Economics education in school

It seems that some people have already done something to bring economics into schools. This sounds promising...

rethinkecon.co.uk/

PS. Economics has always been political.

I'll ask her when I see her next month, daphne, or when I next speak to her.

Ooer! I wonder if it's the same one I taught IB.

Depends who you talk to, about British values. My granddaughter is going to start doing the IB at a sixth form college in Cambridge, daphne.

'Back in the day' when I was in the Sixth Form, General Studies A level was compulsory. It was essential for a place at Oxford or Cambridge and expected at other universities, although the grade didn't count towards the offer.

A foreign language, maths, science and current affairs were part of the exam. I remember that the current affairs question was explaining the significance of a political cartoon.

We had talks by loads of speakers. I remember we were taught about the Common Market (this was 1973) and the upcoming American elections, so we had an understanding of the way the American political system worked. I thought the course was interesting and valuable.

I think it's a shame that GS isn't more valued, because A levels are quite narrow compared with the International Baccalaureate and, as mentioned above, I think political ignorance makes a mockery of democracy.

PS. I don't even know what 'British values' are .

I think that at one time there were some excellent General Studies courses available. 'British Values' now have to be promoted throughout the curriculum..not quite sure if we would all agree on what BVs are! But that could provide an opportunity for debate on current affairs, exploring political viewpoints etc.

My eldest son had to take general studies A level, along with everyone else at his sixth form college. When it came to taking the A level exams, they were told they would have to pay for them as they were not proper A levels.
My son had a place on the degree course he wanted providing he passed the other three, so he did not see any point in taking it.
I hope that has changed over the intervening thirty years.

Both my children did A level Economics. One studied it at university and the other is hoping to get a place, but I'm thinking more of a General Studies course. I would even make a pass compulsory for higher education.

If I were writing a programme of study for General Studies Economics at sixth form level, I wouldn't start with the current A level syllabus, but an understanding of the issues and terminology required to understand a broadsheet newspaper. Without that understanding and ability to go 'behind the headlines' it's far too easy to manipulate people.

I agree with you about the level of political ignorance highlighted by the referendum. It would appear some campaigners deliberately went for hearts not heads. I would go so far as to say that a referendum without knowledge makesa mockery of democracy.

I agree with you daphnedill and you can study A Level economics. Some schools find space in a limited curriculum to do general studies but less seen in schools now. Critical Thinking is more likely to be on the curriculum in its place.

The level of political ignorance that the referendum has highlighted is shocking in a relatively wealthy and 'well educated' society.

I would include regulations in a combined course (with economics, etc) on the role of governments. I would also include intervention in cases of market failure to provide for citizens.

Economics shouldn't just be for students who want to study to a higher level. It should be everybody, so that they have an understanding of current affairs and can make more informed decisions when they vote. I believe an understanding of economics, politics and ethics (and the way they interact) is an essential part of a democracy. Otherwise, people are too easily manipulated by the media and politicians and democracy itself becomes a sham.

Governments can make a fertile ground or a desert. They can remove stones and weeds with regulations, they can plant inducements that attract pollinating insects to the crops that others plant and increase the yield, they can collect their share of the crop efficiently and fairly so as to fill their barns with as much as possible for the lean times.

Or they can remove regulations so that weeds thrive over legitimate crops, they can leave other competing countries to tempt away the pollinators with more attractive flowers, they can be dilatory in collecting taxes.

I don't think politics can create wealth Elegran. Governments are able to provide fertile ground but, other than their direct employees, they make no jobs or any wealth. In my opinion posters on political threads are concerned about the economics but politics is not only about economics and "wealth creation" means different things to different people and is looked at from a different view from different political stances. In recent years politicians have got to the position where only their view of economics is put forward, how that effects people has been lost in the commoditisation of labour with the growth of the global economy - but politics is about people, economics is just a tool to make it work.

