Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Oklahoma Schools Required To Teach Students Personal Finance

samzenpus posted about 5 months ago | from the value-of-a-dollar dept.

The Almighty Buck 304

Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "Paula Burkes reports that under legislation passed in 2007, Oklahoma students, effective this May, now must demonstrate an understanding in banking, taxes, investing, loans, insurance, identity theft and eight other areas to graduate. The intent of personal financial literacy education is to inform students how individual choices directly influence occupational goals and future earnings potential. Basic economic concepts of scarcity, choice, opportunity cost, and cost/benefit analysis are interwoven throughout the standards and objectives. 'Oklahoma has some of the strongest standards in the country,' says Amy Lee, executive director of the Oklahoma Council on Economic Education, which lobbied for and helped develop the curriculum. 'Where other states require four or five standards regarding earnings, savings and investing, Oklahoma has 14 standards including three that are state-specific: bankruptcy, the financial impact of gambling and charitable giving.' The law is designed to allow different districts to implement the curriculum in different ways, by offering instruction in various grade levels, or by teaching all the curriculum in a single class or spreading it across several courses. 'The intent of this law was always to graduate students out of high school with a strong foundation in personal financial literacy to reduce the many social ills that come from mismanaging personal finance,' says Jim Murphree. 'I cannot think of anything that we teach that is more relevant.'"

cancel ×

304 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Good (5, Insightful)

realilskater (76030) | about 5 months ago | (#46328821)

Maybe students will fully understand the ramifications of going deep in to debt to with student loans.

Re:Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46328895)

With the way paying off student loans are set up now, you can get a monthly payment of $0 for 25 years and the debt goes away, provided you got a worthless degree or can't get gainfully employed.

That's not a student loan, it's Pay It Forward (1, Interesting)

IgnorantMotherFucker (3394481) | about 5 months ago | (#46328983)

You are correct to the extent that you are discussing the proposed Pay It Forward plan, in which tuition is free, but one pays a fixed fraction of one's income for twenty-five years after graduation. One does not have to pay if one does not have income, and one's debt is forgiven after twenty-five years.

But to the best of my knowledge the Pay It Forward plan has yet to actually be implemented anywhere.

Student loans are funded by banks, and guaranteed by either the states or the federal government. The government pays the interest while you are in school, but if you are not enrolled - even if you haven't graduated - you have to start paying, even if you don't have a job.

A while back I calculated that student loans are actually just welfare for the banks. For the government to pay the interest while you are in school, as well as to guarantee the loan, so that the government pays if you default, costs the taxpayer more money than if the government just gave you the money outright, say with the Pell Grant that I received starting in 1982.

However if any legislator were to propose that we eliminate student loans, but then used the money saved to give outright grants, the banks would see to it that that legislator loses the next election.

Re:That's not a student loan, it's Pay It Forward (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | about 5 months ago | (#46329125)

If everybody defaulted, you'd be right. Check your work and assumptions.

Re:That's not a student loan, it's Pay It Forward (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329137)

You should check out the student loan revamp passed in 2010. It is no longer a welfare system for banks which is why several large banks are getting out of the student loan business.

You can apply for the income based payments through sallie mae right now.

It was an needless expense. Why should the government pay off interest when it can just fund the loan through the department of education and skip the interest payments and other fees while the student is in school?

My student loans started out at Washington Mutual, and when they went under, went straight to sallie mae and are now listed as owned by the department of education, but still serviced through sallie mae.

Re:That's not a student loan, it's Pay It Forward (0, Flamebait)

VikingNation (1946892) | about 5 months ago | (#46329457)

The "Pay It Forward" proposal amounts to an entitlement view on life that everyone is "owed" a right to higher education on someone else's dime. How many students are on educational tracks for occupations that will not pay enough to allow them to re-pay their debt?

Re:That's not a student loan, it's Pay It Forward (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329643)

Not really, it is contractual obligation. The higher institution (or whoever funding your education) is accepting the risk that you won't generate any income in trade for some percentage of your future income. It could easily be implemented by the gov't or private sector. I first saw this idea presented in the early 2000s. This is about managing and mitigating risk. It isn't a whole lot different reverse car insurance or annuity model. You live a long time, you extract more money then you pay in, you live a short time, you pay in more than you get out. "Pay it Forward", it just reversing that, you earn a bunch, you overpay for your education, you make a little, you underpay for your education.

Now institutions have an incentive to be very selective about the students they choose, and the amount of funding they give to various majors. I'm guessing that poetry majors will get a lot less money per student than say CS or mechanical engineering.

Re:Good (1)

nickmalthus (972450) | about 5 months ago | (#46329091)

One can't win at a game unless they know the rules.

Re:Good (2)

sexconker (1179573) | about 5 months ago | (#46329459)

One can't win at a game unless they know the rules.

False. Some people win at Baccarat.

Re:Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329663)

You son of a bitch! I just wasted ten minutes reading the rules of Baccarat and understand it less than when I knew nothing about it at all!

Re:Good (1)

epyT-R (613989) | about 5 months ago | (#46329399)

and with federal expenditure.

Re:Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329447)

Dream on. Government-controlled education is all about supporting the government-beneficial economic structure. The only real rule for ensuring you'll do better in the future is to AVOID BIG DEBTS. Nowhere in the popular media will you ever see that truth. And you certainly can't get it from government education, particularly since it's staffed with unionized employees who are largely insulated from the ever worsening economic environment.

