California high school students may have an additional course added to the eight that are needed to graduate. These courses, such as the ethnic studies requirement passed in 2021, all entered the school curriculum at the direction of the State Board of Education. This proposed new requirement—a financial literacy class—may end up on high school schedules at the direction of voters. The effort to put financial literacy education into California high schools has been decades-long, with various lawmakers trying and failing to make the class a requirement. One nonprofit seeks success by placing the question on a ballot measure this November. If passed, it would be the first time that curriculum requirements were established at the direction of voters. Polls show overwhelming popular support for adding financial literacy to high school curriculum, but some educators and researchers are nervous about the implications of bypassing the existing process of deciding what and how things are taught in California classrooms. But some experts are concerned about the implementation of such a requirement, and even more so about passing off a complicated policy decision to the voters of California. Heather J. Hough, executive director of Policy Analyst for California Education, is skeptical both of increasing the number of state-mandated graduation requirements and of taking choices that would be made by experienced policymakers and putting them into the hands of voters, who may not consider the broader effects of approving specific curriculum. “I think that decisions about what to teach and how to teach it are not ideal decisions that go to voters — those are decisions, at least in the way it’s done in California, that are made locally and through policymaking bodies with professional knowledge,” Hough said. Typically, the Instruction Quality Commission develops curriculum which is subject to a series of reviews, edits and public discussion and then goes to the State Board of Education for approval. Sometimes, curriculum changes are driven by the Legislature via Assembly bills, like the recent ethnic studies requirement. Local school districts also have the authority to develop their own curriculum and graduation requirements. Teaching financial literacy to high school students may be well-intentioned, but a policymaker must consider implementation. “I think part of how I always come at questions of policy is not just is this policy a good idea, because many things we talk about are on their face good ideas, but how this policy is implemented and how this policy puts pressure on existing strains on the system,” Hough said. In the case of adding financial literacy as a graduation requirement, Hough sees several potential snags. For one, with the recent addition of an ethnic studies graduation requirement and talks of a computer science graduation requirement, students could face increasingly bloated schedules that leave little room for electives, career technical education pathways or other programs that appeal to them personally. On a local level, districts must spend money and time coordinating master schedules, training or hiring staff to teach the course and possibly developing their own curriculum. This could be a major problem amid a statewide teacher shortage. Approving this curriculum also takes away flexibility from school districts in assessing what coursework would most engage and benefit their respective student populations. California is also facing a major chronic absenteeism problem, increasing twofold in under a decade. Constraining schools too much in terms of class requirements can make it difficult for them to be flexible enough to meet student needs, Hough said. Hough is not alone in her concern. Other education experts have pointed out that voters of California already have the civil power to support politicians who reflect their interests and to engage directly with school districts and curriculum. “It’s a very blunt instrument and I’m not sure it will accomplish what people want it to,” Hough said.