On August 12, the Council of Ministers adopted the Bulgaria Management Program 2026-2030. The document is complex and large - 208 pages, covering almost all public spheres, outlining goals and expected results. Not surprisingly, education is one of the areas developed in detail. What makes a strong impression is the obvious lack of an important part of the previous educational policies: intercultural education, desegregation, support for schools with a concentration of vulnerable groups, educational mediators, educational integration are missing or almost missing. What have they been replaced with, is their absence accidental, what can be done to fill these important gaps? Deyan Kolev, Chairman of The Center for Interethnic Dialogue and Tolerance “Amalipe”.
- Mr. Kolev, how do you assess the Management Program 2026-2030 in its part on school education - is there a real change in direction or do we rather see a continuation of policies from recent years?
- In general, there is a continuation of the main policies so far - the idea that teacher salaries should be 125% of the average salary, the development of new curricula, education should form not only knowledge, but also values, and a number of others are things that we have heard many times in previous years. It is good that there is continuity, the question is how this can actually happen.
What is a weakness in the Management Program is the absence of educational integration. For a country where half of the schools are concentrated in vulnerable groups, and a large percentage of students are Roma and Turks, this is a very significant lack.
- The program emphasizes improving quality, functional skills and changing the curriculum and assessment. However, what is specifically missing so that these goals do not remain just declarations, as we have already seen in previous management programs?
- In my opinion, this is the most significant challenge compared to what is envisaged in the Management Program. Everything sounds like very good wishes, but no mechanisms have been put in place to achieve them. In my opinion, the introduction of various forms of civic and intercultural education is part of the solution. I say this from the experience of the “Amalipe“ Center. We work with 259 schools across the country. Part of the activities with them are to introduce civic education - both through compulsory preparation classes, optional classes (FUCH), interest-based activities, and through peer training, youth campaigns and a number of others. The results clearly show that the young people who participate in them have results above the average for the country. Intercultural education is also an integral part of our work with these schools. It leads to both a reduction in dropout rates and an increase in academic success.
- One of the more serious changes is the introduction of a mandatory subject “Virtues and Religions”. In your opinion, will this help the school to better fulfill its educational function or does it risk creating new divisions and tensions?
- This idea is also not new - the Ministry of Education and Science proposed it in April 2025. Then we conducted a survey among school principals we work with. The results showed that they have serious concerns about whether this will lead to ethnic tension in mixed areas. That is why we proposed two things. First, to have not only confessional programs (Christianity and Islam), but also a secular program („Virtues and Ethics“). Secondly, to conduct a pilot project in a large number of schools - 100 or 200, including in mixed areas, and only after the results are seen, to move towards expanding this experiment. I hope that now we will proceed with piloting and then - to expand. We should not play with the danger of interethnic and interreligious tension. It is important that parents be given the opportunity to make a real choice - whether their children should study religion (religious doctrine) first and foremost, or to emphasize values and ethics. I am convinced that the possible secular program „Virtues and Ethics“ will be very well received by the vast majority of parents.
- You draw special attention to the fact that the new program practically lacks concepts such as „Roma“, „ethnic minorities“, “desegregation“ and “intercultural education“… Why, how do you explain it?
- This is an extremely worrying trend and I can define it as the biggest weakness in the Management Program. In practice, the concepts of intercultural education, desegregation and ethnic minorities are missing. The latter has been replaced with the very paradoxical "children with different linguistic backgrounds" or with the much broader "socio-economic inequalities", "children from vulnerable groups", etc. Nowhere in the program is there any mention of ethnicities, ethnic minorities, and the Roma are mentioned only once. This would be appropriate for a country in which there are no ethnic minorities (for example, Japan, but not Bulgaria) or for Bulgaria in the early 1980s (on the eve of the Revival process)... I strongly hope that we will not encounter attempts at assimilation through education.
The comparison between the Strategic Framework for the Development of Education, Training and Learning in the Republic of Bulgaria (2021-2030), the “Education” Program 2021-2027 and the Management Program 2026-2030 shows a significant narrowing of the educational integration policy in the latter document. The Management Program maintains commitments to equal access, coverage, dropout prevention and support for “vulnerable groups“, but does not carry over a number of specific policies set out in both the Strategic Framework and the “Education“ Program.
- What does this lack mean for educational integration and why is it a problem when these policies are replaced by the more general concept of “vulnerable groups“?
- As I said above, 52% of general education schools and also 52% of vocational high schools have a concentration of vulnerable groups – these are data from the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, extracted from the NEISPUO system based on the educational status of parents. A study by the “Amalipe“ Center indicated that the majority of these educational institutions educate Roma and Turkish children. After 2009, the Ministry of Education and Science has not collected information on ethnic principles and they cannot tell us what the percentage of minorities in school education is, but it is certainly at least ¼ or even 1/3 of the students. Educational integration should be one of the leading policies in education. It should not be hidden under the term “inclusive education“, because it also contains topics such as the preservation of cultural identity, desegregation, the formation of tolerance and the introduction of intercultural education. They are completely missing from the current Management Program.
- Desegregation is one of the most significant shortcomings that you point out. What should the state actually do to overcome segregation in schools and why does only reducing the number of fifth-group schools not solve this problem?