Re:Good (1)

icebike (68054) | about 5 months ago | (#46329737)

The only real rule for ensuring you'll do better in the future is to AVOID BIG DEBTS. Nowhere in the popular media will you ever see that truth.

Because you are posting as AC, it seem likely that if I took 17 seconds to google avoiding debt and pasted a couple hundred links to prove you wrong you would declare them not part of "popular" media. So lets not play that game.

Here's the challenge: You define popular media.
Then we can talk.

Amazing (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46328833)

Great idea and one that is long overdue.

Shocked it came from a backwards, taliban state like Oklahoma.

Re:Amazing (2)

h8sg8s (559966) | about 5 months ago | (#46329081)

Usually an attitude held by those who've not lived there. It's a bit different, but given their population mix, about what you'd expect.

Re:Amazing (0)

xevioso (598654) | about 5 months ago | (#46329293)

I grew up in Tulsa and graduated from Oklahoma State. It is a backwards, taliban state, for the most part. But even a broken clock...blah blah blah...

I'm not surprised. (5, Insightful)

Valdrax (32670) | about 5 months ago | (#46329523)

You know, I count myself firmly as a dyed-in-the-wool liberal, but one of the strong suits of conservatism as a philosophy is a belief both in the value of self-reliance and self-responsibility, especially in a financial realm. I have no surprise seeing this come from a red state, and I wish more states would embrace such a curriculum.

It's irresponsible that we don't teach kids how to manage money, and it's a good place to get in their heads that math is useful for something, even if they don't like it. We need a society that values saving and long-term rewards over short-term consumption.

We spend too much time thinking of the other side as "the enemy" because of "wrong" beliefs that don't match our own and not enough time looking seriously at their strengths and how we can embrace those as common values -- places where we need to step up our own game in a bipartisan fashion.

So, good for you, Okies. May this be an example for the rest of us.

Re:I'm not surprised. (2, Funny)

ynp7 (1786468) | about 5 months ago | (#46329681)

Saving over short-term consumption? Are you trying to destroy our entire economy?!?!?

Re:I'm not surprised. (1)

Valdrax (32670) | about 5 months ago | (#46329699)

Saving over short-term consumption? Are you trying to destroy our entire economy?!?!?

Yes. And to build a better one in it's place.

I did say I was a liberal, didn't I? :-)

Re:I'm not surprised. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329871)

Too bad Oklahoma receives more in federal dollars than it pays in, unlike most 'liberal' states.

Which means they are reliant on people they hate to support them.

What's this story doing here? (0)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | about 5 months ago | (#46328837)

A story about Oklahoma that doesn't mention Christians, rednecks, or hillbillies? I don't get it, this is news for nerds. We need someone to look down on. How am I supposed to get my Two Minutes Hate [wikipedia.org] on?

Re:What's this story doing here? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46328969)

Don't worry, it's Oklahoma, something will come up soon enough.

Meanwhile in Kansas, there's the comments of a Senate candidate:

“One of my all-time favorites," Wolf posted to the Facebook picture. "From my residency days there was a pretty active 'knife and gun club' at Truman Medical Center. What kind of gun blows somebody's head completely off? I've got to get one of those.”

Re:What's this story doing here? (1)

erice (13380) | about 5 months ago | (#46329717)

Consider what they may not be teaching in order to cover topics that are

state-specific: bankruptcy, the financial impact of gambling and charitable giving

The school year and the material that can be covered in it is finite. If you add hefty new requirements, something else will have to be dropped. Maybe they can trim out all the "controversial" science.

Wow (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46328857)

I can get behind this type of teaching. As the summary states, there is nothing more relevant to someone graduating from high school with no real experience or specific working knowledge that is not self-taught.

It's actually unfortunate that they left it up to the districts as that means there will inevitably be multiple districts where it is planned, or taught, by someone who has no clue about it themselves.

Great Idea (5, Interesting)

Etherwalk (681268) | about 5 months ago | (#46328949)

Absolutely. Long overdue.

Re:Great Idea (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329601)

Yea, I agree too.

So where's my +5 mod?

Re:Great Idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329759)

Textbook example of the gross flaws of the moderation system here. Best ever my @ss.

Re:Wow (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329253)

As the summary states, there is nothing more relevant to someone graduating from high school with no real experience or specific working knowledge that is not self-taught.

Self-taught workers are typically better to begin with.

And while I'm in support of this, it's pathetic that we need classes to teach people such things; it shows how unintelligent most people are, and demonstrates further that schools are based on rote memorization.

Re:Wow (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329435)

it's pathetic that we need classes to teach people such things; it shows how unintelligent most people are

What do you propose we do? Kill the stupid people?

Re:Wow (4, Insightful)

icebike (68054) | about 5 months ago | (#46329615)

And while I'm in support of this, it's pathetic that we need classes to teach people such things; it shows how unintelligent most people are, and demonstrates further that schools are based on rote memorization.

I suppose you sprung from the womb, with a credit card, checkbook, investments all in hand, taxes paid up, retirement account established and ready to go?

Seriously, where do you suppose people learn stuff? Not everyone's parents are able to teach this kind of stuff, some scarcely know it themselves. What do you think education is for? If not teaching this, then what SHOULD they teach?

