evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

South Korea's AI digital textbooks

South Korea · Seoul · See the South Korea profile · See the Seoul profile

Evidence: Observational / pre–post Top 72% 40/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

A ₩1.2-trillion national push to put AI-adaptive textbooks in classrooms from 2025 — downgraded from mandatory to optional within four months after backlash over privacy, screen time and a rushed rollout; adoption fell from 37% to 19%.

1.2 ₩ trillion
National public funding committed (2025)
37 %
Adoption rate before downgrade (2025)
19 %
Adoption rate after downgrade (2025)
South Korea's AI digital textbooks

Details

Maturity
Discontinued
Promoter
Republic of Korea, Ministry of Education
Keywords
Teaching practice & content creation, adaptive textbooks, cautionary, national programme

Context

South Korea introduced AI-adaptive digital textbooks nationwide in March 2025 (English, maths and more), backed by over ₩1.2 trillion in public funding and large publisher investment.

Results

Within four months, amid teacher and parent backlash, lawsuits over data-privacy risks and screen time, technical glitches and factual errors, the government downgraded the textbooks from mandatory to optional; their official textbook status was later revoked and adoption fell from 37% to 19%.

Conclusions

A cautionary national-scale case of a rushed, top-down AI rollout without adequate groundwork, scoring low across impact, equity, ethics and capability.

Implementation
Indicative cost
Very high (> €5M) — Over ₩1.2 trillion in public funding plus large publisher investment for the national rollout.
Time to results
Short (< 1 year) — Mandatory rollout from March 2025; downgraded to optional within four months; adoption fell from 37% to 19%.
Staffing & skills
Republic of Korea Ministry of Education, Textbook publishers (private-sector investment)

Common failure modes

  • Rushed, top-down national rollout without adequate groundwork or consultation
  • Privacy lawsuits and data-protection concerns over student data
  • Technical glitches and factual errors in the AI-adaptive content
  • Teacher and parent backlash over screen-time concerns

Where it fits

Governance type
national/centralised (Ministry of Education mandate)
Scale
national
Income level
high-income

Commonly funded by

National / regional programmes

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful