parents. (IJ=0) students on this type are more
emotional in using their money. They are ignorant on
others’ opinions and tend to hand over the financial
problems to their parents. They manage the money for
something that they want without having further
consideration. (U=0) These students have already had
thoughts on how to spend their funds, yet they lack of
control and are more emotional in meeting their in-
ward fulfilment.
3.2 Students Consideration in Managing
Funds
3.2.1 Well Literate Students
Students in this category have more consideration on
arranging and managing funds to meet their needs as
well as obtain more income. They do not use the
funds for consumption satisfaction. They are likely to
dig deeper information on the quality, price and use
of the products. In fact, some students have thoughts
on how the goods could provide additional income. It
illustrates that students have effective and efficient
analytical decision in expenditure. In handling the
risks, they often look for preventive and effective
actions to solve them. They have thought and
considered the short term and long term possibilities.
These results are in line with Need Achievement
theory (McClelland: 2010) and studies Satrio Y.D
(2012).
3.2.2 Sufficient Literate Students
Students under this criteria spend their money to
fulfill their consumptive desire. The consideration on
how to spend the money for goods or services is
frequently changing depends on their eagerness.
Their analytical thoughts are more on the price and
quality of certain products. Generally, students on this
type rely their funds only to their parents. The failure
in managing their money is tolerable and can be a
lesson for them.
3.2.3 Less Literate Students
These students heavily depend on their parents to
meet their needs. They are more emotional in
spending their money. After receiving money from
their parents, they think about how they could spend
all the money to earn what they want. They do not
have good analytical thoughts in spending the money
com-pared to other types. Failure in managing the
funds is not a problem to them. When they face such
problems, they will ask their parents for help. These
results are in line with previous studies, suggesting
that democratic characteristic and parent’s
socioeconomic are systematically related to literacy
levels (Erner C. et. All: 2016).
4 CONCLUSIONS
The majority of Economics students who use the
Branchless Banking service have fine financial
literacy. The high financial literacy covers the
budgeting, saving and managing money, the bases of
investment and knowledge about the value of good
and priority scale of their lives. In addition, it also
covers the potential of conflicts and benefits, under-
standing and belief in banking service and its benefits
and risks and finding additional information and
support.
Students with high financial literacy are not only
prioritize their desire but also eager to have additional
income. They are likely to look for further
information on the quality, price and use of the
products. They tend to have effective and efficient
analytical thoughts. Students with average level of
financial literacy often use the money to fulfill their
wish. The consideration on how to spend the money
for goods or services is frequently changing depends
on their eagerness. Students with low financial
literacy tend to spend the money without taking into
account the economic consequences. They do not
have good analytical thoughts in spending the money
and failure in managing the funds is not a problem to
them.
A few students have low financial literacy.
Therefore, the faculty and department of economy
have to develop either academic or non-academic
activity to involve students thereby encouraging
students’ level of financial literacy.
REFERENCES
Bosshardt W, and Walstad W. B. 2014, National Standards
for Financial Lit-eracy: Rational and Content. The
Journal of Economics Education, 45 (1), 63-70.
Bank Indonesia, Keuangan Inklusif di Indonesia. Diakses
dari http:// www. bi.go.id/ /perbankan/ keuanganin-
klusif/Indonesia/Contents/Default.aspx
Erner C. Goedde-Menke M, and Oberste M. 2016.
Financial Literacy of High School Student: Evidence
from Germany. The Journal of Economic Education
2016, Vol 47 no. 2, 95 – 105
Lusardi, A and Mitchell, O. S. 2006. Financial Literacy
and Planning: Implications for Retirement Wellbeing.
Google.com- Financial Literacy.