Monday, September 5, 2016

Make Personal Finance Education Mandatory

This article makes an interesting case.  Sex Education is mandatory and yet many students simply never learn how to manage their money. CNN Money: Personal Finance



Anonymous said...

I couldn't agree more.


jerrye92002 said...

No doubt an excellent idea, but if the public schools teach personal finance the way they teach sex education or American history, let's just forget the whole thing.

John said...

Do you mean that they teach based on facts and data? Sex Education Stds Instead of trying to convince people how to behave based on some groups Religious values?

As for history, what travesty do you think they are conducting in this area?

jerrye92002 said...

your citation simply confirms the general notion that the purpose of Sex Ed /IS/ to alter behavior, to avoid pregnancy and STDs. Religion does not have to enter into it, but if society's values happen to correspond, are you going to prohibit the teaching of values where they are obviously beneficial in promoting the behaviors you are trying to promote? Beyond that, I believe society has a rightful expectation that the schools will transmit their values to the next generation or, at minimum, not contradict them. Handing out condoms with the notion that" we can't stop them" is just like offering amnesty to illegal immigrants – it is an incentive for more of what you are trying to reduce.

As for American history, you probably were not involved when Minnesota set out to rewrite the history standards and had to back down because their proposals were more about indoctrination than about history. Many important facts about American history were left out and a concentration on the many sins of our past were substituted. Recently the federal social studies standards were released too much of the same criticism. That's the problem when you let government write the history, it gets done by the "Ministry of Truth."

John said...

Now I have seen enough of the curriculum to understand that it stresses abstinence as the safest route. And that protection should be used if the teen chooses otherwise. What exactly would you have them add to this message?

- if you masturbate you will go blind?
- if you have pre-marital sex you will go to hell?
- Other

Now let's be more specific about the History "changes"... I assume until the past ~50 years most of the history books were written by biased old white guys. (ie the winner gets to write the history) So what tales cause you angst?

- Columbus was not the brave fair adventurer we thought him to be. He was actually an egotistical religious zealot who tortured and killed "heathens", and finally had to removed by his government.

- The Bureau of Indian Affairs and their affiliated schools committed many acts of brutality against kids as they tried to make them assimilate into the White culture.

- The reality that White males controlled almost the whole country and treated everyone else as second class citizens for ~150 years.

- Other?

Now I am not in any hurry to pay reparations based on things that occurred generations ago. But I sure am happy to ensure that the real history gets recorded and taught.

jerrye92002 said...

I would have them add that this isn't just mechanics and that it can have tragic consequences, that history teaches it's not a good idea. I would teach that condoms fail even when used correctly, that other forms of birth control don't protect from STDs, that some STDs are rather permanently debilitating.

But more than that, let us admit that it is HIGHLY possible to teach this subject incorrectly, by a simple matter of emphasis, or something being left unclear. You've heard me repeat the line from the sex ed gurus that says, "don't have sex, but if you do use a condom." What message does that send to hormone-addled teens? That they should always have a banana handy when they have sex, to put a condom on? The message should be, don't have sex, period. Here's why. THEN you can talk about "when you're older this is birth control."

And it is a matter of emphasis or balance that is missing from too many history standards. I don't mind them teaching about the evils of slavery, but can we mention Abe Lincoln or that he was a Republican? Can we praise Thomas Jefferson for the Declaration and Constitution without dredging up his slaves? Or at minimum, do both when length permits? The purpose of American history is to talk about those things that make the country great and special. If you want the complete record and have the class time to delve into the "detours" from that E pluribus unum- creating narrative, fine, but don't make it the whole story. Don't whitewash the past, but don't try to live there.

Anonymous said...

"I don't mind them teaching about the evils of slavery, but can we mention Abe Lincoln or that he was a Republican?"

You can't talk about him being a Republican without describing how far removed the Republican party is now from the days of Lincoln. Hint: It's entirely different.

"Can we praise Thomas Jefferson for the Declaration and Constitution without dredging up his slaves?"

