(54.81.178.153) 您好!臺灣時間:2017/10/20 05:56          離開系統
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
本論文永久網址: 
研究生:張良丞
研究生(外文):Liang-Cheng Zhang
論文名稱:臺北市國民小學教育經費適足性之研究—成本函數取向
論文名稱(外文):A Study on the Educational Expenditure Adequacy among Elementary Schools in Taipei City – Cost Function Approach
指導教授:王保進王保進引用關係
指導教授(外文):Bao-Jinn Wang
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:臺北市立教育大學
系所名稱:教育行政與評鑑研究所碩士班
學門:教育學門
學類:教育行政學類
論文出版年:2008
畢業學年度:96
語文別:中文
論文頁數:150
中文關鍵詞:教育經費適足性成本函數
外文關鍵詞:Educational ExpenditureAdequacyCost Function Approach
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:5
  • 點閱點閱:1119
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:624
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
本研究旨在瞭解臺北市國民小學教育經費之適足性,透過對國外適足性理論之探討,歸納出適足性理論與評估方法,並進一步估算臺北市國民小學教育經費達成適足之情形。
研究方法主要採行成本函數法,研究對象為140所臺北市立國民小學,經過文獻探討採行所需變項後,進一步以資料包絡分析法估算各校相對效率,並以兩階段最小平方法估計ln平均教師薪資迴歸式與ln每生支出迴歸式,ln每生支出迴歸式估計出來後,以適足分數代入,而其他自變項分別以平均數代入來估計出臺北市適足教育經費。
經過資料分析與討論後,獲致以下研究結論:
一、教育經費適足性係為公平性之延伸,係指在既定學生成就之下所需之教育經費。
二、適足性評估方法主要有四,可依研究性質選取資源導向或表現導向來決定合適方法。
三、成本函數法係透過迴歸分析方法估計迴歸式,並代入適足學生成就來決定適足經費,並可因地制宜計算出不同適足經費。
四、相較於國外適足模式,我國之平均教師薪資不適合做為投入價格
五、以學生成就平均數之95%信賴區間計算縣市層級適足經費,不到一半的學校有適足經費。
六、適足經費與學校規模呈現負相關。
七、臺北市國民小學效率平均表現具有高效率,但仍有改進空間。
八、學校效率的提高有助於降低學校適足經費。
九、以學校特質計算適足經費雖提高達適足經費校數,但平均所需的適足經費卻提高了。
十、從國外歸納之五項適足性假設中,本研究符合四項適足性假設。
十一、學校效率與學生成就是影響達適足與否的關鍵因素
十二、以適足經費做為各校經費分配依據,不需要增加太多額外經費

最後則根據研究結論給予教育行政機關、國民小學與未來研究建議:
壹、給教育行政機關之建議
一、優先補助有效率卻未達適足經費者
二、逐步鬆綁預算與經費使用權以提昇效率
三、設計激勵教師制度
四、訂立國小基本學力檢測預期目標
五、小班小校政策值得再深思
六、適足經費標準,應逐步向學校特質邁進
貳、給學校之建議
一、可先針對改善比例高的投入產出做改善以增進效率
二、妥善運用經費補強學生學習不足之處
參、給未來研究之建議
係針對研究對象與範圍、研究方法、研究變項給予建議。
The main purpose of this study is to estimate the adequate expenditure of elementary schools in Taipei City. After analyzing foreign adequacy theory to gain appraisal approaches, this study estimates the
achieving adequate levels of Elementary Schools in Taipei City.
The main research approach is cost function approach. After selecting 140 elementary schools and necessary variables, this study uses DEA to estimate school relative efficiency and 2SLS to estimate ln average teacher salary regression and ln expenditure per student regression. Use adequate scores to replace student achievement and use average to replace other variables in ln expenditure per student regression, and then we can get the adequate expenditure of elementary schools in Taipei City.
After analyzing data, those results lead to following conclusion:
1. Adequacy is the extension of equity, and it means that adequacy is the expenditure based on adequate student achievement.
2. There are four main approaches to estimate adequacy, and researches can choose resource approach or performance approach according their research.
3. The cost function approach uses regression approach to decide the cost of adequacy, and its main strength is to estimate the cost of adequacy according to different characteristics.
4. Compared with foreign adequacy model, average teacher salary in Taipei is not appropriate for input price.
5. After using 95% confidence interval for the adequate student achievement to estimate adequate expenditure, there are not 50% schools above achieving city adequate level.
6. Adequate expenditure and school scale are negative correlation.
7. The average relative efficiency of elementary schools in Taipei City is high, but they still need to improve their efficiency.
8. Improving school efficiency can decrease adequate expenditure.
9. Although estimating adequate expenditure based on school characteristics can increase percent of achieving adequate cost, it needs more adequate cost.
10. Of five adequacy assumptions, this study meets four ones.
11. School efficiency and student achievement are the key factors of whether schools achieve adequacy.
12. If we use adequate expenditure as money distribution standard, Taipei City will not pay too much additional funds.
At last, according to conclusion, this study gives educational administration organization, elementary schools, and further advanced studies some suggestions.
摘要.......................................................i
Abstract.................................................iii
謝辭.......................................................v
目次.....................................................vii
表次......................................................ix
圖次......................................................xi
第一章 緒論.................................................1
第一節 研究動機與目的........................................1
第二節 研究問題.............................................6
第三節 名詞釋義.............................................6
第四節 研究範圍與限制........................................7
第二章 文獻探討.............................................9
第一節 教育經費適足性之內涵..................................9
第二節 教育經費適足性之評估方法..............................23
第三節 成本函數變項之探討...................................38
第四節 國內外教育經費適足性評估之相關研究.....................59
第三章 研究方法............................................67
第一節 研究架構............................................67
第二節 研究設計流程........................................68
第三節 研究資料來源........................................71
第四節 研究對象............................................73
第五節 資料分析方法........................................74
第四章 結果分析與討論.......................................79
第一節 學校效率分析結果.....................................79
第二節 投入價格迴歸式分析結果...............................82
第三節 每生支出迴歸式分析結果...............................86
第四節 臺北市國民小學適足教育經費評估結果.....................97
第五章 結論與建議.........................................107
第一節 結論...............................................107
第二節 建議...............................................112
參考文獻.................................................121
壹、中文部分..............................................121
貳、外文部分..............................................124
附錄.....................................................130
壹、中文部分
王立心(2004)。國民教育經費分配模式公平性與適足性之研究。國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文,未出版,臺北市。
王保進(2004)。多變量分析。臺北市:高等教育。
王保進(2005)。視窗版SPSS與行為科學研究(2版)。臺北市:心理。
王建正(2002)。國民小學學校經營效率評鑑指標之研究-DEA 評鑑模式。國立屏東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,屏東市。
吳時省(1996)。地方政府教育預算分配:以台北市國小為例。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。
吳清山、蔡菁芝(2006)。英美兩國教育績效責任之比較分析及其啟示。師大學報,51(1),1-21。
李子奈(主編)(1992)。計量經濟學-方法與應用。北京:清華大學。
李文益、黃毅志(2004)。文化資本、社會資本與學生成就的關聯性之研究:以台東師院為例。台東大學教育學報,15(2),23-58。
李秉正(譯)(2005)。H. S. Rosen著。財政學(Public Finance, 7e)臺北市:雙葉書廊。
李建然、謝兆恩(2004)。臺北市立國中教育經費運用及預算控制績效評估-隨機邊界成本函數之應用。當代會計,5(1),57-86。
李美蓮(2007)。應用資料包絡法評估國民中學之經營效率-以台中縣立國民中學為例。南華大學管理科學研究所碩士論文,未出版,嘉義縣。
李雪莉(2008)。教改戰場下的百萬孩子兵─我不想上學。天下雜誌,395。
沈水河(2004)。以包絡分析法評估雲林縣公立國民中學之經營效率。南華大學管理科學研究所碩士論文,未出版,嘉義縣。
林文展(2006)。我國中小學教師薪給制度改進的可行方案。教育研究,14,123-133。
孫遜(2004)。資料包絡分析法:理論與應用。臺北市:揚智文化。
徐育珠(2006)。財政學。臺北市:三民。
徐良維(2006)。國家權力干預人民基本權之合法性與正當性。政策研究學報,6,267-303。
秦夢群(2004)。美國教育法與判例。臺北市:高等教育。
涂巧玲(2001)。以專家判斷法決定國民小學教育經費充足—一個方法的試探。國立花蓮師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,花蓮市。
教育基本法(2006)。
教育部(無日期)。國小輔導設施理想設備標準,2008年3月15日取自:http://www.guide.edu.tw/fac_element_1.php。
教育經費編列與管理法(2000)。
莊三修、許添明(2000)。推動教育優先區計畫指標界定與補助方式之調查研究。教育部委託專案。
許純君(譯)(1999)。S. A. Delurgio著。預測的原理與應用(Forecasting Principles and Applications, 1e)。臺北市:台灣西書。
許添明(2003)。教育財政制度新論。臺北市:高等教育。
陳明華(2004)。應用DEA 評估國民中學經營效率之研究---以高雄市為例。國立中山大學經濟學研究所碩士在職專班碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
陳美芳(1999)。國語文低成就學生口語理解能力的發展。特殊教育研究學刊,17,189-204。
陳淑玲(2005)。國民中學經營績效評估之研究-以臺灣地區某縣市國民中學為例。國立東華大學企業管理學系碩士在職專班碩士論文,未出版,花蓮縣。
陳麗珠(1993)。我國中小學教育財政公平之研究。高雄市:復文。
陳麗珠(2000)。美國教育財政改革。臺北市:五南。
黃文隆‧黃龍(2005)。迴歸分析。台中市:滄海。
