Your comment is a bit off-topic for this post (yes, I realize it was a copy/paste from your comment on Tim’s blog), but I’ve responded with a full post to your concern about paying math and science teachers more than their counterparts in other subjects.

As for integrating writing across the curriculum, you’re right. Research shows it’s incredibly effective if done properly. Principals (and to some extent districts) should to encourage that sort of coordination between departments.

Ed,

Utah’s financial literacy curriculum is quite in-depth, and includes topics like privacy and preventing identity theft in addition to more vanilla topics like saving and investing. My comments thus far are somewhat more national in scope; Utah is one of the few states with a dedicated, required course in financial literacy. However, it hasn’t been around long enough to quantify any positive societal effects.

I’m differentiating between “pensions” and “401(k)s.” The latter is quite common, the former rather less so (outside of government and education). Perhaps “defined benefit plan” would be more accurate than the broader “pension.”

You are correct about needing to teach the stock market. Less than half of all households own stock in any form, including 401(k)s. (Along these lines, only 50% of Americans contribute to their 401(k).) We miss out on $30 billion of “unmatched” 401(k) money annually.

Until Tim started his, I was the only Board member who blogged, and even then I did so rather infrequently.

“Relevance” can become an altar upon which is sacrificed the stuff people need to know.

Think of financial literacy as part of the program to train good citizens. We teach — or used to teach — civics, even though kids can’t vote. Immediate relevance is not a good criterion.

What does it take to be a good citizen, financially? Generally, we want kids to grow to be adults who can take care of themselves, provide for their family and their family’s future, and stay out of the poor house when they retire. The first part is where most of the education should be concentrated, but the overarching theme is that people should plan their budgets wisely, often and well, ‘and here’s how to do it.’

The course should include basic instruction in banking, and why it’s important to use a bank. At least 30% of our population now is “unbanked.” On the one hand, they are not taking advantage of the services that can be offered. They don’t write checks, so bill paying must be a nightmare. They don’t build credit ratings. They don’t save at interest for retirement. On the other hand, their income and savings-in-mattresses represent several billions of dollars that are essentially dead, out of circulation, unavailable to banks to loan out to other people to build the economy. It’s vital that people know what banks do, how our system works, and how and why to get involved.

Other topics that should be covered: How to buy a car,for cash, and on credit; how to buy a house; how mortgages work; how to sell a house; how to shop for a credit card; how to wisely use credit cards; how to build a good credit rating; when to get an accountant; how small businesses are organized (under the state’s laws); how and why to pay taxes; how to figure opportunity costs.

You say above that pension education seems archaic. Not quite. Most people will have a job at some time that will give them a chance to start a 401K, or a 403B, or something similar. Participation in 401K plans is shockingly lower than 100% — tens of percentage points lower. Our nation’s future financial security is built on an assumption that most people who can use 401Ks, will use them. Can you spell “disaster?” That’s what happens if we don’t get the participating percentages up.

Kids need to know what the stock market is, what mutual funds are, what bonds are, and how to pick investements in their 401K — and why they should.

It wouldn’t hurt if kids knew some basic small business stuff, too, especially how to hire and fire — so they know what to do on job interviews, if nothing else.

Greenspan was right. It’s basic stuff, but let’s get to work!

I am not an English teacher, but I have an example of their importance. If you cannot read, you cannot do math and you will fail in science. If you report your science findings you must be able to communicate your results. The same principal holds true in using math. The written language needs to be precise.

My son worked at a metal-works factory. He and those working with him tore down parts that had been put together incorrectly because someone either didn’t write the instructions well or the welders making the parts didn’t read the instructions well. These mistakes cost the company penalties for late delivery plus the time and material as the parts were torn apart and remade.

How much work does an English teacher do? They spend a lot more time reading and editing students work, many hours more than most teachers. What about a band, choir, gym, or art teacher? They handle double and sometimes triple the number of students per hour. They allow for smaller class sizes for the rest of the school. Also students who have the arts in school do better in math and communication, shouldn’t we pay them more also?

How about changing the traditional teaching methods to move toward higher learning and thinking skills through cross curriculum teaching and cooperative project learning? Students could do projects in math and science and write their reports in English classes with the instructors working together to help guide and grade the students efforts?

What would happen if college English students were editing high school student’s papers and collegiate math students were tutoring high school students? I have found that usually the students doing the tutoring learn as much or more than the students being tutored.

When sending a college student to “student teach” also send detailed instructions to the cooperating teacher and choose a cooperating teacher who will agree to actually help the student teacher.