The reorganization of social work administration in China has broadened the institutional responsibilities, service populations, and collaborative relationships involved in grassroots governance. Community workers are now expected not only to provide professional services but also to interpret policy, assess needs, mobilize residents, facilitate deliberation, integrate resources, and use digital technologies responsibly. Conventional Community Work courses, however, are still commonly organized around theoretical knowledge and general intervention methods. This structure provides an important disciplinary foundation but does not always connect course content with governance tasks, sustain classroom-community partnerships, integrate digital tools with professional reasoning, or generate valid evidence of practice competence. This article presents the design of a competency-oriented reform of the Community Work course at Yibin University. Drawing on constructive alignment, experiential learning, and situated learning, the reform reorganizes learning outcomes, course content, authentic community tasks, and assessment evidence around students' capacity to understand and address real grassroots governance problems. Policy analysis, method training, simulation, community-based projects, and reflective assessment are integrated into a coherent learning process. Course teachers, field professionals, community practitioners, residents, and students contribute complementary evidence to the assessment of learning. The design also establishes boundaries for the use of generative artificial intelligence and community data. Rather than treating digitalization as the addition of platforms or software, the reform positions technology as a support for contextual judgment, ethical practice, and sustained collaboration. The article offers a context-sensitive approach to preparing social work students for community practice in an increasingly digitalized governance environment.

Daxia Lei. Reforming Community Work Education for Grassroots Governance in the Age of Digital Intelligence. International Journal of New Developments in Education (2026), Vol. 8, Issue 9: 14-21. https://doi.org/10.25236/IJNDE.2026.080903.

[1] Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, & State Council of the People's Republic of China. (2021). Opinions on strengthening the modernization of grassroots governance systems and governance capacity [in Chinese].

[2] General Office of the State Council of the People's Republic of China. (2022). Plan for the development of urban and rural community service systems during the 14th Five-Year Plan period [in Chinese].

[3] Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, & State Council of the People's Republic of China. (2023). Reform plan for Party and state institutions [in Chinese].

[4] Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, & State Council of the People's Republic of China. (2023). Overall plan for the layout of a Digital China [in Chinese].

[5] Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China, et al. (2025). Opinions on accelerating education digitalization (Jiao Ban [2025] No. 3) [in Chinese].

[6] Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China, et al. (2026). Action plan for “Artificial Intelligence + Education” [in Chinese].

[7] Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32(3), 347-364. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138871

[8] Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall.

[9] Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815355

[10] Miao, F., & Holmes, W. (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. UNESCO. https://doi.org/10.54675/EWZM9535

[11] UNESCO. (2024). AI competency framework for teachers. UNESCO. https://doi.org/10.54675/ZJTE2084