- School education in Bulgaria is extremely segregative – both ethnically and socially. Our children are learning in a “sterile environment”, significantly different from the environment in which they will live. According to data from the EU Agency for Fundamental Human Rights, over 60% of Roma children study in classes only or almost entirely with other Roma children. A study conducted by “Amalipe” in 2020 indicated that 120 segregated general education schools operate in cities, and 64 are in the process of segregation. The picture is similar with vocational high schools. The constant increase in this number is worrying - Roma parents make an effort for their children to attend ethnically mixed schools, but in parallel with this, a process of secondary segregation is underway - as soon as Roma children cross the psychological threshold of 25%, and sometimes 20%, Bulgarian parents withdraw their children from these schools and enroll them elsewhere. Usually there is no adequate municipal policy for the prevention of secondary segregation and this leads to an increase in educational institutions that are outside Roma neighborhoods, but are attended only by Roma students. Thank God, we also have positive examples of schools that stopped secondary segregation and brought back Bulgarian children (e.g. SU “Trayko Simeonov“ in Shumen), but they are an exception.
It is important to undertake activities in at least two directions. On the one hand, the Ministry of Education and Science and the Ministry of Education and Training must exercise control over whether Article 99, paragraph 4 of the Education Law, which prohibits the formation of classes on an ethnic basis in ethnically mixed schools, is being implemented. Our work clearly shows that this vicious practice continues to exist, segregated classes are formed and the Ministry of Education and Training does not react. On the other hand, measures are needed to overcome inter-school segregation. A year ago, the Ministry of Education proposed changes to the Basic Education Act (BEAA) that require all municipalities with segregated institutions to take measures for desegregation and reduce enrollment in segregated schools. It is important that these changes be adopted now.
I want to draw attention to something important about segregated education. It is primarily an urban problem - we are talking about segregated schools in large and smaller cities, in which there are also other schools attended by children from the majority. It is there that we can talk about segregated schools and kindergartens. In the villages there is one educational institution and it is not correct to define it as segregated - it usually reflects the population of the respective village. The fact is that in the villages around the regional cities the problem of segregation also exists - children from the majority are enrolled in schools in the city, and from minorities - in the rural school. But it is more effective to insist on desegregation policies in the cities.
- How do you assess the planned preparatory language class for children who do not have sufficient command of the Bulgarian language? Can this measure help for better integration or, if not combined with intercultural education, is there a risk of leading to the opposite effect?
- This is also not a completely new idea – it was proposed a year ago, and has been discussed since 2023. The preparatory language class can have a positive effect and lead to the acquisition of the Bulgarian language. But it is important that the teaching in it integrates intercultural bilingual techniques, that is, that the children's mother tongue is actively used. I have observed this in Peru and Mexico, where intercultural bilingual education is very well developed. On the other hand, repeating a preparatory language class should not be allowed, because if a student repeats it, he will enter the 1st grade only at the age of 9. This is a sure prerequisite for him to drop out of school.
And one more thing that is very important. Municipalities must do everything possible for children to attend kindergarten from the age of 4, as required by the education law. Some time ago, we made a lot of efforts to abolish kindergarten fees, and this is a fact. There are no obstacles for children to attend preparatory groups or classes from this age. I am convinced that if this happens, they will master the Bulgarian language and there will be no need for a preparatory language class.
- What is happening with the educational mediators in this program? There is a request for more trained mediators and a methodological center, but there are no clear commitments for funding, professional development and sustainability?
- This is also an important gap in the program. People know how important the profession and position of the educational mediator is. We have managed to achieve important successes in the institutionalization and sustainability of mediators - today their salaries are financed from the state budget, their qualifications are regulated, etc. It is good that the Management Program provides for an increase in the number of educational mediators and their training. In practice, there are no clear commitments and goals, and no additional financial commitments have been made. This should happen during the implementation of the program.
- What could be the consequences for schools with a high concentration of vulnerable students?
- This is another topic that worries me. The program lacks a commitment to continue and increase funding for schools and kindergartens with a concentration of vulnerable groups: Art. 52 a of the Funding Regulation. This concerns over half of general education schools and vocational high schools, as well as over ¼ of kindergartens. They have received additional funding since 2018 - for the appointment of educational mediators, for outreach teams, as well as for additional payment of teachers. For many of these schools, additional funding is key to ensuring that they can secure teachers' salaries and mediators' salaries - 750 supported schools are in villages and their students are few, so they would hardly survive without this additional support. It is also very important that these schools and kindergartens be evaluated through the so-called “value-added system“, that is, to track what changes occur with their students, and not to compare the results of test evaluation and matriculation exams between schools with different student profiles. We should not underestimate the fact that it is precisely the schools with a concentration of vulnerable groups that have the highest added value – teachers make enormous efforts and manage to educate and develop the skills of their students. This should be recognized.
The management program itself does not contain an immediate threat to suspend funding under Art. 52a, but there is no commitment to their continuation and increase. I hope it's a technical oversight.
- Should we be worried that after 2030, when the “Education“ Program ends, Bulgaria may be left without a clear national commitment to desegregation, intercultural education and work with the Roma community?
- I strongly hope that this will not happen. I hope that these topics will be included in the implementation of the program.
This trend of initially omitting educational integration is sustainable, to our great regret. It does not start with the current government – we have encountered it many times before. For example, during the preparation of the Strategic Framework for the Development of Education from 2030, as well as the current “Education“ Program, these topics were also completely omitted. Center “Amalipe“ we reacted, we addressed all national institutions and the European Commission and our proposals were accepted. I hope that now they will also be integrated into the activities for the implementation of the Management Program.