The awareness of Kazakhstan school students in financial literacy and their interest



In the article, the author explores the financial literacy of school students and possible methods of improving.

Keywords: Financial literacy, Economics, school students.

List of used abbreviations

NIS — Nazarbayev Intellectual school

PISA 2015 (Volume IV) [1] reveals just 12 % of 15-year-olds excel in financial literacy. However, many nations have around 4 % proficiency, like Lithuanians. Lusardi (2019) [2] notes complex financial instruments altering the modern world. Individuals increasingly manage personal financial planning, investments, and resources. Presently, developing financial awareness, grasping global economic basics, and enhancing active and passive finance knowledge is imperative to avert severe repercussions.

Lusardi (2019) [2] assessed Russian citizens, with 53.7 % making one or two errors in three financial literacy questions. Kazakhstan's resemblance to Russia in education and social structures implies analogous results there. Generations across the globe display a lack of economic literacy from students to adults. The researcher, a student, aims to bridge this gap specifically among school students.

Gaps in Kazakhstan researches on that field and a personal interest in exploring Kazakhstan’s school students financial literacy motivate the study. The focus lies on Kazakh school students, their Economics interest and current financial awareness. This research addresses the gap in Kazakhstan studies and explores students' financial literacy.

Context

Economics is vital to modern society, permeating all aspects of life. While intricate economic understanding is not essential at an individual level, basic financial literacy is crucial. Studies explore its impact on income and social groups. Yet, Kazakhstan lacks representation in global financial literacy research, especially for students.

Given similarities to Russia, insights from Russian research could apply to Kazakhstan. Lusardi (2019) [2] found 53.7 % of Russians struggled with financial questions, impacting investments.

For students, the global scenario mirrors researched countries due to limited Kazakhstan data. PISA 2015 Results (Volume IV) [1] revealed only 12 % of 15-year-olds excelling. China scored 33 %, Brazil 3 %.

Consistently, global literature reveals insufficient knowledge, perhaps due to education systems. China excels due to comprehensive math and functional literacy. Kazakhstan lags, as schools ignore Economics and financial literacy, hindering effective knowledge application.

Research directed topics:

1. No Kazakhstan student financial literacy studies.
2. Sparse financial and functional literacy data.
3. Lack of addressing strategies.
4. Thus, this study targets Kazakhstan's student financial literacy, proposing improvements.

Aims

This study aims to assess school students' awareness and interest in Economics and financial literacy. To achieve this, we'll explore students' knowledge and potential development strategies through the following questions:

1. How do NIS students perceive Economics?
2. How do NIS students perceive Financial Literacy?
3. What's the current level of NIS students’ Economics awareness?
4. What's their current financial literacy level?
5. What ways can be implemented to enhance NIS students financial literacy?

By answering these questions, it becomes possible to uncover the core issue and achieve the research goal. This project benefits NIS students directly, potentially increasing their future income. The hypothesis suggests low NIS students knowledge, requiring significant improvement.

Methods

This research employs deductive methods to connect students' financial literacy facts and reveal their real awareness and interest levels. The following methods will be used:

1. Survey.
2. Interview.
3. Document analysis.

These methods provide a comprehensive view of students' financial awareness. The survey targets NIS students in grades 9–12, assessing awareness, specific Economics knowledge, and self-evaluation. Random sampling via forwarded messages is planned, aiming for a group of 50–75 participants. This size offers insights into NIS students' Economics understanding.

Specialist interviews provide an expert perspective and guidance on enhancing financial literacy. Around three specialists in Economics will be interviewed. No age or gender restrictions apply; expertise in Economics or behavior sciences is preferred.

Combining student and specialist insights is vital for a comprehensive understanding of financial literacy. Document analysis, examining national and school-specific curricula, will shed light on potential factors affecting students' literacy levels.

Methodological limitations

This research has several limitations. (1) A time constraint, with only three terms allotted, restricts the study's depth. (2) A limited budget prevents complex and costly research methods, necessitating inexpensive and straightforward approaches for analysis. (3) As the author is a school student without substantial sway in the scientific realm, influence is limited. Thus, interviews will involve local experts rather than renowned specialists.

Summary .

Overall, this research concludes three different research methods and all of them will describe as much as possible view of the full picture of students’ financial literacy. This research has several limitations, but the all work to avoid them are going to be done.

Results

Survey

Survey among students was taken in a way to evaluate the self-assessment of them in terms of Economics and financial literacy. Therefore, this survey contained two open-ended questions and five closed-ended questions, to describe: students understanding of Economics, financial literacy, their interest in financial literacy and ways of learning it, and their use of financial literacy in real life.

Table 1

1 st open-ended question
‘What is Economics for you? (Explain in your own words)’
Themes of the first open-ended question:	Frequency of answers:
Science	12
Connection with money	17
Production-consumption and welfare of the country	16
Confusing with financial literacy	5
System, rules-laws	2
Overall	52

In Table 1 above, students were asked to describe the term ‘Economics’. There are mentioned five main themes for the survey.