Its not like it is all expected to be taught to seniors in High school. It can be spread over many years. Just like everything else taught in public schools.

In sixth grade we had an investment chapter in one of my classes. We learned to to research stocks and bonds. We made investments (monopoly money). We tracked them every week through the newspaper. YES Newspaper. This was 1962 There was no internet. My parents never had enough to invest. They had no clue. I knew what a PE ratio was before I was out of grade school. (Didn't fully understand it, but knew where it came from and how to use it).

I just wish my mom had access to the water your mom drank. Maybe I would have sprung fully fledged into the delivery room, ready to go job hunting the next day.

Republican-controlled Oklahoma? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46328891)

Hey, why can't California or New York or Massachusetts have this?

Maybe they're too busy with stupid shit?

Let’s give up on academic freedom in favor of justice [thecrimson.com]

There's nothing progressive or liberal about the dolt that wrote that - that's just leftist statism/fascism talking. One wonders where such a moron learned that freedom is something to be given up for her perverted idea of "justice".

Re:Republican-controlled Oklahoma? (1)

sexconker (1179573) | about 5 months ago | (#46329529)

Hey, why can't California or New York or Massachusetts have this?

Maybe they're too busy with stupid shit?

Let’s give up on academic freedom in favor of justice [thecrimson.com]

There's nothing progressive or liberal about the dolt that wrote that - that's just leftist statism/fascism talking. One wonders where such a moron learned that freedom is something to be given up for her perverted idea of "justice".

Holy shit that link contains a lot of stupid.
Ughhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Re:Republican-controlled Oklahoma? (2)

hey! (33014) | about 5 months ago | (#46329645)

Well... [mass.edu]

My wife went to public school in Massachusetts in the 1960s and 1970s and in her town they taught personal finance as part of the curriculum. I think a lot of that kind of forward thinking went out with ed reform, which focused on more traditional academic subjects. Massachusetts was early on the ed reform bandwagon, and consequently our students perennially top the nation in math, science and reading scores in the past decade. It sounds like the Mass DoE is looking for a way to shoehorn back in some of the content that got squeezed out.

Also required in Oregon (2)

supersat (639745) | about 5 months ago | (#46328919)

This was required in Oregon when I was in high school. I was amazed to discover it wasn't mandatory everywhere.

Re:Also required in Oregon (0)

Nephandus (2953269) | about 5 months ago | (#46329195)

Being from a stupid religious private school, I was amazed that it wasn't either for public, while being amazed it wasn't covered in my supposed microeconomics class in community college. Comparing it to macroeconomics, which I took out of curiosity, I think those courses were primarily (neo)Keynesian indoctrination. They openly handwaved literally everything else. Thusly, I wonder how politically neutral this implementation is...

Re:Also required in Oregon (5, Insightful)

vux984 (928602) | about 5 months ago | (#46329471)

Thusly, I wonder how politically neutral this implementation is...

personal finances courses tend to be:

how to make a budget
how to balance a checkbook (even though nobody uses them)
how credit card interest works
how car loan interest works
how leasing works
how home mortgages work
how bank interest works (or in today's banks doesn't)

some very introductory stuff on investments (ie what are bonds, gics, stocks, dividends, mutual funds, etc).

And I would hope in today's versions they talk a bit about things like payday loans.

Its pretty practical stuff largely divorced from any economic theory.

I think this is a real good idea. (1, Insightful)

IgnorantMotherFucker (3394481) | about 5 months ago | (#46328933)

When I was six years old, I figured I was old enough to ask for an allowance.

"Mom? Can I have an allowance?"

"No Mike."

"But Mom! I want to buy my own candy bars."

"No Mike."

I begged and pleaded for like an hour. Finally Mom agreed to twenty-five cents a week. That meant that every two weeks, I could buy my own candy bar!

The following week I asked for my allowance. "What allowance?" Mom replied. I broke down in tears. "But Mom, you said I could have twenty-five cents a week." "No I didn't."

She did finally give me just that week's twenty-five cents. After that I gave up on even asking.

I have an older sister. When mom would treat the two of us to a movie, she would give my sister the money for both of our tickets. Mom pointed out that because Jean was older than I, she was more responsible with money.

I was down with that. Jean was three years older than I; the maturity difference between six and nine years old was obvious to me even then.

But when I got to be nine, Mom would still give Jean the money when treating us both to a movie. Even when I was in high school.

The end result of my own mother not trusting me with money, and not wanting to teach me to handle my own money, is that I did not finally figure out how to handle money ON MY OWN until I was a half-million dollars in debt! I am not fucking kidding.

Even the IRS, while the hassled me quite a bit, wrote me off as uncollectable. The California Franchise Tax Board, Maine Revenue Services and Canada Revenue Agency didn't exactly write me off. They just stopped calling.

I expect Citibank would like to know where I am. If they ever find me, I will declare bankrupcy.

But now, I'm a wizard with GNUCash, OpenOffice Calc, Excel and Quattro Pro. I don't have no accountant. I don't need no stinkin' accountant. I know how to read financial books.

However it is quite unlikely that I will ever purchase a home again. If I ever do it will either be because I scored options with a successful startup, or a start a successful business myself.

