This is something I've been pondering for the sustainability party - the introduction (or in many cases reintroduction) of basic economics in the high school curriculum. I'm also interested in a broadening of tertiary education, so that it is viewed as more than intensive training for medicine, law, engineering, accounting etc. It should be broader and viewed as further creation of well rounded citizens able to contribute more than 9-5 to their society.

Anyway, back to economics in high school. I think that like history, english etc, a basic introduction similar to an introductory micro or macroeconomics course at uni should be compulsory for students doing maths-science as well as those with a history-geography focus, but not those doing tafe based courses in their final years. I'm just not sure how to distuinguish the two groups. Is anyone here familiar with how it works these days?

FD as far as I can gather, economics is an elective at present offered as a part of some commerce courses in years 9-10, or as a full course for years 11-12.

It's a shame not too many people want to choose economics as a subject. There are however facets of basic economics within certain courses(when referring to secondary school) such as commerce etc. Economics as I understand is also available as one of the majors in the B.A. university course at present? Economics is often tied in university to courses as a relative subject, however I think there is a B.E (bachelor of economics) available as a university course. But I'm not entirely sure?

As for re-introduction into the high school curriculum, could you possibly elaborate on your ideas this matter? What would this kind of change achieve if such an ammendment is made?

I think mayby we should do a UNI course centered around politics perhaps, a course that encompasses aspects of Law/the justice system and also fields like buisness and economics? Does anyone think this might be a good idea? I'm studying to be a teacher myself. Though if there was a B. in politics avaiable, I might've considered that instead. And started my career in grassroots democracy. Perhaps this course could promote more respect for "grass-roots" democracy.... any thoughts?

I did civics in early high school. I think that taught the basics of criminal and civil law, how our elections work etc. The idea of compulsory economics is so that people understand what is in the newspaper every day and what politicians mean. For example, why does the reserve bank raise interest rates, what impact do taxes have on the economy, supply and demand, market failures, subsidies, tariffs etc. Economic management is a major criteria that people judge politicians on, yet less than half the population comes close to understanding the basics of what is really going on. I think enough economics could be taught in a single year. Probably grade 11 or 12 would be best so that it wasn't forced upon those who choose the 'non-academic' path.

We learnt about economics for 5 weeks in my Society and Environment class, after that it is only available as an elective for years 11 and 12.

I chose said elective, the class didn't run due to lack of interest. Very disappointing.

I took an introductory microeconomics course at UCSD and also an upper division law and economics course. This was a bit of overkill to cover equivalent classes back home, plus to fill available gaps. I wasn't expecting much, but I'm glad I chose them. I feel like they were the most valuable course I ever did. I'm also auditing a macroeconomics course at the moment. I did some psychology subjects as well in my undergrad days. While they were interesting at the time, I don't feel like they have benefitted or enlightened me much in the long term.