Teaching financial education at secondary school is the best way to help children understand the increasingly complex financial world we live in. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

In public perception providing students at schools with financial intelligence is the superior means of educaof this aspect of life. Despite the likelihood of efficiency of this method, parents' experience seems more convincing. Creating classes of economics in the schedule of school is quite appropriate, without a doubt. It would probably give a chance to improve mathematical, along with analytical skills and the students may find it more interesting than simple maths. Any child's attention can be drawn to calculations once they start connecting it with their own, important to some extent, monetary operations. Taking an example of a world-wide famous bussinesman Warren Buffett, he used to have a dairy as a child, where he would write every financial transactions he conducted. Even though the aforementioned argument seems viable, I have a more productive suggestion. Thus, if parents are involved in the education about money it is expected to bring immediate and more effective results. To make it more comprehensive, their nurturing is more practical than theoretical, which can also be sustained whit their better attention than of teachers'. For instance, parents may create specific situations in which their children are faced with problems related to money. It is good idea to watch them deal with the very issues and later give instructions. To finalise the debate, there is no denial that implementation of finance as a subject at school is deemed to have results. Yet, parents' assistance in this matter as a guarantee for a child's success. Therefore, it is encouraged that parents keep a close-eye at their children's financial intelligence.