplying AI systems, components or services to educational institutions. "Personal data of minors" follows the GDPR definition but is treated with enhanced safeguards in the educational context. "Human-in-the-loop" indicates a design requirement where a qualified educator retains meaningful intervention and override capability for system outputs that affect learning or assessment.

Governance and Institutional Framework

The proposed governance model establishes an inter-ministerial Steering Board chaired by the Ministry of Education and Science and including representatives from the Commission for Personal Data Protection (CPDP), Ministry of Transport, Information Technology and Communications (where relevant for infrastructure), the Executive Agency for Education Programme management, and independent academic and civil-society experts. A specialized Secretariat hosted by the Ministry would coordinate implementation, maintain an approved-systems register and manage procurement guidelines. The draft calls for explicit Memoranda of Understanding with national research institutes (e.g., the Institute for Computer Science, Artificial Intelligence and Technology/INSAIT) to support safe model adaptation and auditing. It also proposes regional coordination points (via Regional Education Inspectorates) to support pilot rollouts and collect compliance data. Where commercial vendors are involved, the governance framework mandates contractual clauses covering data processing terms, audit rights, security obligations and liability allocations. To ensure transparency and stakeholder participation, the draft prescribes public consultation phases for major procurements and for updates to the national AI-in-education guidance. For international and EU policy coherence, the Secretariat is tasked with maintaining a regulatory watch function to track the EU AI Act and other binding obligations and to prepare conformity and registration pathways for identified high-risk systems (Ministry of Education and Science (sitemap and AI page)).

Key Focus Areas

The draft organizes policy and operational activity into six interdependent pillars: (1) Curriculum and competencies — integrating AI literacy (both "learning about AI" and "learning with AI") across subjects and age groups, and embedding critical thinking and digital citizenship; (2) Teacher and leader capacity — national CPD frameworks, accredited courses, and an approved-provider registry to scale high-quality training; (3) Technical infrastructure and procurement — secure connectivity, standardized APIs, local or contractual data residency and procurement templates favoring explainability and auditable systems; (4) Safe pedagogical deployments — protocols for pilot design, human oversight, student consent/notification, and limitations on algorithmic profiling for high‑stakes decisions; (5) Data protection and child safety — mandatory Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs) for systems processing pupil data, pseudonymization where possible, strict retention limits and parental information processes; (6) Research, evaluation and innovation — targeted funding for research partnerships (e.g., with INSAIT), open-model initiatives, and evidence-generation on learning outcomes and equity. Each pillar has associated deliverables: updated curriculum frameworks, an accredited teacher-training catalogue, technical procurement templates and minimum-security baselines, DPIA templates, pilot evaluation protocols and an independent monitoring dashboard. The strategy also emphasizes inclusion: targeted support for rural schools, assistive AI for learners with disabilities, and language adaptation for Bulgarian and minority languages.

Implementation Framework

The draft proposes a phased implementation: Phase 0 (preparation, months 0–6) establishes governance, publishes mandatory guidance (DPIA template, procurement templates, minimum-security checklist) and opens calls for pilot partners; Phase 1 (pilots, months 6–24) funds regionally representative pilots across different school types (urban/rural, general/professional, special educational needs) with independent evaluation; Phase 2 (scale-up, months 24–60) implements validated systems, supports procurement and teacher CPD at scale, and integrates AI literacy into national curricula; Phase 3 (consolidation, months 60+) focuses on continuous improvement, long-term funding and full alignment with EU conformity regimes. The draft requires providers of medium- and high-risk systems to submit technical documentation, third-party evaluation or conformity assessment (as the EU AI Act prescribes) and to agree to ongoing post-market monitoring obligations. It also proposes a national sandbox for research and testing under tightly controlled data governance, enabling safe model fine-tuning with anonymized educational datasets and partnerships with research institutions such as INSAIT. Funding mechanisms are a mix of national budget lines and EU co-financing (Education Programme 2021–2027). Procurement templates incorporate ethics-by-design and audit clauses, and require demonstration of bias‑mitigation testing and robustness checks prior to deployment.

Monitoring and Evaluation

Monitoring is two-fold: compliance monitoring (regulatory and contractual) and impact evaluation (learning outcomes, equity and safety metrics). The Secretariat will publish an annual Compliance Report summarizing DPIAs, audits, incidents, enforcement actions and the approved-systems register. Impact evaluation will be undertaken by independent academic teams, using standardized outcome and equity indicators and pre-/post-implementation study designs. The strategy envisages a national dashboard presenting anonymized learning analytics, distributional effects by socio-economic status, incidents of harm (e.g., inappropriate content or data breaches) and system performance metrics. Post-deployment, providers must submit routine safety testing reports and update documentation when models are materially changed. The strategy calls for an early-warning incident reporting mechanism for schools to notify the Secretariat and CPDP within defined timelines should breaches or harmful outcomes occur.

Penalties, Liability, and Appeals

The draft sets out a graduated enforcement regime, combining administrative measures and contractual remedies. Proposed penalties include suspension of system use in schools, removal from the Ministry’s approved-providers list, temporary or permanent exclusion from public procurement, and financial penalties under relevant administrative law (to be coordinated with the CPDP for GDPR-related fines). For contractual breaches, remedies include funding clawbacks, termination, and claims for damages. The strategy specifies an appeals process allowing vendors and schools to request review by an independent panel (including academic experts and civil-society representatives) prior to final sanctions. It also calls for clear parental and pupil redress routes — a formal complaints process managed by the Secretariat with referral pathways to CPDP or judicial remedies where personal-data or fundamental-rights violations are alleged.

Relationship to Other Instruments

The draft situates itself within Bulgaria’s broader regulatory environment and international obligations. It explicitly references the Government Concept on AI to 2030 and aligns education-specific measures with GDPR (data protection), national child-protection laws and procurement rules. The draft anticipates the EU AI Act (conformity assessment, categorization of high-risk systems, market surveillance obligations) and proposes a national registration and market surveillance layer for educational AI systems to complement EU processes. It also references national programmes such as the Education Programme 2021–2027 (EU funding) and existing teacher CPD registers (RQT), proposing interoperability between administrative registers and the new approved-systems registry. Where sectoral rules exist (e.g., health data in school-based health services), those regimes take precedence and are integrated through inter-agency cooperation agreements.

International Alignment

The draft emphasises alignment with EU regulatory developments (notably the EU AI Act), OECD guidance on AI in education and UNESCO recommendations on AI and education. It foresees active engagement with EU digital education initiatives, peer learning through the European Education Area and technical cooperation with pan-European research infrastructures. The strategy supports open-science approaches (where feasible) and encourages exportable, ethically designed Bulgarian AI solutions, including partnerships with national research centres (INSAIT) to develop language- and curriculum‑adapted models. It also proposes mechanisms to incorporate international best practices (bias testing, child-centred design, explainability standards) into national procurement and certification templates and to contribute Bulgarian case studies to EU policy discussions.

Implementation Timeline

PhaseDurationKey deliverables
Preparation (Phase 0)0–6 monthsGovernance body established; DPIA and procurement templates; pilot call launched
Pilots (Phase 1)6–24 months3–8 representative pilot projects; independent evaluations; teacher CPD pilots
Scale-up (Phase 2)24–60 monthsNational rollout of validated systems; curriculum updates; approved providers list
Consolidation (Phase 3)60+ monthsFull integration, continuous monitoring, EU conformity alignment

Compliance Checklist

RequirementWhoAction
Data Protection Impact AssessmentProviders & SchoolsComplete DPIA before pilot/production use; submit to Secretariat
Human-in-the-loop guaranteeProviders & SchoolsDesign systems to allow educator override on pedagogical decisions
Teacher CPDSchools/LEAsEnsure staff complete accredited training modules prior to use
Transparency & documentationProvidersPublish system capabilities, limitations, training data provenance (summary)
Security baselineProviders & SchoolsMeet minimum cybersecurity checklist and incident-reporting rules

Sources and References

SourceType
Правителството прие Концепция за развитието на изкуствения интелект в България до 2030 г. (Government Concept for AI to 2030)Primary Source
Ministry of Education and Science (sitemap and AI page)Primary Source
INSAIT: BgGPT announcementPrimary Source
RQT (Ministry CPD register) – examples of AI in-education CPD coursesPrimary Source
Plain English

This draft strategy outlines how Bulgaria plans to safely and effectively integrate artificial intelligence (AI) across all levels of its education system, from pre-school to higher education. It applies to all Bulgarian educational institutions, their staff and students, and crucially, to any commercial or non-commercial entity providing AI systems or services to these institutions.

