Economics education in school

At the least children should be taught how to budget. Then maybe they wouldn't then build up such huge card debts etc when they're old enough to have cards.
Or maybe this is parent's responsibility.
So what parts of economics should be taught to school children?

Economics has always been political. It's about choosing how money is spent, simplified.

steadystatemanchester.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/assumptions-of-ecological-economics-mb.pdf

How democracy works is taught to children from a very early age. It permeates our whole society. Cubs were always very accepting of democratic decisions the group made.

Yes, critical thinking should definitely be taught.

To my mind economics is as complicated as astro-physics, but more subject to personal preferences influenced by political outlook.

I agree thatbags that economics can be complicated. Husband is very interested, and tries to explain things to me such as money as a concept rather than a concrete entity - it's still beyond me. And I did "study" it at university for a year or two. Still got some of my essays.
All I remember now is the concept of the margin, plus money and interest as compared with property and rent, labour and wages etc. No doubt all outdated now. And too heavy for children I would have thought.

^"Economics . . . is about choosing how money is spent," - simplified to extinction!

Money as notes and coins is only a symbol, a substitute for the exchange of work for food, equal value for equal value. Economics is about how decisions in other fields affect the movement of money, and how the movement of money affects things in other fields. That involves far more complicated interactions than how it is spent.

It may be beyond children to understand all of it, but they are quite able to grasp some of the concepts.

Isaid money, not notes and coins. You obviously did not look at the link that went with that comment, Elegran.

I'm ashamed to say that, when I left school at 16 I worked in Local Government, the main reason being that they said they would pay for me to do A Levels. What they didn't say was that they had to be Economics and British Constitution. I was bored out of my head with both subjects and found economics especially hard to understand. I'd wanted to do English...

Whether or not I looked at the link is not really relevant to my reply to your post - economics is not just about spending the money, however much anyone tries to simplify it. Many people on here have mentioned how difficult a subject it is to understand.

There are some excellent videos on YouTube and elsewhere about understanding economics. The Bank of England have some, as do RSA Animate. Many of them are quite short and try to dispel the myths that economics is the same as running a household or running a business for profit.

Economics, Media studies and 'life skills' were all on the curriculum at one time. Governments have removed them. They find it easier to maintain power with a mostly ignorant electorate.

I have a minute understanding of national /international economics but I can balance a personal / work based budget.

Basic economics is something you learn as you progress through life,starting with your £1 a week spending money.
There should be opportunity in senior schools to choose it as a subject of course,as it well form the basis for further education and a career ,but I would not want to see it taking too much curriculum time before that stage.
Schools vary enormously around the country and delivering the curriculum in some is a far smoother process than others.

It has concerned me for some years that we do not cater fully for those pupils who are not academic,and would benefit far more from practical skills.
I do understand the reasoning behind the original suggestion,but feel that compulsory economics could be a real burden for pupils who may already be struggling with core subjects.

Economics A level does still exist as an academic subject. My daughter studied it and my son is waiting his results.

I'm sorry, but economics is just not the same thing as managing a personal budget. It's a huge myth and needs dispelling. I don't accept that the basics of macro-economics are difficult and I wish more people understood what's been going on.

As well as the RSA Animate videos, this speech by Andy Haldane at the BoE is worth reading...

www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Documents/speeches/2016/speech916.pdf

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

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.

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.

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

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

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

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.

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).

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

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 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.

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.