If you have a child yourself, you could save them - and yourself - a lot of trial and tribulation if you buy them a piggy bank at the very first opportunity. That would be when the could be trusted to handle a penny - yes a one cent piece, or your own national currency equivalent - without sticking it in their mouth and asphyxiating.

Get one of the ceramic piggy banks that does not have a cork stopper, so you have to break it open with a hammer.

When your chillun sees what has become of his financial management upon cracking open his or her piggy bank, raise his allowance to a nickel.

Do this the right way, and they'll put themselves through college, as did a close friend of mine from high school. He was promoted to manager at McDonalds when he was eighteen, and had only just the week before graduated high school.

Re:I think this is a real good idea. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329121)

That sounds like an awful lot of pain

My parents started me off with a small allowance and a bank account, any time I got money it went into the account and into the book, every time I took money out, it went into the book.

If I wanted to buy something they showed me how to create a budget rather than blowing the whole wad, when there was something I wanted I could have afforded it but it would have drained my whole account and had no money for anything else like movies or whatever.

I carried this knowledge with me when I got my first credit card in college, hell I was able to pay for my first trip to Japan using cash, have enough spending money to have fun and still have money left over just in case without having to touch the Visa, the other people I was travelling with had just enough for travel money and basic expenses and had some big bills to deal with when they got back home.

It doesn't take a lot of work to learn how to handle money, all it takes is somebody to show you the basics at a young age and reinforce the activity.

Your parents did right by you. (1)

IgnorantMotherFucker (3394481) | about 5 months ago | (#46329267)

I should have mentioned that my father is also at fault, but only in his own way.

Were I to have ever asked him for an allowance, he would have just said "Go ask your mother".

Now in many ways he was a wonderful father. That's how I got accepted to study astronomy at Caltech.

My father taught me to pound nails the very instant I was strong enough to hold his hammer in two hands. I had to wait a long time before he would trust me with his circular power saw. Now I own HIS father's contractor's table saw, I am very good at carpentry so if coding ever doesn't work out I could do construction.

He did that in much the same way as little girls were taught to type, you know, in case their husband ever abandoned them. :-/

Anyway:

"Dad!!! Dad!!! the ice cream man is coming!! Can I buy an ice cream?"

He would just whip out his wallet and hand me a few dollar bills, without counting them, without ever expecting to be paid back.

That was nice at the time, but to this very day I have a problem with binge-purchasing. It is very difficult for me to keep much cash in my wallet for any length of time.

Really what should have happened, is that THE TWO OF THEM should have agreed on some reasonable allowance, then if I wanted an ice cream, I would be expected to pay for it out of my allowance.

Re:Your parents did right by you. (1)

vux984 (928602) | about 5 months ago | (#46329595)

Really what should have happened, is that THE TWO OF THEM should have agreed on some reasonable allowance, then if I wanted an ice cream, I would be expected to pay for it out of my allowance.

Agreed and disagreed at the same time. I have kids, and they have a modest allowance; and its amazing to see them save up for a few months and buy things like a pokemon game for the DS or whatever. So I agree with you about the importance and value of that end of things.

But it's modest enough that if the ice cream man comes up the street, and they buy an ice cream that would blow the majority of their biweekly allowance. They know that... and thus don't blow their allowance on ice cream... which is great. They've learned something.

But at the same time, as parents, we want our kids childhoods experiences to include things like 'spontaneous ice cream on a hot summer day' so we buy the overpriced ice cream once in a while, and don't expect our kids to pay for it.

Re:I think this is a real good idea. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329431)

God damn, you are a fuckin' whiner. Your parents are at fault for this, your parents are at fault for that - woe is me, I cheated everyone I ever entered into a contract with because I didn't know better but I am a financial genius. How about 'fraudulent fuck' instead? That sounds like a more apt description for you. How about some little personal god-damn responsibility? Own your failures or be owned by them - and perhaps a little prison time would help that persecution complex you've got going there - then you can feel REAL persecution...and a bit of prosecution too - just to top it all off....

Holy shit! Where's the Tylenol...

Re:I think this is a real good idea. (2)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | about 5 months ago | (#46329569)

forget about managing money.

just learn to SUMMARIZE, dammit.

we ain't got time for this shit, man!

Re:I think this is a real good idea. (1)

sexconker (1179573) | about 5 months ago | (#46329577)

Get one of the ceramic piggy banks that does not have a cork stopper, so you have to break it open with a hammer.

You hold it upside down and insert a butter knife into the slot at an angle, then shake gently. Coins come out with a bit of doing, and you don't have to spend those coins on a new piggy bank.

Re:I think this is a real good idea. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329669)

So basically the moral of this story is:

1. Your mom fucking sucks
2. You are a fucking idiot
3. Your mom should have put you in a home for 'special' people.

Re:I think this is a real good idea. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329755)

The word you are looking for is "me," not "I."

Watch some corporate retard (4, Funny)

future assassin (639396) | about 5 months ago | (#46328971)

step in and cry foul that schools shouldn't be teaching kids to be wise with the finances as it will upset the delicate balance of free enterprise.

More like liberal angst (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 5 months ago | (#46329129)

at giving students enough information to realize just what a raw deal college is for most students.

Re:More like liberal angst (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329749)

Republican angst. The banks paid good money to them to protect that revenue stream. opensecrets.org

The Republicans oppose teaching critical thinking (0)

IgnorantMotherFucker (3394481) | about 5 months ago | (#46329173)

For example, just the other day I saw an ad that said something like "AAPL! Could you turn one thousand dollars into one hundred thousand dollars almost overnight?"