It is also, GG, not just about wealth distribution, but how that wealth is created. No use dividing a small pie scrupulously into equal tiny slices to go round more and more people.

Several of the posters on the political threads are very concerned with the division and not at all with the creation. Both processes are important.

Theories of economics will also be closely allied to political stance. e.g. Keynsian /Friedman

There are two different things being discussed: Young people leaving school with an understanding of finance and managing personal budgets and young people leaving school with an understanding of different approaches to national/global economies so they may be keen to study a higher level.
Both are important!

It's not just about wealth, but how that wealth is distributed I have a strong feeling that some have forgotten that ... or really just don't care but it is so true for the maintenance of the wellbeing of the whole of society and for anticipating things like global migration (how fascinating that must have been) which we clearly didn't

That sounds fascinating Daphne. We are lucky to piggy-back a little on their learning. My DiL has just finished her BSc and over four years, part-time while bringing up two children and working, she has sent me various papers she thought I would be interested in. She did it a little like our Open University but with much more contact from what I could see as she was attached to a local university (in Australia).

From what I understand, the students at Manchester felt there was too much emphasis on mathematical modelling and theory. My daughter chose to do history and geography modules as part of her degree, both of which link well with economics. It's not just about wealth, but how that wealth is distributed - and that's where politics is also a factor, as are values and ethics.

My daughter's BA thesis was on global migration over time.

I have a feeling it was Andrew Neil I heard commenting on it - although I should know to take everything he says with a pinch of salt

It is interesting to see the comment in your linked article

It also asks that lecturers endorse collaborations between social sciences and humanities departments or "establish special departments that could oversee interdisciplinary programmes blending economics and other fields".

My daughter is doing a Masters in Organisational Behaviour and it is really interesting how it draws on both science and arts. Those taking the course come from both the Business Studies/Economics backgrounds and Psychology and similar. I have really enjoyed reading some of her texts (she is dyslexic and I have often acted as her reader) but technology is taking over and she now has software to read for her. Just in time as I can feel myself getting to the point where my lack of understanding will affect my reading. She does explain as it clarifies her own thoughts, but I think she will find the software a lot quicker

I don't know if all universities do, but my daughter did, both for her BA and MA.

I heard recently that you do not do a dissertation for an Economics degree dd; is that true? If one sided theory is being treated as fact and no dissertation is used to allow students to compare and contrast I can see why students feel short changed. I assume anyone doing a masters in Economic areas would do a thesis so at least some new thinking is coming through.

I'm also concerned how little some adults seem to know about economics. I'd like to see people like Ha-Joon Chang and Andy Haldane popularising economics on TV, in the same way Brian Cox has popularised physics.

I'm not an expert by any means, but having an economist daughter and a son, who is likely to work as a professional economist, I've picked up loads and can actually understand 'some' of what's going on and the theories behind it. It's really not that difficult until you get into the realms of economic modelling, when my maths lets me down.

There's a rebellion going on at the moment over economics teaching in universities. My daughter was involved in this...

www.theguardian.com/education/2014/may/04/economics-students-overhaul-subject-teaching

Yes, dj, I think they should. However, I'm also very wary of all the things people think pupils should learn at school. There aren't enough hours in the week for pupils to learn everything and, personally, I think they try to cover too much anyway.

The other problem is that too much was crammed into a Personal social and Health Education programme and, taught often by non-specialists to make up their timetable, it was too often a dumbed down waste of time.

However, pupils now have to stay in education of some sort until they're 18. I would very much like to see a compulsory beefed-up civics programme, including economics, politics and ethics, critical thinking, etc as part of the Sixth Form curriculum.

The question is about all children learning about economics, not just A level students.
Shouldn't all pupils learn about why they will pay taxes, who to, and how they are spent?
The more difficult you make it, the less likely pupils are to take it in.
Where does my money go, and how does the government get its money are much more likely to be thought relevant than GDP and how it is measured, I would have thought.

You would be more likely to look at a personal budget in Business Studies than Economics.