According to the taken information, (1) the most part of students connected the term of ‘Economics’ with money. For example, ‘Field about money’ or ‘It is money’. Secondly, (2) students described Economics as Production and consumption terminology and the country’s welfare. The brightest example is the ‘base of country's development, comparable outcomes and incomes of country and state of the country in global marketplace’ On the third place, (3) students described Economics as the specific field of science. For example, ‘It's basically a science that studies how some resources are used, distributed, produced among and by economic agents’, ‘Science about using money’ . (4) 5 students confused Economics with financial literacy and (5) only 2 students described Economics as the rules-laws system. Examples are shown respectively, ‘Trying to save money’ and ‘Economics is rules and laws of farming’.

Table 2

2 nd open-ended question
‘ What is Financial literacy for you? (Explain in your own words) ’
Themes of the second open-ended question:	Frequency of answers
Managing, saving and spending money	43
Investing money	8
No response	1
Overall	52

In Table 2 above, there are mentioned three main themes of answers for the second open-ended question. Students were asked to describe the term ‘Financial literacy’.

The main part of students, 43 of them described ‘Financial literacy’ as ‘Managing, saving and spending money’. Next, 8 students described ‘Financial literacy’ as ‘Investing money’. So, there is only one student, who did not answer, therefore ‘No response’ theme has 1. Most of students answered well and correctly, nevertheless some of students connected the term of ‘Financial literacy’ with princip of ‘Investing money’, which can be appear from the fact that in the global and especially social media, both of terms come together.

Table 3 below, shows 5 close-ended questions with answers. They were designed to describe students’ interest in some aspects of financial literacy, their ways of learning and their usage of Financial literacy in two cases. The answers are shown both in Table 3.

Table 3

Close-ended questions
No.	Question	Scales	Number of responses	Percentage
1	Are you interested in investments (such as stocks, bonds, investing money in businesses)?	Absolutely interested	7	13.5 %
		Interested	13	25 %
		Particularly	20	38.5 %
		Not so interested	8	15.4 %
		Absolutely not interested	4	7.7 %
	Total	52
2	Do you study finances (in school or by yourself)?	Yes, by myself	24	46.2 %
		Yes, by school classes	2	3.9 %
		No	25	48.1 %
		Another	1	1.9 %
	Total	52
3	If so, what do you do(reading books, magazines; watching useful videos and etc.)? Choose all that apply .	Internet materials(such as online courses)	23	35.9 %
		Short instagram/tiktok videos	23	35.9 %
		Books	9	14.1 %
		Magazines	2	3.1 %
		School classes	2	3.1 %
		Another	5	7.8 %
	Total	64
4	Do you realise how much pocket money you spend on average on life for 3–6 months?	Yes	16	30.7 %
		Probably yes	27	51.9 %
		Probably not	6	11.5 %
		No	3	5.8 %
	Total	52
5	It is common, when person throw money away and does not realise its consequences. So, to what extent do you realise moments when you spend pocket money?	(1)Do not realise	0	0 %
		2	1	1.9 %
		3	17	32.7 %
		4	23	44.2 %
		(5)Absolutely realise	11	21.2 %
	Total	52

In question 1, students were asked about their interest in investments. Most students 38.5 % said that they were particularly interested, 25 % interested, 25.4 % not so interested, 13.5 % absolutely interested and only 7.7 % of students were absolutely not interested.

In question 2, students were asked whether they study finances. 48.1 % answered no, whereas 46.2 % answered that they study by themselves and only 3.9 % said they took participation in School Economics classes. 1.9 % or 1 student chose ‘another’ option and wrote that ‘he does not study, but knows some information’.

In question 3, students were asked which ways of learning finances they use. This question was with several choosable options, hence the total number of responses is 64. So, the main part of the responses is for Internet materials and short social media(Instagram and TikTok) videos, with 35.9 % for both. 14.1 % of the responses are chosen as books, and 3.1 % are for both magazines and school classes. 7.8 % of the responses are chosen as another, with the ‘do not study’ answer in it. According to the given information, most part of students take information about finances and general Economics from the Internet(Short Instagram/TikTok videos and Internet materials), so it can be useful for making a final product of the research.

In question 4, students were asked about their realising how much pocket money they spend in average. They were asked about pocket money, because in most cases it is the only money students have. 51.9 % of students probably realise, 30.7 % realise, 11.5 % of students probably do not realise and 5.8 % of students do not realise their pocket money spending.

In question 5, students were asked about the realising consequences of their spending pocket money. This question is designed as a scale, where 1 is ‘Do not realise’ and 5 is ‘Absolutely realise’. Hence, most of the students, 44.2 % chose 4, 21.2 % of students chose 5, 32.7 % of students chose 3, and 1.9 % or 1 student chose 2.