That's known as a "Pump-And-Dump Scheme" Arguably such an advertisement should be illegal, but this is America!

To teach critical thinking, would be for example to teach schoolchildren not to trust advertising.

The right wing quite forcefully opposes such forms of instruction.

Re:The Republicans oppose teaching critical thinki (1)

khallow (566160) | about 5 months ago | (#46329327)

The right wing quite forcefully opposes such forms of instruction.

Do you have an example in mind? Or is this the doings of the imaginary right wing?

Re:The Republicans oppose teaching critical thinki (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329705)

Dick Cheney was imaginary? Whew, so it really was just a nightmare.

I can cite a newspaper article, but not now (1)

IgnorantMotherFucker (3394481) | about 5 months ago | (#46329721)

It was several years ago that I read this in the news. I don't recall where I read it, but it was in a dead-tree newspaper.

Given that there is opposition to teaching evolution in some states, and that some state legislature tried to pass a law that the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter be exactly equal to three, how is it that you assert that the opposition to critical thinking on the part of the right wing is just my imagination?

Re:Watch some corporate retard (1, Informative)

stephenmac7 (2700151) | about 5 months ago | (#46329355)

No, the less government crowd wants people to make a company and gain money. There is no, "Let's make it so that only some people have the chance to create a corporation." It's more like, "Let's let everyone start pretty much in the same spot, then allow them to fail or succeed based on their own merits." This is in contrast to the progressive, "Let's make sure everyone finishes in the same spot, we don't care where they started or how hard they worked. You succeeded? Great! Now give away all your work." Also, there is not a "delicate balance of free enterprise". The whole idea behind conservatism is that "capitalism will find a way to make it work".

Teachers union brought to heel (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329009)

OK put a leash on their teacher's union back in 2001 and since with Right To Work laws, school accountability reforms and other measures. The union has actually lost members as existing members walk away from the union.

Lacking a strong union to dominate the state legislature they've been able to innovate. Otherwise, introducing new curriculum like this would have been precluded by the union because it displaces tenured staff; there are only so many hours of school a day and teaching personal finance takes up time that should be used for gender/race/sexual-orientation sensitivity training, and stuff.

Re:Teachers union brought to heel (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329393)

Modding the post down won't change the truth.

This is the crap that " gender/race/sexual-orientation sensitivity training" devotees publish:

The Doctrine of Academic Freedom [thecrimson.com]

Let’s give up on academic freedom in favor of justice

...

It is tempting to decry frustrating restrictions on academic research as violations of academic freedom. Yet I would encourage student and worker organizers to instead use a framework of justice. After all, if we give up our obsessive reliance on the doctrine of academic freedom, we can consider more thoughtfully what is just.

Sandra Y.L. Korn ’14, a Crimson editorial writer, is a joint history of science and studies of women, gender and sexuality concentrator in Eliot House. Her column usually appears on alternate Mondays.

"[O]bsessive reliance on academic freedom"?!?!?!

What.

The.

Fuck?!?!?

Someone majoring in the History of Science calls for getting rid of academic freedom?

Talk about a wasted education.

Oklahoma's business (1)

whizbang77045 (1342005) | about 5 months ago | (#46329017)

It strikes me that this is Oklahoma's business, and they can do it however they want to.

Should be part of nationwide standards (1)

PeeAitchPee (712652) | about 5 months ago | (#46329059)

It is unbelievable to me that this isn't somehow required, at the Federal level. WTF do we have a Department of Education for if stuff like this is missing?

DOE is there for teachers, not students (1, Interesting)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 5 months ago | (#46329179)

The DOE has never been about helping students. It's always been a federal organization built to help teachers only.

Which is why shutting it down would make a lot of sense, the communities could come up with sensible standards like teaching financial skills.

Re: DOE is there for teachers, not students (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329291)

What kind of standard gets set again and again on a local level?

Re: DOE is there for teachers, not students (1)

sexconker (1179573) | about 5 months ago | (#46329653)

What kind of standard gets set again and again on a local level?

Flexible, relevant, competitive standards developed by the people they will directly impact.

I bet you have a standard routine for wiping your anus. It gets set again and again on a local level. Everyone has their own particular method, but guess what, it works for them. Now once in a while you'll get the retard who just fails and smears shit everywhere, but thankfully they're only impacting themselves. You get to wipe they way you see fit for yourself. If you're ever dissatisfied in your wiping technique, you can poll your peers and see how they wipe. Do any of them use bidets? Or those moist towelette things? You can borrow from them, or you can keep on doing whatever you do. The bottom line is that you handle your shit how you want to handle it.

Re:DOE is there for teachers, not students (0)

mcl630 (1839996) | about 5 months ago | (#46329429)

What does the Department of Energy have to do with it?

Re:DOE is there for teachers, not students (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about 5 months ago | (#46329565)

Excuse me, but a sweeping conclusion regarding a cabinet level department of the United States Government and you can't even get the commonly accepted abbreviation of the name right?

Come on man. You need to do better than that to be taken seriously.

