Skip to main content

DonorsChoose: Start 'em young

I think that for many people, the idea of teaching young children about money feels a bit odd. I can understand that, because at first glance, I think that's how I would feel and I'm an economist saying this! Unfortunately, a lot of people associate money with greed, selfishness and other "bad" values that we generally don't want to pass on to our children. But money itself, and the role it plays in the world, carries none of those values inherently; all of those negative associations arise from people spending money in particular ways. One thing I find interesting is that there are also plenty of values that most people consider "good" that could also be associated with spending money in other ways (such as 'frugal', 'generous', 'good provider') but I don't think that's the first thing that comes to most people's minds.

At any rate, however you feel about money, I think most people would agree that those who have a better understanding of economics are probably more likely to spend their money wisely. Understanding trade-offs and incentives, that there is no such thing as a free lunch, and how to compare costs and benefits are crucial for making good decisions (and not just about money). I'd also argue that understanding markets, both when they work and when they don't, is crucial for being an informed citizen. So I am excited that some teachers, like Mrs. S. at C. Wayne Collier Elementary School in Hope Mills, North Carolina, are trying to expose students to these concepts as early as possible. Ms. S. wants to give her first graders the experience of being producers and consumers in a simulated market where they will make and 'sell' crafts. However, she needs some help with buying the materials. You can help her out by donating on the DonorsChoose website. You can also check out the other economics projects I'm promoting, or search for other worthy projects.

Comments

  1. I learned about "money" having an allowance and earning "money" in various ways as early as 8, I remember. My father managed a grocery store at the time, and I went in for 3 days to help with inventory. At the end got my little manilla envelope with some 12 dollars in it. I felt very grown up and put in my savings account.
    My parents, born in 1930 and '39 were children of poor Italian immigrants. I never went without, but there was clearly the notion that money doesn't grow on trees in our house.
    "Shut off the lights" wasn't about ecology.
    Few in my immediate or extended family really understand economics. Few have college degrees. The basics of owning rental property, and your house, they seem to have figured out along the way.
    What I think they didn't have was an appetite for consumerism, in the way that Americans have become accustomed to: buying on credit, just because you can.
    No moral of the story, just an eye opener towards generational and perhaps cultural differences that may somehow be the difference between to making smart and not so smart decisions.

    ReplyDelete
  2. That's an excellent concept. Money is not bad; just the way some people spend their money can be bad. It reminds me of the concept about guns and other weapons. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. The sooner we teach our kids the ways to spend money responsibly, the more lasting the impression will stay in their heads.

    ReplyDelete
  3. @cleocatra: I certainly didn't mean to imply that one can't make good decisions about money without training in economics. I think that individuals with good sense about money tend to pass that on to their kids but if students aren't getting it from their parents or other family member, then all else equal, I think it's good for them to get it at school.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Comments that contribute to the discussion are always welcome! Please note that spammy comments whose only purpose seems to be to direct traffic to a commercial site will be deleted.

Popular posts from this blog

THE podcast on Implicit Bias

I keep telling myself I need to get back to blogging but, well, it's been a long pandemic... But I guess this is as good an excuse as any to post something: I am Bonni Stachowiak's guest on the latest episode of the Teaching in Higher Ed podcast, talking about implicit bias and how it can impact our teaching.  Doing the interview with Bonni (which was actually recorded a couple months ago) was a lot of fun. Listening to it now, I also realize how far I have come from the instructor I was when I started this blog over a decade ago. I've been away from the blog so long that I should probably spell this out: my current title is Associate Vice President for Faculty and Staff Diversity and I have responsibility for all professional learning and development related to diversity, equity and inclusion, as well as inclusive faculty and staff recruitment, and unit-level diversity planning. But I often say that in a lot of ways, I have no business being in this position - I've ne...

This is about getting through, not re-inventing your course

As someone who has worked hard to build a lot of interactivity into my courses, I have never been interested in teaching fully online courses, in part because I have felt that the level of engaged interaction could never match that of a face-to-face class (not that there aren't some exceptional online courses out there; I just have a strong preference for the in-person connection). But the current situation is not really about building online courses that are 'just as good' as our face-to-face courses; it is about getting through this particular moment without compromising our students' learning too much. So if you are used to a lot of interaction in your F2F class, here are some options for adapting that interaction for a virtual environment: [NOTE: SDSU is a Zoom/mostly Blackboard campus so that's how I've written this but I am pretty sure that other systems have similar functionality] If you use clickers in class to break up what is otherwise mostly lect...

When is an exam "too hard"?

By now, you may have heard about the biology professor at Louisiana State (Baton Rouge) who was removed from teaching an intro course where "more than 90 percent of the students... were failing or had dropped the class." The majority of the comments on the Inside Higher Ed story about it are supportive of the professor, particularly given that it seems like the administration did not even talk to her about the situation before acting. I tend to fall in the "there's got to be more to the story so I'll reserve judgment" camp but the story definitely struck a nerve with me, partly because I recently spent 30 minutes "debating" with a student about whether the last midterm was "too hard" and the whole conversation was super-frustrating. To give some background: I give three midterms and a cumulative final, plus have clicker points and Aplia assignments that make up about 20% of the final grade. I do not curve individual exams but will cu...