Volume 10,Issue 9
Designing an AI-Enabled, Project-Based Curriculum for Undergraduate FinTech Education: A Competency-Oriented Teaching Reform Framework
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
FinTech programs must integrate finance, computing, regulation, and ethical judgment while responding to rapid technological change. This conceptual study proposes a competency-oriented reform framework for undergraduate FinTech education by synthesizing research on constructive alignment, project-based learning, digital competence, and responsible artificial intelligence. The framework organizes learning around five competency domains: financial reasoning, data and AI practice, digital system design, regulatory and ethical judgment, and professional communication. It connects these domains to a four-layer curriculum, an authentic project cycle, portfolio-based assessment, and an explicit protocol for generative-AI use. A staged implementation and evaluation plan is provided, using performance tasks, analytic rubrics, learning portfolios, student feedback, and external review. The proposed reform shifts FinTech education from disconnected course coverage toward evidence-based capability development. It also offers a practical way to preserve academic integrity while treating AI as an object of critical inquiry and a supervised learning tool.
[1] Arner DW, Barberis J, Buckley RP, 2016, The Evolution of FinTech: A New Post-Crisis Paradigm? Georgetown Journal of International Law, 47(4): 1271–1319.
[2] Gomber P, Koch JA, Siering M, 2017, Digital Finance and FinTech: Current Research and Future Research Directions. Journal of Business Economics, 87(5): 537–580. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-017-0852-x
[3] Puschmann T, 2017, FinTech. Business Information Systems Engineering, 59(1): 69–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-017-0464-6
[4] Thakor AV, 2020, Fintech and Banking: What Do We Know? Journal of Financial Intermediation, 41: 100833. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfi.2019.100833
[5] Vives X, 2019, Digital Disruption in Banking. Annual Review of Financial Economics, 11: 243–272. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-financial-100719-120854
[6] Cotton DRE, Cotton PA, Shipway JR, 2024, Chatting and Cheating: Ensuring Academic Integrity in the Era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(2): 228–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2190148
[7] Kasneci E, Sessler K, Küchemann S, et al., 2023, ChatGPT for Good? On Opportunities and Challenges of Large Language Models for Education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103: 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
[8] Biggs J, 1996, Enhancing Teaching Through Constructive Alignment. Higher Education, 32(3): 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138871
[9] Freeman S, Eddy SL, McDonough M, et al., 2014, Active Learning Increases Student Performance in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23): 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
[10] Hmelo-Silver CE, 2004, Problem-Based Learning: What and How Do Students Learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3): 235–266. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3
[11] Prince M, 2004, Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3): 223–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x
[12] Bell S, 2010, Project-Based Learning for the 21st Century: Skills for the Future. The Clearing House, 83(2): 39–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098650903505415
[13] Blumenfeld PC, Soloway E, Marx RW, et al., 1991, Motivating Project-Based Learning: Sustaining the Doing, Supporting the Learning. Educational Psychologist, 26(3–4): 369–398. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.1991.9653139
[14] Long D, Magerko B, 2020, What Is AI Literacy? Competencies and Design Considerations. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–16, ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376727
[15] UNESCO, 2024, AI Competency Framework for Students. UNESCO.
[16] Binkley M, Erstad O, Herman J, et al., 2012, Defining Twenty-First Century Skills. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw, E. Care (Eds.): Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills, 17–66, Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5_2
[17] European Commission, 2022, DigComp 2.2: The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/115376
[18] OECD, 2018, The Future of Education and Skills: Education 2030. OECD Publishing.
[19] Mishra P, Koehler MJ, 2006, Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6): 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
[20] Nicol DJ, Macfarlane-Dick D, 2006, Formative Assessment and Self-Regulated Learning: A Model and Seven Principles of Good Feedback Practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2): 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090
[21] Boud D, Falchikov N, 2006, Aligning assessment with Long-Term Learning. Assessment Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(4): 399–413. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930600679050
[22] Dwivedi YK, Kshetri N, Hughes L, et al., 2023, ‘So What If ChatGPT Wrote It?’ Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Opportunities, Challenges and Implications of Generative Conversational AI for Research, Practice and Policy. International Journal of Information Management, 71: 102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642