Re:Should be part of nationwide standards (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329311)

Not for running schools, no, which is why people complaining about it are usually way off the mark. They lament the failing schools, and say the Federal Department of Education is obviously running them poorly, yet never seem to realize that the actual operations of their schools are in the hands of local people, not some Washington bureaucrats.

Except their actual remit is considerably less:

http://www2.ed.gov/about/what-we-do.html

Your school curriculum? Try the State Capitol, or the local school board. Going to the US Capitol would only help if it's DC, or a Department of State/Defense overseas school. Or maybe Indian Affairs, I'm not sure.

Re:Should be part of nationwide standards (1)

stephenmac7 (2700151) | about 5 months ago | (#46329389)

AFAIK, the tenth amendment prevents the federal government from making such a law: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." The constitution doesn't seem to say anything about teaching finance in public schools.

Re:Should be part of nationwide standards (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329611)

The Constitution doesn't say anything about Education, yet we have Federal Department of Education. The Constitution doesn't say anything about environmental law, yet we have the Federal EPA. The Constitution doesn't say anything about Health Insurance, yet we have HealthCare.gov (if it's up right now). The Constitution doesn't say anything about ... [you get the idea]

That ship sailed long ago.

Re:Should be part of nationwide standards (2)

The Cat (19816) | about 5 months ago | (#46329723)

The Federal Government has no constitutional authority to set education standards. It's a state issue [wikipedia.org] .

But fiat money is just a theory! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329065)

They should teach both sides of the Bitcoin controversy.

Re:But fiat money is just a theory! (1)

sexconker (1179573) | about 5 months ago | (#46329671)

They should teach both sides of the Bitcoin controversy.

Side A: Bitcoins are great.
Side B: Bitcoins are great, and Doge coins are Bitcoins + fun!

This might help reduce the divorce rate (4, Interesting)

cold fjord (826450) | about 5 months ago | (#46329073)

Hopefully this will help reduce the divorce rate.

Divorcé's Guide to Marriage - Study Reveals Five Common Themes Underlie Most Divorces [wsj.com]

Money was the No. 1 point of conflict in the majority of marriages, good or bad, that Dr. Orbuch studied. And 49% of divorced people from her study said they fought so much over money with their spouse—whether it was different spending styles, lies about spending, one person making more money and trying to control the other—that they anticipate money will be a problem in their next relationship, too.

Many marriages today are 'til debt do us part [usatoday.com]

Maybe we should all institute internal accounting? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329191)

Like this couple that pays each other to watch the kids?

http://www.nbcnews.com/busines... [nbcnews.com]

The ones who really need it (1)

tomhath (637240) | about 5 months ago | (#46329075)

The intent of personal financial literacy education is to inform students how individual choices directly influence occupational goals and future earnings potential. Basic economic concepts of scarcity, choice, opportunity cost, and cost/benefit analysis are interwoven throughout the standards and objectives.

It's a shame that there's no way to force those concepts into the heads of the students who drop out. I suppose you can only help the ones who will be helped; the rest will spend their lives complaining that they're not being helped enough.

Total crock (-1, Flamebait)

jodido (1052890) | about 5 months ago | (#46329087)

This is a total crock. The purpose is to blame the victim. If you don't have a job, if you can't pay your mortgage or your student loans, must be because you didn't pay attention in your "personal finance" class in high school. How about a program that provides decent-paying jobs? Wouldn't that do a lot toward ending personal financial crises?

Re:Total crock (2)

PeeAitchPee (712652) | about 5 months ago | (#46329111)

Because even if you have a decent-paying job, you can still make shit decisions and piss it all away very quickly. Look at the large percentage of NFL players who are bankrupt at the end of their careers as a simple illustration of this. This is also true with the vast majority of people who don't earn nearly that amount of money. LIVE WITHIN YOUR MEANS, whatever they may be.

Re:Total crock (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329251)

It's sort of unnecessary. Most high schools have classes in home economics, or straight up business classes that teach skills like making a household budget, managing credit, how to calculate interest for a car loan, etc. Given the sponsors of the OCEE, I have a feeling this is going to be part instructional courses and part corporate propaganda.

Re:Total crock (1)

sexconker (1179573) | about 5 months ago | (#46329767)

It's sort of unnecessary. Most high schools have classes in home economics, or straight up business classes that teach skills like making a household budget, managing credit, how to calculate interest for a car loan, etc. Given the sponsors of the OCEE, I have a feeling this is going to be part instructional courses and part corporate propaganda.

Where have you been the past 30 years? Home economics, wood/metal/auto shop, gym/PE, and driver's ed with actual driving training are all but gone. Some dipshits convinced people that those skills wouldn't be necessary anymore, that home ec was offensive, that gym made Bily feel bad for being a fatty, and that training kids to drive on the school parking lot was too much of a liability, so they just let them mow their classmates down at the prom. (Don't worry, they've worked it out so the prom is held after school hours, not on school grounds, and is technically organized by the senior class reps not the school administration, so the school can't get sued.)

Today's high schools have kids discussing feelings more than they have them learning anything useful, and we're shitting out kids who can't cope with reality. This has been going on so long now that those kids are having their own kids come out of the same schools, equally useless. (Hell, they're often still in school when they have their kids.)

Re:Total crock (1)

khallow (566160) | about 5 months ago | (#46329419)

How about a program that provides decent-paying jobs? Wouldn't that do a lot toward ending personal financial crises?

