FORMS AND METHODS OF DEVELOPING FINANCIAL LITERACY OF STUDENTS IN MATHEMATICS LESSONS IN HIGH SCHOOLS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47390/SPR1342V4I9Y2024N54Keywords:
financial literacy, additional education, global, flipper class, rotation, gamification, financial organization, budget, investment.Abstract
The article describes the forms and methods of developing financial literacy of students in mathematics lessons in secondary schools. It is recommended to conduct comprehensive departmental studies with the participation of several teachers; in these lessons, teachers explain the topic using the tools of their subject. It is also necessary to pay special attention to the formation of knowledge and skills in the field of financial literacy when studying lesson topics related to finance within general education programs, as well as take into account the use of various pedagogical methods in the development of a lesson plan, and it is not necessary to use one methodology to build the entire course, based on Different teaching methods can be combined in different lessons.
References
1. Yoo, S. (2022). Politics of technology: Building institutions of humility in the age of AI and Quantum Computers. Ethics and Information Technology.
2. European Commission. (2019). Cybersecurity Act. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/cybersecurity-act
3. Glickman, O. (2022). Upholding human rights in the quantum age. Ethics & International Affairs, 36(2), 201-219.
4. Quantum Industry Coalition. (2023). Voluntary code of ethics for quantum technologies. https://qic.org/ethics-code
5. Henderson, T. (2023). Verifying the verification: Auditing quantum advantage claims. Cryptography Review, 41(7), 983-1002.
6. Montalban, M. (2024). Private quantum oversight: Features, bugs and policy hacks. Policy Sciences. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-023-09462-8
7. Intemann, K. (2020). Ensuring oversight does not undermine inquiry: crafting legitimate quantum technology regulations. Philosophy of Science, 87(5), 859-890.
8. Latour, B. (2023). Entangled oversight: Governing quantum relationships. Limn, 12(3), 99-186.
9. Raman, A. & Church, G. (2021). Regulating quantum intrusion: Challenges & approaches. Harvard National Security Journal, 3(2), 55-99.
10. Quantum Industry Coalition. (2023). Voluntary code of ethics for quantum technologies. https://qic.org/ethics-code
11. Gill, K. (2021). Staying with the trouble: An ethics of care approach to quantum governance. Hastings Center Report, 51(1), 34-42.
12. Danaher, J. (2020). Welcoming robots into the moral circle: A defence of ethical behaviourism. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(4), 2023-2049.
13. Grace et al. (2018). When will AI exceed human performance? Evidence from AI experts. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 62, 729-754.
14. Raman, A. & Church, G. (2021). Regulating quantum intrusion: Challenges & approaches. Harvard National Security Journal, 3(2), 55-99.
15. Ellis, J. et al. (2022). Updating export controls for quantum software. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.05924.
16. penetrate-quantum. (2023). Standard contract for vulnerability disclosure & bug bounties in quantum technologies. https://pen-quantum.org
17. Preskill, J. (2018). Quantum Computing in the NISQ era and beyond. Quantum, 2, 79.
18. Zeng, W. et al. (2022). Steering disruptive knowledge: A new mandate for dual use oversight? Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 78(2), 102-109.
19. Karinen, R. & Guston, D. H. (2010). Toward anticipatory governance: The experience with nanotechnology. In G. H. Hadorn et al. (Eds.), Governance and sustainability: New challenges for states, companies and civil society (pp. 217-242). Bern, Switzerland: Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences.
20. Yoo, S. (2022). Politics of technology: Building institutions of humility in the age of AI and Quantum Computers. Ethics and Information Technology.
21. Unruh, D., & Nunez-Vasquez, F. (2021). Quantum tech: Political capacity in an emerging institutional field. Research Policy, 50(7), 104-252.
22. Mittelstadt, B. (2019). Principles alone cannot guarantee ethical AI. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(11), 501-507.