Why would you intentionally leave out important aspects of the life of one of our founders? Sounds like you have an agenda. But, no, it's only liberals who have an agenda in education. LOL

"The purpose of American history is to talk about those things that make the country great and special."

I'd call that jingoism, not education.


jerrye92002 said...

The point is, Joel, if you only have one paragraph about Thomas Jefferson in the book, the Declaration and Constitution are more important than the fact that he, like almost every other landed gentleman, held slaves. The latter did not distinguish him nor make him an historical figure.

It's not jingoism, it's some sense of national pride engendered by a reasonably accurate rendering of history. Let others teach hatred for America, we don't have to do it ourselves.

Anonymous said...

"It's not jingoism, it's some sense of national pride engendered by a reasonably accurate rendering of history. Let others teach hatred for America, we don't have to do it ourselves."

You have a strange definition of hatred. You sound like a "librul".


jerrye92002 said...

Correct, "hatred" is the wrong word. "lack of respect" might be better. Our students should be taught first what is right about the USA, and then later we can talk about our various faults. We should get credit for freeing the slaves before we are told to feel guilty of having ever had them in the first place. Seems like too much of our modern education focuses on how we should "feel" about history rather than the important historical facts. That's "librul."

John said...

I love this hobby... I learn so many strange words...

jingoism: the feelings and beliefs of people who think that their country is always right and who are in favor of aggressive acts against other countries

John said...

My youngest is in American History this year and her Teacher is incredibly thorough. (ie loves history) I will need to checkout her textbook.

From what I remember of the other 2... They focused on the important facts and things like Jefferson being a slave owner got little or no coverage.

I think events like what America did to the Blacks, Native Americans and American Japanese should get full coverage... We want to make sure our children learn from our tainted past.

And let's make sure they learn that prohibition was a real bad idea... I like my adult beverages... :-)

John said...

One more definition.

1: the study of past events
2: events of the past
3: past events that relate to a particular subject, place, organization, etc.

jerrye92002 said...

As I said, it is a matter of emphasis. If those "faults" of history are taught in the larger context of the Civil War and Emancipation, Manifest Destiny and the Trail of Tears, Pearl Harbor and Manzanar, only then can the right lessons be drawn. We err, and then, with freedom, we fix.

As for prohibition, I happen to think it was a good idea at the time, but like much of the liberal agenda today flies in the face of the laws of human nature. People believed they had the right AND claimed the responsibility for choosing an adult beverage. By the time it was repealed, the rampant abuse of alcohol had been tamed and was largely done responsibly.

John said...

It still sounds like you want to spin history. And yes, almost every presentation of facts / data / history has a spin.

Please remember that most of the instructors are Americans who believe in the importance of Democracy and Freedom. They have a somewhat different perception / interpretation of these things than you do, but they are in the same ball park.

They are not North Korean Instructors preaching the importance of Dictatorial control.

jerrye92002 said...

Really? You don't think that a fair percentage of teachers are liberals? That the NEA and AFT unions don't affect curriculum? That the Departments of Education aren't staffed by the same educrats educated in our wildly liberal teachers' colleges? I'm sorry, but my "ballpark" doesn't have a left field big enough to include some of these people. If left to their own devices, they might do better, but the curriculum is controlled by others that may be further left. And yes, call it "spin" if you like, but I prefer a slight rightward spin to a radically leftist one.

John said...

What radical Left indoctrination do you actually believe they are putting into the curriculum? And communicating to the children?

Since you sit it the medium to far Right seats. My guess is that your "slightly rightward" spin would be pretty much Right Wing indoctrination for most of the US citizens.

jerrye92002 said...

Been quite a while since I've seen an "approved" history textbook. The last involvement I had was commenting on the proposed MN Social Studies standards, which were way left and were ultimately withdrawn under criticism. Examples abound on the web, I'm sure. Obviously it is difficult and probably unreasonable to generalize from such anecdotes, but their existence indicates we do have a problem. I know at least one egregious example from my own family, though quickly corrected.