for instance, was established in the summer of 1978 – by proponents of economic education from higher education and teacher training institutions. and the standing conference of the ministers of education and cultural affairs from germany ’ s federal states, the kultusministerkonferenz, is on record as describing economic education as an indispensable component of general knowledge. the reality of our education system, though, is quite different : education in germany is a matter for the federal states, of course, which is why the curricula differ widely from one state to the next. secondary schools teach economics - related topics inconsistently and in different subjects. 1 / 7 bis central bankers'speeches those topics also crop up in mixed subjects, as they are known, like social sciences or politics and the economy. and they often have to make do without a fixed number of lessons. dedicated economics courses can be offered in upper secondary school levels, but schools are under no obligation to do so. 2 all in all, then, the offering is meagre. an opinion poll by the bank ing - diba, the results of which were published last week, revealed that not even 20 % of the current round of school leavers had received school tuition in financial matters. four years ago, that figure was at least a little better, at more than 30 %. 3 but should it be the job of schools in the first place to teach economics, finance and other economic education topics? it would be wrong to make schools responsible for everything, some would argue. that view isn ’ t entirely off the mark – after all, the scarcity principle applies to the running of a school as well, so it ’ s not possible to offer every subject. but there are also some ideological misgivings, i ’ m sad to say. some fear that the “ neoliberal doctrine ”, as some call it, might make inroads into school curricula. and a general aversion to economic matters might also have a bearing, to a degree. you don ’ t talk about money, or so we ’ ve been told – and certainly not with young people, apparently. there ’ s still no sign of that trend reversing, even after the global financial crisis. lastly, opinions differ over which particular economic topics should be taught. these three factors – scarce resources, a sense of being at risk and uncertainty – often play a part in eroding the enthusiasm for economic education reform before

specific target group. 16 these initiatives and many others like them help make up a rich array of educational opportunities. allow me to expressly acknowledge this work at this juncture. however, many of the extracurricular learning opportunities depend on schools asking for them. thus, schools are and will remain at the heart of education activities. that is why i would urge schools in germany to anchor economic education much more firmly in the curriculum than is the case at present. 5. conclusion ladies and gentlemen, critics ’ voices want to be heard, and so they should be. however, i believe that many of the points they raise can be remedied. in the debate about economic education we dare not succumb to ideological trench warfare. it is my belief that by adopting an excessively defensive attitude, we do more harm than good with regard to what we are actually seeking to achieve – namely a broad level of general knowledge as befits a free society. one solution would be to focus on giving economic education the status it deserves by making it a subject in its own right. the key components worthy of particular attention, in my opinion, would then be : teaching fundamental concepts such as the shortage of goods, capital and labour, bringing the subject closer to everyday life, although this should not be misunderstood as 5 / 7 bis central bankers'speeches relegating the subject to “ self - help ” advice on coping with day - to - day problems, as well as a critical engagement with economic dogmas and economic history. extracurricular initiatives also need to be stepped up. specifically, i would propose creating a young researchers competition for economic and financial topics, too. at the end of the day, whether or not every one of you agrees with every point i have made is of secondary importance. but it would be downright wrong to simply agree that economic education is important and leave it at that. for if we did that, countless pupils in germany would see their economic skillset continue to fall short of their potential – and in saying this, i don ’ t only mean with regard to their understanding of taxes, insurance and rent but also the knowledge they need as citizens. no one ought to be intimidated by questions concerning financial provisioning or globalisation. on the contrary, everyone should be given the means to seek answers. whether or not people can then communicate these answers in four different languages strikes me as being a luxury problem. thank you for your attention. 1 naina kummel ( na