I could remember one of my memories was having a teacher like the late Miriam Defensor-Santiago in high school. She was a pretty strict and brilliant woman like the late senator. Some say she was unreasonable but I wouldn't say that. She was temperamental but she made sense (most of the time) when she was angry. She did flunk me in the first grading but offered to help me as well. Though, I was thinking that economics in high school was rather hard to understand. When I look back--I had a brilliant teacher but the education system was dumb. Maybe, it was for the best that she left the Philippines with my science and math teacher. I ended up thinking it's too bad I wasn't able to communicate with her during my commerce days.
I could think about how learning economics at the University of San Carlos-Main Campus was fun. I think about microeconomics, macroeconomics, and economics during my graduate school days. I think about how the struggle with economics, later on, wasn't so bad compared to high school. Maybe, because I learned better study habits since I never experienced having back subjects. Sure, I had some barely passing grades (my first two accounting subjects) but I didn't get that with my economics. I did have basic economics during my Associate in Computer Science days for one semester. I felt that economics was truly a fascinating subject only during commerce.
I ended up reflecting back on how it's absurd to teach economics only at fourth-year high school in K+10. Economics should be gradually learned in both middle school and high school. That's why I'm for K+12. Economics needs to be gradually introduced and not just a one-shot deal for an entire year. Economic literacy is something that was barely taught. I confess that I even once thought of going to a coffee shop as an "arrogant gesture" without knowing why coffee shops sell higher. If premium ingredients are used, if salaries are high, if the cost of utilities is high then shouldn't customers pay for both the good food and the ambiance? It's like how I paid PHP 250.00 for my Monte Cristo sandwich set in Jolly Bubble because it's a cafe that operates for long hours. If coffee shops don't charge high then they can expect to go bankrupt from using premium ingredients and having a nice ambiance. Some restaurants have service charges to have net profits to keep it going.
Economics is something that shouldn't be waited until college before you know its application. It's something that should be taught as soon as possible and not just during the graduating year. I feel so stupid I only learned how economics is part of life in college but not in high school. Math formulas related to economics run all our transactions. A year of economics before college doesn't even cut it. Somebody may get a high grade in economics during that time. However, I'd like to ask if there was any actual learning really even there? Economics is part of life so why teach it shoddily? Even a brilliant economics teacher is wasted if that's the case.
If economics were taught in both middle school and high school--I could expect students to learn more about it before college. Economics isn't that easy in the long run since it requires plenty of analysis. Microeconomics and macroeconomics are two different but related subjects that are better studied separately. You need to learn the micro before you go to the macro. I think students will learn how economics is part of life better when it's taught in middle school and high school than just being taught in the graduating year.