理財教育課程綱要之層級比較分析－－以 Jump$tart高中課程綱要為例

A hierarchical study of Jump$tart's high school financial education curriculum guidelines

本研究針對美國Jump$tart聯盟高中階段理財課程標準，邀請學者專家針對課程內容提供建議。再利用問卷對六個主題與對應的課程標準進行評比分析，以AHP方法評估各個課程標準的權重。符合AHP方法一致性問卷於高中教師有23份，大學教授有13份。由權重大小作重要性排序結果。於六個主題中，高中教師的前三名依序為「金錢管理與規劃」、「風險管理與保險」、「理財責任與決策」，大學教授前三名依序為「理財責任與決策」、「金錢管理與規劃」和「風險管理與保險」，兩類教師對於主題的看法差異不大。課程標準前兩名中，高中教師為「解釋醫療、失能與人壽保險的目標與重要性」、「說明避免或糾正借貸問題的方式」，大學教授為「分析一般的風險類型與基本的風險管理方法」、「探索職業上的可能性」，教師間重要性排序差異頗大，值得理財教育課程規劃者的留意與思考。

This study applies the Jump$tart Coalition's National Standards to high school Personal Finance Education as curriculum guidelines, and uses the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) as a tool to evaluate the importance of different standards. To achieve this, a questionnaire is developed, a survey is conducted, and 23 copies of high school teachers and 13 copies of university professors are collected as valid and consistent questionnaires. AHP is used in multiple criteria decision making, which offers a methodology for ranking alternative courses of action based on the decision maker's judgments regarding the importance of financial education curriculum themes and standards. The results show that, in the first level, themes regarding ‘Planning and Money Management’, ‘Risk Management and Insurance’, and ‘Financial Responsibility and Decision Making’ rank as the top three, respectively, of high school teachers. In addition, the ranking of professors is similar to that of high school teachers, with the exception of ‘Planning and Money Management’. In the second level, curriculum standards regarding ‘Explain the purpose and importance of health, disability, and life insurance protection’ , ‘Describe ways to avoid or correct debt problems', and ‘Explore career options’ rank in the top three, respectively, of high school teachers. Weights in this level have considerable differences between professors and high school teachers, this result demands more attention for the financial education curriculum planners and implementers.