The proposed policy introduces several key obligations for those developing and deploying AI in education. Providers and schools must conduct mandatory Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs) for any system processing student data, ensuring enhanced safeguards for minors and strict data retention limits. A core principle is "human-in-the-loop" design, meaning educators must retain meaningful intervention and override capabilities for any AI outputs affecting learning or assessment. The strategy also mandates extensive teacher training and curriculum updates to build AI literacy across all age groups. Importantly, it places limitations on using algorithmic profiling for "high-stakes educational decisions" that materially affect a student's progression, certification, or disciplinary outcomes.

As a draft, the strategy's exact effective date is unknown, but it proposes a phased implementation starting with governance setup and pilot projects over the first two years, followed by a national scale-up. Non-compliance could lead to significant penalties for providers and schools, including suspension of AI system use, removal from a national approved-providers list, exclusion from public procurement, and financial penalties, especially for data protection breaches. There will also be clear appeal and redress routes for vendors, schools, parents, and pupils.

A practical pitfall for AI system providers is the requirement to submit technical documentation, third-party evaluations, and agree to ongoing post-market monitoring for medium- and high-risk systems. This aligns with anticipated EU AI Act standards and means providers will need to demonstrate their systems are explainable, auditable, and have undergone bias-mitigation testing before deployment in Bulgarian schools.

Plain-English rewrite by Regulations.ai — not legal advice. Verify against the official text.

What you must do — compliance checklist

0 / 15 marked complete

Plain-English obligations under Bulgaria - AI in Education Strategy. Not legal advice — verify against the official text before relying on it.

  1. #1CriticalBefore pilot or production use

    Applies to: Providers and educational institutions.

    Complete DPIA before pilot/production use; submit to Secretariat
  2. #2CriticalBefore placing on market

    Applies to: Providers of AI systems for education.

    Design systems to allow educator override on pedagogical decisions
  3. #3CriticalBefore pilot or production use

    Applies to: Providers and educational institutions.

    Meet minimum cybersecurity checklist and incident-reporting rules
  4. #4CriticalBefore deployment

    Applies to: Providers and educational institutions.

    limitations on algorithmic profiling for high‑stakes decisions
  5. #5CriticalBefore placing on market

    Applies to: Providers of medium and high-risk AI systems.

    requires providers of medium- and high-risk systems to submit technical documentation, third-party evaluation or conformity assessment
  6. #6CriticalOngoing after deployment

    Applies to: Providers of medium and high-risk AI systems.

    agree to ongoing post-market monitoring obligations.
  7. #7CriticalBefore deployment

    Applies to: Providers of AI systems.

    require demonstration of bias‑mitigation testing and robustness checks prior to deployment.
  8. #8CriticalWithin defined timelines

    Applies to: Schools.

    an early-warning incident reporting mechanism for schools to notify the Secretariat and CPDP within defined timelines
  9. #9CriticalBefore placing on market

    Applies to: Providers of educational AI systems.

    proposes a national registration and market surveillance layer for educational AI systems to complement EU processes.
  10. #10CriticalBefore contract signing

    Applies to: Educational institutions procuring AI systems.

    the governance framework mandates contractual clauses covering data processing terms, audit rights, security obligations and liability allocations.
  11. #11CriticalBefore deployment/processing

    Applies to: Educational institutions and providers.

    pseudonymization where possible, strict retention limits and parental information processes
  12. #12ImportantPrior to use

    Applies to: Schools and Local Education Authorities.

    Ensure staff complete accredited training modules prior to use
  13. #13ImportantBefore placing on market

    Applies to: Providers of AI systems.

    Publish system capabilities, limitations, training data provenance (summary)
  14. #14ImportantBefore deployment

    Applies to: Educational institutions.

    parental information processes
  15. #15ImportantWithin 6 months

    Applies to: Secretariat.

    calls for clear parental and pupil redress routes — a formal complaints process managed by the Secretariat

© Regulations.AI — created on 13-Jun-2026