The New Money Curriculum: Students want crypto taught in college. Most schools aren't teaching it.

Nine in ten college students said their school should teach crypto and blockchain. Most schools don't.

The syllabus lost to the feed

About one-third (33%) of students named social media or influencers as their most important source for learning about crypto. Just 7% named school, teachers or professors. Students were nearly 5x more likely to learn about digital assets from a feed than from a faculty member.

The rest of their education was scattered: financial advisors (17%), crypto platforms and apps (12%), parents or family (10%), friends or peers (10%) and traditional news (6%). No single credentialed source came close to social media.

Parents followed a different path entirely. Crypto platforms and apps ranked first at 21%, followed by financial advisors at 19%, social media at 17%, friends or peers at 12% and traditional news at 11%. Students were about twice as likely as parents to lean on social media, 33% versus 17%.

Two generations, two curricula.

Students hold the knowledge edge, and both sides know it

More than half (53%) of students said college students understood crypto better than their parents did. Fifty-one percent of parents agreed. Only 14% of students and 13% of parents said parents understood it better.

That agreement was rare in intergenerational finance, and it was changing behavior at home. Forty-seven percent of students said they had taught a parent or guardian something about crypto or investing, and 43% of parents confirmed it happened. About 1 in 4 students said they had specifically taught their parents about crypto.

Parents were willing to act on that expertise. Fifty-six percent said they would definitely or probably let their college-aged child make a crypto transaction on their behalf. Actual behavior trailed the trust: only 9% of students said they had ever done it.

But knowing more did not translate into the final say. Thirty-six percent of students said they should have the greatest influence over their first investment decisions, more than twice the 16% who chose their parents. Parents saw it differently: 29% said the student should lead, while 30% said parents or family should. The knowledge gap and the authority gap were pointing in opposite directions.

Normalization, with guardrails

The stereotype of crypto as a young person's gamble did not survive contact with the data. More than half (52%) of students described buying crypto as a long-term investment, while just 6% called it a hobby, a gap of nearly 9x. Parents tracked closely at 48% versus 9%. Both generations had moved crypto out of the entertainment column and into the portfolio column.

Acceptance was not the same as maximalism: 89% of students said at least some allocation to crypto could be responsible, while 11% said the appropriate allocation was zero. Broad acceptance paired with measured allocations shows how crypto is maturing as an asset class within household decision-making.

The regret question was more revealing still. Asked what today's college students would most regret not owning, 27% of students said real estate, ahead of AI and technology stocks (23%), the S&P 500 (20%) and Bitcoin (17%). Parents also ranked real estate first at 26%, with Bitcoin close behind at 24%.

Real estate was the only asset that ranked first with both generations. Crypto and AI dominated the headlines. Housing still dominated the anxiety.

And the paycheck itself is now in scope, with 56% of students saying they would definitely or probably accept a job paying 20% of their salary in Bitcoin. Surprisingly, 62% of parents would support their college-aged child taking that arrangement. Parents were, on this question, slightly more permissive than the students themselves.

Why this matters

A generation is forming lifelong financial habits around digital assets, while the institutions meant to teach them are still deciding whether to offer the course. When formal education is absent, the vacuum is filled by whoever posts most often.

Closing that gap is not solely a university problem. Exchanges are now the most common way parents learn about this asset class, and the third most common for students. That places responsibility on the platforms themselves.

Serious infrastructure is more than matching engines, custody and uptime. It is clear disclosure, honest risk framing and education that treats users as people making long-term decisions rather than short-term trades. The demand signal here is unambiguous. Nine in ten wanted this taught. The question facing both universities and the industry is who is prepared to teach it well.