Interview

In this data-gathering tool, the researcher analyzed each response qualitatively since only open-ended questions were used in the structured interview. The interview was taken from two experts and then they will be called Expert one and Expert two. There is the list of questions:

1. How much financial literacy is important in the modern world?
2. How would you like to evaluate general people’s level of financial literacy?
3. How would you like to evaluate students’ level of financial literacy?
4. What are the possible ways to increase students’ financial literacy?
5. Should financial literacy be taught at schools? Why/Why not?

For the first question, both experts have brought the necessity of financial literacy to the Modern World. It can be shown by the expert one’s words: ‘it has ceased to be desirable; it has become necessary’.

Both experts agreed that the general public's financial literacy is low. Expert one attributed this to a lack of understanding of the consequences of bad financial decisions. Expert two did not provide specific reasons for the low financial literacy level.

For the third question, expert one said that the financial literacy of school students is low, and expert two, he said that it is difficult to evaluate. Both of them connected this issue with the fact that students do not earn money, they only have pocket money. For example, ‘It is quite low, primarily due to the fact that students do not have the money they earned. Well, for the most part. Accordingly, they do not have the same experiences as adults who get that money from work’ . Moreover, expert one mentioned that the key issue is the fact that students have no experience of earning, losing and facing other unpleasant situations connected with money. ‘Students are incredibly difficult to be taught these topics so that they understand them. Yeah... they kind of get this, but this knowledge does not take on any emotional response and it is not difficult to impose this knowledge on the experience’ . So, according to his words, it would be difficult to teach school students, because ‘they do not have the emotional response’ .

For the fourth question, experts had different views. Expert one mentioned classes in school, however as it seems to him, it would not be approved by the Ministry of Education, ‘The only thing, it seems to me, is not always approved by the Ministry of Education’ . As for the expert two, he mentioned that the parents are responsible for the child’s level of financial literacy, ‘I think that for the development of financial literacy, it is necessary for parents to develop their child from childhood’ .

For the fifth question, both experts mentioned classes in school, however both of them see some limitations. As for the expert one, he mentioned two limitations: (1) lack of financially literate teachers ‘there are not enough teachers, since they themselves are particularly financially illiterate’ , (2) the amount of expended resources ‘that requires constant investment of effort and financial resources’ . As for the expert two, he sees (3) the limitations of free time for such classes ‘but its introduction into the school is a complex topic, because there are already a huge number of school subjects in Kazakhstan’. Overall, according to both experts there are three main limitations of studying Financial literacy in school: lack of specific teachers, required resources and free time for such classes.

Conclusion

Key conclusions drawn from the investigation are as follows:

1. Divergence in Self-Assessment: Students rate their financial literacy considerably higher than experts do. This discord could stem from biases and subjectivity in student self-assessment.
2. Internet as Information Source: Students show keen interest in finance, mainly relying on the internet for information, encompassing various sources like articles, videos, and social media. Utilizing this preference for an online platform in the final product creation could be effective.
3. Inaccurate Terminology: Students' descriptions of 'Economics' and 'Financial literacy' reveal inaccuracies, indicating their actual knowledge might be lower than perceived. Confusion between 'Investing money' and 'Financial literacy' might arise from the conflation of these terms, notably in social media.
4. Experience and Early Learning: Expert Two highlights the importance of early exposure to financial literacy, resonating with Expert One's emphasis on experiential learning. Effective financial literacy education encompasses theoretical knowledge coupled with practical money management experience.
5. Limitations of School Education: Three main limitations for teaching financial literacy in schools emerge: (1) a shortage of financially literate teachers, (2) limited resources, and (3) time constraints. These obstacles make school-based financial literacy education challenging and potentially less effective.
6. Given these insights, a more practical approach could involve creating a free, accessible online platform or a scientific-popular show for students in Kazakhstan. This solution would be cost-effective, efficient, and comfortable, aligning with students' internet-centric learning preferences.

Further research

This research had limitations due to the researcher's authority, time, and money constraints, which prevented the coverage of key features. To address this, further research is needed.

Three suggestions for future research are proposed. Firstly, the survey should be extended to all NIS school students instead of just 52 NIS NUSstudents. This will provide a more comprehensive view with a larger sample. Secondly, the issue of learning financial literacy at schools should be narrowed down to focus on specific aspects. Lastly, only two experts were interviewed, which may not be enough to develop a good research conclusion.

To conduct a more in-depth research, more sources of information can be gathered globally among all NIS schools.

The research results revealed some interesting findings. Firstly, there were differences in results between students and experts regarding their level of financial literacy, which could indicate a biased opinion among students. Secondly, school classes are the best way of educating financial literacy. Lastly, the new limitations of educating financial literacy at school were explored.

References:

1. PISA 2015 Results (Volume IV): Students’ Financial Literacy | en | OECD. (n.d.). https://www.oecd.org/finance/financial-education/pisa-2015-results-volume-iv-9789264270282-en.htm
2. Lusardi, A. (2019, January 24). Financial literacy and the need for financial education: evidence and implications — Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics. SpringerOpen. https://sjes.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s41937–019–0027–5/tables/2