Core literacy, defined by the OECD (2005) as “key competencies for all,” has evolved into a global educational priority. The OECD identifies three domains: interactive competence (collaboration across diverse groups), tool-mediated interaction (using digital/linguistic tools), and autonomous action (goal-directed behavior). In China, the Core Literacy Research Group (2016) adapted this framework to local contexts, emphasizing three dimensions: autonomous development (e.g., self-directed learning), cultural foundation (e.g., humanistic literacy), and social participation (e.g., responsibility). These frameworks align with global trends while integrating socialist values such as patriotism and collectivism ( Chen, 2019 ).

For applied undergraduate universities, core literacy transcends technical skills. This holistic approach ensures graduates thrive in both local and global environments.

Globally, “values education” (VE) shares IPE’s focus on ethical and civic development ( Noddings, 2013 ). However, IPE is uniquely rooted in China’s political context, emphasizing alignment with socialist core values (e.g., “prosperity, democracy, harmony”) ( MOE, 2020 ). In higher education, IPE has shifted from “political indoctrination” to “contextualized, student-centered integration” ( Wang & Liu, 2021 ).

In tourism education, prior studies ( Mowforth & Munt, 2015 ) highlight IPE’s role in addressing industry-specific ethical challenges (e.g., overtourism, cultural commodification). Yet, few studies have explored IPE integration in “Tourism E-Commerce”—a field where technical skills evolve rapidly, but ethical guidelines remain underdeveloped.

This study adopts a synergistic framework, where:

Core literacy provides overarching goals (ethical decision-making, adaptability); IPE serves as the vehicle to achieve these goals by embedding socialist values into disciplinary content; Tourism e-commerce acts as the applied context, requiring students to balance technical expertise with social responsibility.

To bridge theory and practice, we developed the “Four-Step Integrated Model”, grounded in core literacy and IPE principles.

1) Contextualized Introduction: Leverages students’ prior experiences to reduce resistance to abstract values ( Noddings, 2013 ). Use Alibaba’s Fliggy platform (a familiar industry tool) to introduce data ethics: “How should user data be collected and shared responsibly?”

2) Seamless Embedding: Integrates values into technical content to avoid “two separate classes” ( Wang & Liu, 2021 ). When teaching e-commerce algorithms, discuss algorithmic bias: “How might biased algorithms affect marginalized tourist groups?”

3) Experiential Extension: Encourages application of values in real-world contexts to deepen understanding ( Kolb, 1984 ). Task students with designing an eco-tourism app for a local ethnic minority community, requiring collaboration with community leaders to address cultural preservation.

4) Reflective Alignment: Facilitates metacognition to connect learning to long-term goals ( Schön, 1983 ). Guide students to reflect: “How does today’s lesson on fair pricing align with China’s rural revitalization strategy? How will this skill benefit my career?”

This mixed-methods study employed a sequential explanatory design ( Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018 ):

1) Phase 1 (Quantitative): Pre- and post-course surveys measured changes in ethical awareness (5-point Likert scale, α = 0.89) and professional identity (α = 0.92).

2) Phase 2 (Qualitative): Semi-structured interviews (N = 15 faculty) explored challenges in IPE delivery; curriculum analysis (N = 3 courses) identified IPE integration patterns.

1) Students: 120 second-year tourism management students from three applied undergraduate universities: Zhejiang Vocational College of Tourism (comprehensive tourism vocational college), Guilin Tourism University (tourism-focused applied undergraduate institution), Shandong Vocational College of Tourism (technology-integrated tourism college).

2) Faculty: 15 IPE-trained instructors (10 males, 5 females; teaching experience: 3 - 15 years), all certified in “curriculum-based IPE.”

1) Surveys: Administered at Week 1 (pre-test) and Week 16 (post-test) of a 16-week course.

2) Interviews: Semi-structured, focusing on IPE design, delivery challenges, and student engagement.

3) Curriculum Analysis: Reviewed syllabi, lesson plans, and case studies to map IPE integration.

1) Quantitative: Descriptive statistics (means, SDs) and paired t-tests (SPSS 26.0) analyzed pre/post differences.

2) Qualitative: Thematic analysis ( Braun & Clarke, 2006 ) using NVivo 12.0 identified recurring themes (e.g., “contextualization effectiveness,” “industry collaboration gaps”).

Survey results showed significant improvements in key outcomes:

1) Ethical awareness: Increased from 3.2 (SD = 0.7) to 4.1 (SD = 0.6) (t = 8.2, p < 0.001). The “data privacy protection” item showed the largest gain (Δ = 1.0, p < 0.001).

2) Professional identity: Increased from 3.5 (SD = 0.8) to 4.3 (SD = 0.5) (t = 7.9, p < 0.001). The “pride in future career” item had the highest post-test mean (4.5).