Most such "programs" provide decent-paying jobs by taking away more decent-paying jobs elsewhere, but doing so in a invisible manner (few people see opportunity costs). I suggest market capitalism instead (it doesn't have to be "free market", regulated markets usually work well too) as something that actually works at creating decent-paying jobs.

If you don't have a job, if you can't pay your mortgage or your student loans, must be because you didn't pay attention in your "personal finance" class in high school.

BUT you might not have such large mortgage and student loans with that personal finance class. The more people who have smaller, more manageable problems, the better it is for society as a whole. This isn't about preventing financial mistakes altogether, but about reducing the number of people who are in seriously screwed up financial circumstances and about improving everyone's quality of life.

Shorter words (3, Interesting)

sl3xd (111641) | about 5 months ago | (#46329089)

Oklahoma's teachers had better use shorter words in their curriculum than their lobbyists used for the press.

Though I also think high schoolers should be required to work a minimum wage job before graduation, for at least a few months. That way, instead of abstract concepts, they know "it feels like this to earn $100.00."

Re:Shorter words (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329319)

What jobs?

No need for hyperbole (1)

ohnocitizen (1951674) | about 5 months ago | (#46329093)

I cannot think of anything that we teach that is more relevant

Of course you can. The ability to communicate, math, the ability to think for yourself... All relevant to students in general - and in many cases pre-requisites for a lot of the personal finance curriculum. That being said, glad to see this is being taught - it's a great addition!

Re:No need for hyperbole (1)

khallow (566160) | about 5 months ago | (#46329535)

I believe personal finance to be an integral part of the ability to think for yourself. For example, there's a huge problem with people who don't understand economics at all, but want to make all sorts of society impacting rules and policies. Personal finances actually provides a means by which people can understand the mechanics of a society and government.

Meanwhile, in Texas... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329123)

They're busy teaching kids "vote for lower taxes, and you, too, will eventually be rich! As long as you never have health problems. Or disagree with your employer so they fire you."

Um.......you couldn't be more wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329353)

http://smartertexas.org/?p=368

Then again, why let facts stand in the way of your personal bigotry?

Not the job of the Government/Corporations! (1, Interesting)

EMG at MU (1194965) | about 5 months ago | (#46329197)

This scares me. We have to realize that textbooks and curriculum are not guaranteed to be written by truly objective and qualified academics, and that not all teachers are qualified to teach personal finance. With those things in mind, do we want our public schools teaching personal finance?

Look at those states fighting evolution, look at those states fighting climate change. Think of all the times in high school that it was obvious the teacher had no real knowledge of the subject matter and was just reading out of a book and relying on pre-prepared material.

In theory, teaching students personal finance would result in financially literate young adults that would avoid the pitfalls of not understanding finance and pass on those positive skills to their children. In practice, theory is never the same as practice.

Re:Not the job of the Government/Corporations! (1)

khallow (566160) | about 5 months ago | (#46329427)

What's the point of having public schools? Might as well get them to teach something useful.

Re:Not the job of the Government/Corporations! (3, Interesting)

tapi0 (2805569) | about 5 months ago | (#46329433)

Following your argument (that teachers generally aren't able to teach, if I read correctly) to the obvious extreme, why don't we just do away with schools completely as they're obviously pointless. Really?

Re:Not the job of the Government/Corporations! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329441)

Make sure they teach the controversy! After all, Finance is really just a theory.

Re:Not the job of the Government/Corporations! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329449)

In practice, theory is never the same as practice.
 
Correct. Why even bother teaching the kids since there's no guarantees in life.

Re:Not the job of the Government/Corporations! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329677)

In practice, theory is never the same as practice.

But in theory, it is.

Re:Not the job of the Government/Corporations! (1)

sexconker (1179573) | about 5 months ago | (#46329801)

Look at those states fighting evolution, look at those states fighting climate change. Think of all the times in high school that it was obvious the teacher had no real knowledge of the subject matter and was just reading out of a book and relying on pre-prepared material.

Who's fighting evolution? How?
I thought you WANTED people to fight slimate change. Now you're all for it? Make up your mind!
And what the fuck does "pre-prepared" mean? Does it perhaps mean "prepared"?

Just wait... (2)

prisoner-of-enigma (535770) | about 5 months ago | (#46329243)

I'm sure someone will stand up shortly and complain that this is somehow racist, sexist, or otherwise deleterious to the well-being of the pupils being schooled. Can't have kids learning about how money is made, handled, taxed, and invested. That would interfere with them being good little minions who simply do what they're told by their betters...i.e. those in government power.

Re:Just wait... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329339)

Har. As opposed to be being good little minions who simply do what they're told by their 1% betters.

Political Bomb (0)

Jim Sadler (3430529) | about 5 months ago | (#46329387)

I have grave doubts that this course in finances is not designed to support right wing ideas. There is almost nothing involving finances that is not political or a matter of unproven beliefs. Traditional ideas about business and the work ethic may have already killed us off as the effects are accumulating and no remedy for the growing, negative effects, is at hand. For example we are no where close to eliminating slash and burn deforestation which has the potential to kill all life on Earth. We have no handle at all on causing the population boom to reverse itself. The world's oceans are effectively dead or at least on their death beds. We can not house, feed or provide care and stability for the world's population. All of these woes fall back upon the fact that businesses are at the root of it all. And not one single politician deals with any of this, ever. Business and finances are all about endless growth. Growth itself may be our worst enemy. A catastrophic, world wide, total collapse of the economic system just might be the best thing that could happen to us if it shut down modern businesses and eliminated 90% of the world population. Given that the above is somewhat correct would it not be true that little Johny and Susie should be taught that bankrupticy and no-pay of debts is an ideal state of behavior? Should educated students be taught to maintain,advance, or destroy existing systems? It is all political.

