1.6 Legislation

The

Take EUHome AI Act

Take-home messages

message

• The school is responsible, not you personally. When AI is deployedused institutionally, the school or school authority is generally responsible—the deployer (Art. 3(4)) — not each individual teacher.
• AI literacy is a duty, not a course to tick off. Schools must support thestaff developmentin ofbuilding AI literacy among(Art. their4); staff. Nono specific training coursecertificate or certificatetraining format is prescribed.
• Two Biometricuses emotionare recognitionbanned outright. Inferring students’ emotions from facial or vocal data is generally prohibited in educationalschools, institutions.and so is AI that exploits children’s vulnerabilities to distort their behaviour and cause them harm (Art. 5).
• Risk Notdepends allon AI-generatedthe teachingdecision, materialsnot havethe toproduct. be labelled.

Ordinary writing, research, translation and lesson-planning tools are not automatically classified as high-risk AI.

simply because they

AIare mayused at school. They become high-risk whenonce itthey influencesinfluence admission, educationallearning pathways, learningexam outcomes, examinationsoutcomes or employment decisions.

decisions (Art. 6 · Annex III). Not everything AI-generated needs a label. The specificdisclosure obligationsduty formainly high-risksits AIwith inthe educationprovider; willteacher-reviewed generallymaterial applywith fromhuman 2editorial Decembercontrol 2027.is exempt (Art. 50).

High-risk AI mayneeds onlya human who can overrule it. Its output is never the final decision — you must understand its limits and be usedable withto effectivedisregard humanor oversight.

override it (Art. 26). The deadline is now December 2027, not August 2026. The specific high-risk duties for education AI were postponed — but the bans above and the AI-literacy duty already apply today. The AI Act sits on top of other law, it doesn’t replace it. National data protection, education, employment, child protection and copyright law continue to apply alongside theit AI(Art. Act. 2).

If you remember only one sentence from this page:

Use AI to support your professional judgement, not replace it—stricter rules apply as soon as AI helps make decisions about grades, educational pathways or people.

What teachers need to know

Who is responsible for the use of AI?

If a school introduces and controls an AI-AI system, the school or school authority is usually the deployer (Art. 33(4)). The teacher is normally not a separate deployer when he or she usesusing the tool under the school’s instructions.instructions However,— the teacherbut must still follow those instructions and all relevant school and data-protection rules.

Teachers need to know what they are using

Schools and school authorities must take appropriate measures to support the development of AI literacy among those who use AI systems on their behalf (Art. 4). The AI Act does not specify a particular level of competence, certificate or training format,format but— ratherit describes this as dependingdepends on the AI-AI system to be used, thehow intendedit wayis of usageused, and who may be affected by the usage.

affected.

Emotion recognition is aTwo red linelines for schools

Using AI systems in educational institutions to infer emotions or intentions from biometric data,data — such as students' facial or vocal characteristics,characteristics — is generally forbiddenforbidden. (Art. 3(39); Art. 5). Narrow exceptions exist for medical or safety purposes.

purposes (Art. 3(39); Art. 5(1)(f)).

A second, less well-known prohibition also matters for classroom tools: AI that exploits children's vulnerabilities because of their age, and thereby distorts their behaviour in a way that causes them harm, is banned outright — regardless of intent (Art. 5(1)(b)). Keep this in mind when evaluating "engagement-optimised" learning apps or games aimed at children.

Does AI-generated content need a label?

If students interact directly with an AI system, such as a chatbot, they must be informed that they are interacting with AI. The system provider is primarily responsible for making this clear (Art. 5050(1)).

Schools and teachers must disclose or label deepfakesdeepfakes, or published AI-generated text published on matters of public interestinterest, when theythese are used in classroom.the However,classroom this(Art. 50(4)). This requirement does not apply where the Ai-AI-generated content has undergone effective human review or editorial controlcontrol, and a person or institution assumes editorial responsibility for its publicationpublication. (Art. 50). An AI-assisted worksheet reviewed by a teacher therefore does not automatically require a label.

When AI in education becomes high-risk

Ordinary writing, translation, research and lesson-planning tools are not high-risk simply because they are used for work. ClassificationClassification depends on the system’system's intended purpose, not simply on which product is used (Art. 6 · Annex III).

AI systems may be classified as high-risk when they are intended to:

For Teachers

For Schools

decide decideaccess, admission or accessassignment to education; educational or vocational institutions and programmes; assign students to schools, programmes or educational pathways; evaluate learning outcomes or guidesteer a student’student's learning process; determineassess the appropriate level of education for a student;student will receive or can access; or detect prohibited behaviour during examinations. (Annex III, point 3)

recruit teachers; or select teachers, including screening applications; decide allocateon workcontract amongterms, teachers;promotion or termination of a teacher's employment; allocate tasks based on a teacher's behaviour or personal traits; or evaluate teachers’teachers' performance. (Annex III, point 4)

A limited checking or preparatory tool may also fall outside the high-risk category if it does not significantly influence a decision. However, an education system that profiles individuals is always considered high-risk.

What high-risk AI means for schools and teachers

Classification of an AI system as high-risk does not automatically rule it ouztout from usageuse in schools. But high-risk systems come with obligations (Art. 26):

For Teachers

For Schools

use it only for its approved purpose and follow its instructions; do not treat its output as a final decision; understand its main limitations and likely sources of error; watch for overreliance on apparently convincing results; and be prepared to disregard or override its output.

provide competent and authorised human oversight (Art. 26(2)); ensure that any input data under its control is relevant and sufficiently representative (Art. 26(4)); monitor the system and respond to risks or serious incidents;incidents (Art. 26(5)); ensure that any input data under its control is relevant and sufficiently representative; keep automatically generated logs for at least six months where those logs are under its control;control (Art. 26(6)); and inform students, teachers or affected people in advance when the system assists decision-making about them.them (Art. 26(11)).

Public bodies and private organisations providing public services may also have to complete a fundamental rights impact assessment before using high-risk AI (Art. 27). Public authorities and organisations acting on their behalf may additionally have to register the system in the EU database.database (Art. 49). Whether this is the responsibility of the school or its governing authority depends on the national school system (Art. 49).system.

The AI Act is not the only law that matters

The AI Act does not replace national regulations on data protection, education, employment and worker participation, child protection or copyright.copyright (Art. 2(7)). For example, the fact that a tool is not high-risk does not mean that you may upload students’students' work or personal data to it (Art. 2).it. A tool may be acceptable under the AI Act but still prohibited by data-protection law or your school’school's rules.

Where to find help

Enforcement is organised differently in each EU country. Because national responsibilities may change, use the European Commission’Commission's current list of national market-surveillance authorities.authorities. Anyone — a teacher, a student, a parent — can lodge a complaint with that authority if they believe the Act has been breached (Art. 85). Where a high-risk system, such as an admission or exam-monitoring tool, has led to a decision that significantly affects a student, they — or their parents — can also ask for an explanation of that individual decision (Art. 86).

National

rules for your country

The AI Act is EU-wide, but enforcement bodies, school law and data-protection practice differ by country. Country-specific notes for the Playbook's partner countries will be added here:

Austria Czechia Germany Latvia Slovakia Slovenia Spain