In April 2025 the Ministry of Education and eight other departments jointly issued the Opinion on Accelerating Education Digitalisation (Jiao Ban [2025] No. 3), and held a press conference on 16 April. Besides the Ministry of Education, the issuing bodies were the Cyberspace Administration of China, the National Development and Reform Commission, the Ministry of Science and Technology, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security and the National Data Administration.
Why nine departments
The boundary of education digitalisation long ago exceeded education administration itself. It engages compute and network infrastructure (the development and industry portfolios), data governance and content security (the cyberspace and public security portfolios), funding (finance) and talent and employment (human resources and social security).
The significance of a nine-department document is that it consolidates matters previously dispersed across departmental mandates into a single instrument that can be executed jointly. For companies supplying AI products to education settings, it means the regulatory position is no longer determined by the education authority alone.
From introducing tools to deploying a system
The Opinion’s landing point is to embed AI and digital technology in teaching, management and assessment, rather than stopping at “introducing a tool”. It connects to the earlier guide on AI literacy education in schools: the latter answers whether a tool may be used in class and how it should be used at each stage, while the former answers what supports it and how it becomes a system.
At the same time, deployment on digital teachers and teachers’ digital literacy brings teacher capability into the picture: the precondition for technology entering the classroom is that the people using it have the relevant literacy.
Data security and platform standards written in at the same time
What makes the education setting sensitive is that the data subjects are mostly minors. While pushing digitalisation, therefore, the Opinion stresses data security and platform standards. A company supplying education AI products has to align with two lines at once: the adaptation requirements of the education setting, and the general requirements on personal information protection and data security.
See our notes on protecting minors online and on the reference framework for AI education ethics.
Where companies should prepare
First, check whether the product touches minors’ personal information. Functions involving student profiling, behaviour records or homework data should complete a personal information impact assessment first.
Second, distinguish teaching assistance from substitute decision-making. When AI takes part in assessment, the compliance requirements for automated decision-making are stricter. See our notes on data compliance for AI companies.
Third, watch stage and subject adaptation requirements. See the 2026 work points on digital literacy and skills; the requirements on content and interaction differ between stages.
Education digitalisation offers a long-term map of demand. Whether a company appears on that map depends on whether it has first laid a solid compliance foundation.
This article is based on the Ministry of Education and eight other departments’ Opinion on Accelerating Education Digitalisation and public information and is for reference only; it does not constitute legal advice.