Tell me if you’ve ever read something like this before:

Financial literacy is one of those topics that most of us like to think about as little as possible. Even the name “financial literacy” evokes boredom, confusion, and general disinterest. Despite this, financial literacy is incredibly important to our futures. That’s why, when so many schools lack basic financial education, we’re doing a disservice to our students.

There have been dozens of articles that start out with this same general stance. Year after year, writers lament about the state of financial literacy in our country, and give the same solutions. Each time a new article comes out, usually around the Financial Literacy month of November, I see the same statistics and half-baked answers being thrown around.

The thinking usually goes like this:

Americans don’t know anything about money → Statistics! → More statistics! → This is why we have massive debt → make financial literacy a state requirement

There’s nothing wrong with that type of article. In the minds of many people, home economics should be as important as calculus and literature. If we subscribe to that thinking, though, we’ll keep getting the same darn article. That’s because lack of financial knowledge is a symptom of a bigger problem. As writers and commentators, we try too hard to blame our financial stupidity on concrete failings. In turn, we blame the states for failing to make financial literacy a priority. Everywhere you look, you hear the same arguments: We don’t refer to it specifically, we don’t have home ec like we used to, we don’t teach students how to do their own taxes. But, I don’t think that’s the reason why Americans end up doing so poorly with their finances. Instead, it’s because we’re too afraid to teach financial literacy as a guiding philosophy, rather than as a concrete framework.

That’s why the

Solution is to Integrate

So, the big problem with financial literacy is that we’re too happy to put it into its own category. We structure classes around it, and have organizations dedicated to it, and have months to honor it. We think that, because financial literacy deals with money, it exists in an entirely different realm. Suddenly, if it doesn’t deal with math, science, or reading, it’s treated entirely differently. But, that shouldn’t be the case. Because, if you think about it, financial literacy exists all around us, and not always with money.

Take the concept of risk. Risk-taking is a vital, if not the most vital, part of financial literacy. Within loans, credit, savings, and spending, you have to know how to take risk in order to make money, but also protect yourself from future hiccups. But, risk, like many other aspects of financial literacy, exists outside of money. Because of that, students shouldn’t have to learn about it by writing checks and making loans.

Instead, teach risk as an integrated concept. One of the first things that we do when we go to a classroom is set up a basket, and ask students to shoot in a paper ball from different distances. For each extra meter that the student places between themselves and the bin, they have the chance to gain an extra point. Clearly, this is something that kids experience all the time by playing games like basketball. In this case, though, the important thing is making the connection. Though we spend our lives dealing with these topics, we never actually discuss them, and try to apply them to other aspects of our lives. The same goes for retirement funds, house purchases, and even the most complicated financial vehicles. The key is to integrate the learning into a simpler subject, but to also create a connection.

So, Instead of calling for specification, integrate the lessons of financial literacy into every other, everyday class. Just like reading comprehension in STEM subjects, make financial literacy an underlying lesson behind more specific classes. Ultimately, that means that we have to teach the underlying concepts of financial literacy, not financial literacy itself.