Economics education in school

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

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, 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.

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.

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.

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...

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

^"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.

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.

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.

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

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?

Probably because Economics has gone political?

I rather think your YouTube video is an example of things to come DD - master classes fed online. My daughter's college has been looking for an Economics teacher for 18 months.

Ten theories now.

Iwas just going to put that link on, daphne, but you beat me to it.

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/07/15/rsa-animate-economics-is-for-everyone/

The comments about it are interesting on this link.
Ihave a feeling this was thought of as silly on another thread; perhaps not so silly here.

Economics is for everyone!

www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdbbcO35arw

Don't think it entered our DS's head either.

There is a shortage of Religious Studies teachers here too partly due to the downgrading of the subject in the proposed English Baccalaureate (not sure of spelling !).

Our DS1 did an Economics degree too rosesareread but teaching never entered his head

There is a shortage of maths teachers too.

Our DS did economics at school and went on to do his degree in it.All secondary schools should offer the subject, three schools in your area Greenfinch that's bad isn't it? A shortage of economics teachers.

That would be a good idea Witzend

As for Economics in school ,who is going to teach it? We know of at least 3 secondary schools in our area who have so far been unable to recruit someone to teach the subject for the next school year and one of those schools prides it self on all subjects being taught by specialists.

Of course I should have deleted 'single' in my penultimate sentence. ?

One thing I wish they'd bring back (if they haven't already though I doubt it) is précis writing. You see so much waffle- and jargon-ridden English where the essential meaning isn't clear, and sometimes you can doubt whether the writer was 100% clear, either. I have to say I think some writers of officialise can't write anything much without a load of jargon/cliches - 'addressing the issues' is one such ubiquitous cliche.

While at uni my dd1 had a lecturer who made them write a particular essay in not more than 500 words (IIRC though it might have been even fewer). The point of the exercise was to cut waffle and padding and make every single word count towards the argument.
A very valuable exercise IMO.

I am not sure that it matters whether people are "thick" or not - if we mean lacking in intelligence - there is a spectrum of intelligence but too much store has been set by it to my mind.

What I have seen, however, is that people have not bothered to acquire knowledge and that they haven't applied critical thinking to the information they have received.

There is a lot of pushing back in education these days so that children come to subjects a lot earlier than they once did. If they are going to leave school at GCSE level then that is essential or they never come across these things. Hopefully more and more are going into further and higher education but that will not suit everyone.

(It was a good thought Luckygirl and I agree)