3) Core literacy integration: 89% of students reported “connecting course content to national strategies (e.g., rural revitalization),” and 76% could cite examples of “social responsibility in tourism e-commerce.”

Faculty interviews highlighted two key themes.

Teachers emphasized that situational IPE (e.g., using Hangzhou’s “City Brain” smart tourism system) made abstract values tangible. A faculty member from Zhejiang Vocational College noted: “When students saw how data ethics directly impacts tourist trust in Fliggy, they began discussing responsibility as a real skill—not just a test topic.” Another from Guilin Tourism University added: “Designing eco-tourism apps for local communities forced students to grapple with cultural preservation, making ‘social responsibility’ a lived experience.”

Two barriers emerged:

1) Limited industry involvement: Only 30% of cases were co-developed with tourism enterprises (e.g., a Ctrip collaboration on “online complaint resolution”), limiting the realism of ethical dilemmas.

2) Variable faculty proficiency: While 73% of teachers felt confident in technical content, only 47% reported expertise in “values-based teaching.” One instructor admitted, “I know to teach integrity, but designing interactive activities around live-streaming fraud? I need better case banks and training.”

The model aligns with Noddings’ (2013) “ethic of care” (emphasizing relational learning) and China’s MOE (2020) “curriculum-based IPE” guidelines. It also addresses gaps in tourism education literature: while Mowforth & Munt (2015) call for IPE in tourism, our model provides a concrete framework tailored to tourism e-commerce, validated across three institution types.

This study demonstrates that the “Four-Step Integrated Model” effectively integrates IPE into “Tourism E-Commerce” courses, enhancing students’ ethical awareness, professional identity, and core literacy. By rooting values in real-world contexts (e.g., e-commerce platform cases, rural tourism projects) and fostering reflection, the model bridges theoretical learning and practical ethics—critical for cultivating responsible tourism professionals.

1) Faculty Development: Establish “values-based teaching” workshops focusing on case design and reflective dialogue. Encourage participation in national IPE teaching competitions.

2) Industry Partnerships: Co-develop case studies with tourism enterprises (e.g., Ctrip, Fliggy) to ensure ethical dilemmas reflect current industry challenges.

3) Assessment Innovation: Adopt rubrics evaluating both technical skills (e.g., algorithm design) and core literacy (e.g., ethical decision-making), integrating IPE performance into scholarships and faculty evaluations.

1) Longitudinal Studies: Track graduates’ professional ethics over 5–10 years to assess the model’s long-term impact.

2) Cross-Disciplinary Comparisons: Compare IPE models in tourism e-commerce with those in engineering or business to identify transferable strategies.

(Please check the most appropriate box.)

1. Gender: □ Male □ Female

2. Age: □ 18 - 20 □ 21 - 22 □ 23 - 24

3. University:

□ Zhejiang Vocational College of Tourism □ Guilin Tourism University

□ Shandong Vocational College of Tourism

4. Major:

□ Tourism Management □ E-Commerce □ Digital Media Technology

5. Grade:

□ Sophomore □ Junior (Aligned with course timing.)

(5-point Likert scale: 1 = Strongly Disagree, 5 = Strongly Agree)

ItemDescription (Linked to “Four-Step Integrated Model”)Rating (1-5)

Q1. The “Contextualized Introduction” (e.g., Fliggy data privacy case) made me realize that data ethics is critical for tourism e-commerce platforms.

Q2. The “Seamless Embedding” (e.g., discussing algorithm bias in e-commerce) helped me understand ethical boundaries in tech applications.

Q3. The “Experiential Extension” (e.g., designing eco-tourism apps for rural communities) increased my focus on tourism e-commerce’s social responsibility.

Q4. The “Reflective Alignment” (e.g., linking fair pricing to rural revitalization) helped me connect ethical learning to my career goals.

(5-point Likert scale: 1 = Strongly Disagree, 5 = Strongly Agree)

ItemDescription (Linked to “Four-Step Integrated Model”)Rating (1-5)

Q5. I feel proud of pursuing a career in tourism e-commerce.

Q6. Integrating national strategies (e.g., “digital tourism”) in class increased my confidence in the industry’s future.

Q7. The “Reflective Alignment” (e.g., discussing algorithm ethics) clarified my career direction (e.g., fair pricing or community service).

Q8. The “Experiential Extension” (e.g., community app design) made me more willing to work in grassroots tourism (e.g., rural tourism operations).

1) Which step of the “Four-Step Integrated Model” (Contextualized Introduction/Seamless Embedding/Experiential Extension/Reflective Alignment) most enhanced your IPE learning? Please provide an example (e.g., “The Fliggy data privacy case in Contextualized Introduction made me realize...”).

2) How would you improve the “Four-Step Integrated Model”? For example, should we add industry expert lectures or adjust case types (e.g., cross-border e-commerce ethics)?