Amen (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329403)

Its about time. I don't recall this being mandatory when I was in school back in the 80's, though I took a basic accounting class as an elective, it was not required. Most of the folks I know who are my age (mid 40's) have at least a basic understanding of these concepts, though the high level of credit card debt shows we're not immune to idiocy.

But I recently had to bang my head against a desk and wonder WTF is wrong with the next generation when a 20 something I know and am "friends" with on Facebook posted about his first paycheck as a full time employee. His comment was along the lines of "The company I work for screwed me over. I worked 40 hours at $10/hr. I made $400 and I only brought home about $275. I should have made about $100 more, I mean taxes are only 6%" (6% is our state sales tax). This was followed by a few dozen posts by his contemporaries who were offering him condolences, telling him to find another employer who wouldn't screw with his money, etc. A few days later he complained about how his bank was screwing him out of money because he had $50 in his account and deposited a check for $250 then used his debit card to make a $100 purchase..... According to him, he should still have $200 and is pissed that his bank screwed him because he now has only $170...... no one ever explained to him that a debit card purchase clears the bank within hours, a day at most while the check he deposited might take up to 3 days to clear and he had overdrafted and been fined $30. Again, none of his contemporaries posted that he was an idiot, the overwhelming number of posts were about how banks screw them all the time saying that they did not have enough money in the bank when they just deposited a check...

Yet another posted about his experience buying a car..... it was $8000, it was a 3 year loan. I forget the exact interest rate but say it was 5%.... He at least understood that 5% meant $400, but had no clue why his payment was going to be higher than $235, no one had ever explained compounding interest to him. We started talking and I explained that when I bought my house I financed 200k @ 3% interest for 30 years. I asked him what he thought my payment was.... He pulled out his phone, openned up the calculator and figured I was only paying about $575/month and said that he should buy a house instead of renting, it would be cheaper...... When I explained the concept of compounding interest, and escrow for taxes and insurance, he was shocked. When I told him that that was actually a decent interest rate and you'd pay more if your FICO score was low, he stared at me blankly and asked "My what score".

These were both high school graduates, both with full time jobs. I know its only anecdotal, but A mutual friend who is my own age and I were talking later and he told me that he didn't bother to respond because he'd had this conversation only a few months earlier with someone else who still didn't get it even after having it explained to them.

Banks have no justification for that. (2)

Valdrax (32670) | about 5 months ago | (#46329685)

According to him, he should still have $200 and is pissed that his bank screwed him because he now has only $170...... no one ever explained to him that a debit card purchase clears the bank within hours, a day at most while the check he deposited might take up to 3 days to clear and he had overdrafted and been fined $30. Again, none of his contemporaries posted that he was an idiot, the overwhelming number of posts were about how banks screw them all the time saying that they did not have enough money in the bank when they just deposited a check...

To be fair, that's a legitimate complaint. There's no justifiable reason for that delay nor is there one for not giving a grace period until the end of it before finalizing the overdraft fee. The only reason that historical processing delay is still there is to screw customers out of a fee that wouldn't happen if they put as much emphasis on processing deposits as they did on withdrawals. There's no technical justification for such a difference between the two nor for the lack of forgiveness.

He may be ignorant for not expecting to be screwed in that way, but it is still him getting screwed for no better reason than that it's a revenue stream for the banks.

Sudden outbreak of common sense (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329407)

Wow.

I like this. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329417)

I took a Macroeconomic and a Microeconomic course in College and having even a basic understanding of Supply&Demand and Opportunity cost has helped me immensely in life, to better understand the motivation of how anything works.

Start teaching civics again too! (3, Insightful)

riverat1 (1048260) | about 5 months ago | (#46329517)

We used to have civics classes back when I was in school. We learned about the Federal, State, County and City governments, their structure, how you can interact with government, etc. Too many people are so clueless about how it all works they shouldn't even be allowed to vote (although most of them probably don't).

Re:Start teaching civics again too! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46329695)

At least where I live, civics is still taught. Guess what? It makes no difference, and mainly because schools are all about rote memorization and propaganda, not understanding. Kids just forget all but the most easy to remember facts, because that's all they did: Memorize facts. These classes don't instill the sense that freedom is important; they don't help kids understand the constitution; and they certainly don't do much else than attempt to teach kids to be submissive to authority. When my son showed me what sorts of things they're working on in his civics class, I just sighed.

History classes clearly also aren't doing a good enough job of teaching people to be wary of the government.

Expecting worse.. (1, Flamebait)

Tengoo (446300) | about 5 months ago | (#46329589)

Was anyone else prepared for something much worse after reading the words "Oklahoma Schools Required to Teach..."?

Look at the bright side (1, Flamebait)

Patent Lover (779809) | about 5 months ago | (#46329597)

I saw "Oklahoma" and "required to teach". I thought it was going to be intelligent design.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>