VDOE Standards of Learning for Economics and Personal Finance

The Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) has requested comments on its proposed economics and personal finance standards of learning. The following comments were provided by me on October 9, 2009. If you are a Virginia resident, I suggest that you review the proposed standards and comment.

Open Letter to Virginia Department of Education Concerning Proposed Standards of Learning for a Public School Curriculum to Teach Economics and Personal Finance

I agree with the VDOE’s goal that an understanding of economics and personal finance is important to young people, as they learn to manage successfully their own time, money, and resources, and become informed citizens in a increasingly globally integrated, interdependent society. However, establishing standards of learning is only the first step in this process. The SOLs, as you have stated them, provide a broad roadmap for what needs to be taught. They do not address the expected outcomes, how it will be taught, or the actual content of instruction. My comments: (1) request clarification on objectives, which appear to be loosely defined, (2) request that VDOE specify the textbooks that will be used, and (3) request that VDOE identify the qualifications of and preparatory instruction that will be provided to teachers who will conduct this very important course.

After a review of the curriculum’s stated objectives, my particular concerns are with specific objectives that explore the interrelationship between a free market economic system and the role of government in that system. Specifically, I am interested in understanding what will be taught in these areas. I am concerned that, like so much of current public education, it can be co-opted by persons who do not share my traditional, historical perspective on the formation and objective success of American free-market economics. Specific comments on the SOLs are:


EFP.7 b) describing government’s role in stabilizing the economy; c) describing sources of government revenue; and d) explaining balanced-budget, deficit, and national debt.

What exactly is to be taught as part of this objective? If the bias is to promote the virtues and success of Keynesian economics as practiced by Roosevelt or the current administration, I would oppose such instruction. However, a balanced discussion that compares and contrasts the practices of the Hoover, Kennedy, Reagan, and G.W. Bush administration to that of Roosevelt, Johnson, Carter, and Obama administrations would be fair. Text references: Folsom, B., New Deal, Raw Deal and Simon, W., A Time for Truth.

EFP.8 in its entirety, which requires the student to demonstrate knowledge of the role of government in a market economy by d.) explaining that governments redistribute wealth.

Again, what is to be taught as part of this objective? While it is a fact the government does redistribute wealth the real question that must be answered is to what purpose and to what extent is this necessary? A good text that addresses the role of government in a free market is Thomas Sowell’s text Basic Economics.

ALL terminal objectives (which is what I assume you have listed in your document) should be broken down into enabling objectives that include a measure of acceptable accomplishment. For example, “Upon completion of this objective, the student will be able to state the three root causes of the Great Depression: (1) ‘Cause 1,’ (2) ‘Cause 2,’ (3) ‘Cause 3’). This would go a long way to “flesh out” what is required and make it clear to the teacher, student, and public if that objective has been accomplished.

Noticeably absent from the learning objectives is a requirement that the students complete an actual income tax return. In this context, it would be good to teach each student that 50% of American taxpayers pay 97% of all federal income tax. Twenty percent pay 3%. Thirty percent either pay nothing or receive transfer of payments (Earned Income Tax Credit) from the top fifty-three percent. This might prove to be an interesting discussion if compared and contrasted to the redistribution of wealth discussion alluded to in EFP 8.

With respect to a text, I recommend that VDOE disclose, at this point in time, the textbooks that will support the curriculum. While I fully anticipate that such a request will be declined because the curriculum will not be taught for several years and it will be argued that it is impossible to select a text at this time, I suggest that you refer to existing texts that you find acceptable today to give the public a feel for content and set an expectation against which the public can judge your final selection. In the absence of any response from VDOE, I recommend that you consider Thomas Sowell’s Basic Economics. The book is unique in that it does not present economics from a mathematical perspective, but utilizes real world examples to illustrate economic principles. It can be understood by anyone using simple logic.

Last, I propose that you disclose required teacher qualifications and the approach, schedule, and training program content that you plan to use in preparing teachers to present this material. This is as important as the instruction itself.

I have posted this letter on my blog and the HR Teaparty blog. I am encouraging other Virginia citizens to review and comment on the proposed SOLs. I have also forwarded a copy of these comments to my state representatives and Del. Bob Tata. I will be following the progress of curriculum implementation closely. Over the past thirty years, traditional values-based Americans have not paid sufficient attention to the actions of government and as a result have ceded the moral high ground to post-modern relativists, who have undermined the nuclear family, the church, education, the media, and government institutions. Control of our economy and the principles that underlie economic freedom are one of their last objectives. Rest assured that I will continue to work diligently to make sure any economics curriculum is taught from a factual and balanced perspective.