A teacher reads reads that the Bank of Namibia has increased the repo rate.
A nurse hears that fuel prices have been adjusted because of under-recoveries in the fuel pricing system.
An artisan follows a news report about inflation, taxation or the national budget. During an election period, citizens hear discussions about coalition governments, proportional representation and two-thirds majorities.
All of these individuals are educated. All of them can read English.
Yet many may struggle to understand what these announcements mean for their loans, household budgets, savings, voting decisions or future financial wellbeing.
The problem is not language.
The problem is knowledge.
Too often, we assume that if citizens can read a government announcement, they automatically understand it.
However, public communication contains specialised concepts that carry meanings far beyond the words themselves.
Terms like repo rate, budget deficit, public debt and tax bracket are not simply vocabulary items.
They represent bodies of knowledge that help people make sense of how public institutions, the economy and governance affect their lives.
A person can read an announcement stating that the repo rate has increased by 25 basis points and still not understand that the decision may increase borrowing costs, affect mortgage repayments or influence the affordability of credit. Similarly, a citizen may hear that fuel prices have increased because of under-recoveries without understanding how international oil prices, exchange rates and transport costs ultimately affect the price of everyday goods.
The same applies to electoral and constitutional language.
Citizens routinely encounter discussions about coalition governments or two-thirds majorities, yet many have never been taught the significance of these concepts or the implications they have for governance and decision-making.
This raises an important question: Where are citizens expected to learn these concepts?
Knowledge relating to banking, taxation, budgeting, inflation, interest rates, electoral systems and other aspects of public life is often confined to subjects such as economics, accounting, business studies and a limited number of related disciplines.
Yet these subjects are not studied by all pupils, many of whom complete their schooling without ever encountering the very concepts that later dominate government announcements, newspaper headlines and public discussions.
The result is an educational contradiction. Public communication is intended for everyone, but the knowledge required to understand it is often available only to those who happened to study particular subjects as part of their schooling.
This is not a call for another school subject.
Rather, it is an argument for thinking differently about knowledge within the curriculum. Certain forms of knowledge are simply too important to be left to subject choice.
Basic concepts relating to finance, banking, taxation, and electoral systems should form part of the knowledge all pupils learn at school.
These concepts are not only relevant to future accountants, economists and politicians.
They affect every citizen who earns, spends, saves, borrows, pays taxes or participates in public life.
If education is serious about preparing pupils for life, then the curriculum must prepare them not only to read public information but also to understand it.
– Linus Nekondo
