What would you say to the idea of requiring courses in economics in high school or college? I see this question as creating somewhat of a dilemma on a couple of fronts.
First, I find the idea of requiring students to take a course in economics (much less requiring them to go to school) as the first worst lesson in economics. How can educators profess to teach free market economics in an environment of coercion? Maybe the students would not see the paradox of going to classes and discussing free exchanges against their free will. So they would leave parroting the principles of free markets, yet they clearly would have learned little, if they do not vigorously protest the hypocrisy.
Second, I question (in advance) the validity of the economic theory which they would study. The structure in which teachers of economics learn their theory influences the theory they learn. Most teachers of economics have studied in institutions that receive their funding either directly or indirectly from the government. Other than teaching, the government provides most of the employment (either directly or indirectly) for economists. Because of all this structural influence I find it a little difficult to believe that mandated economic education would really advocate for free markets.
In response to my objections, some might argue that schools should provide exposure to alternative theories in economics. To that objection I retort, as I have in many other venues, free choice and free markets do not come in gradations. You have free markets, and you have various degrees of market intervention.
Yes, students should study alternate economic theories, but only to expose the fallacies of interventionist economics.