葉運偉(2003)。學校較適經營規模探討-技術效率的觀點。學校行政,24,21-34。
廖英賢(2006)。我國地方教育發展基金預算編列方式變革與展望。主計月刊,605,29-35。
臺北市政府教育局(2006)。臺北市國民小學95年度基本學力檢測計畫成果報告書。臺北市:作者。
臺北市政府教育局(無日期)。活潑生動的國小教育。2007年11月14日取自:http://www.edunet.taipei.gov.tw/public/public.asp?SEL=21
蓋浙生(1999)。教育經濟與計畫。臺北市:五南。
趙國慶(2006)。計量經濟學(Econometrics)。臺北市:偉碩。
劉春初(2004)。TIMSS-R架構與DEA分析法的運用-以台灣地區國民中學學校經營效率南北地區比較為例。台東大學教育學報,15(1),164-184。
鄭建良(2006)。國民中學學校本位財務管理制度之研究—教育充足性觀點。國立高雄師範大學教育學研究所博士論文,未出版,高雄市。
錢美蘭(2005)。預算制度對學校經營效率影響之研究-以臺北市立國民小學為例。東吳大學會計學系碩士在職專班碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。
薄喬萍(2005)。資料評估之資料包絡分析法。臺北市:五南。
顏泳禛(2003)。臺北市國民小學教育經費適足性評估之研究。臺北市立師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。

貳、外文部分
Alexander, K., & Wall, A. (2006). Adequate funding of education programs for at-risk children: an econometric application of research-based cost differentials. Journal of Education Finance, 31(3), 297-319.
Augenblick, J. G., Myers, J. L., & Anderson, A. B. (1997). Equity and adequacy in school funding. The Future of Children, 7(3), 63-78.
Baker, B. D. (2005). The emerging shape of educational adequacy: from theoretical assumptions to empirical evidence. Journal of Education Finance, 30(3), 259-287.
Baker, B. D., & R. Friedman-Nimz. (2003). Gifted children, vertical equity, and state school finance policies and practices. Journal of Education Finance, 28(4), 523-556.
Baker, B. D., Taylor, L., & Vedlitz, A. (2004). Measuring educational adequacy in public schools. Retrieved September 25, 2007, from http://www.tlc.state.tx.us/roadmap/tsfp/Reports/Measuring%20Educational%2OAdequacy.pdf
Baker, E. L., & Linn, R. L. (2004). Validity issues for accountability systems. In S. H. Fuhrman & R. F. Elmore (Eds.), Redesigning accountability systems for education (pp. 47-71). New York, NY: Teacher College Press.
Berne, R., & Stiefel, L. (1999). Concepts of school finance equity:1970 to present. In H. Ladd, R. Chalk, & J. Hansen (Eds.), Equity and adequacy in education finance: issues and perspectives. (pp. 7-33). Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press
Bessent, A., Bessent, W., Kennington, J., & Reagan, B. (1982). An application of mathematical programming to assess productivity in the houston independent school district. Management Science, 28(12), 1355-1367.
Chakraborty, K., Biswas, B., & Lewis W. C. (2001). Measurement of technical efficiency in public education: a stochastic and nonstochastic production function approach. Southern Economic Journal, 67(4), 889-905.
Chambers, J. G. (1995). Public school teacher cost differences across the United States. Retrieved December 11, 2007, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs95/95758.pdf
Chambers, J. G., Levin, J. D., & Parrish T. B. (2006). Examining the relationship between educational outcomes and gaps in funding: an extension of the New York adequacy study. Peabody Journal of Education, 81(2), 1-32.
Costrell, R. M. (2005). Equity v. Equity. Education Next, 5(3), 77-81.
Crampton, D. E. (2007). State school finance legislation: a 50-State overview and trend analysis. Journal of School Finance, 34(4), 470-487.
Duncombe, W. (2002). Estimating the cost of an adequate education in New York. Center for Policy Research Working Paper, 44, 1-31.
Duncombe, W. (2006). Responding to the charge of alchemy: strategies for evaluating the reliability and validity of costing-out research. Journal of Education Finance, 32(2), 173-169.
Duncombe, W., & Lukemeyer, A. (2002). Estimating the cost of educational adequacy: a comparison of approaches. Retrieved October 06, 2007, from http://www-cpr.maxwell.syr.edu/faculty/duncombe/special_report/costofeducadeq.pdf
Duncombe, W., & Yinger J. (1999). Performance standards and educational cost indexes: you can’t have one without the other. In Ladd, H. F., Chalk, R., & Hansen , J. S. (Eds.), Equity and adequacy in education finance: issues and perspectives. (pp. 260-297). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Duncombe, W., & Yinger J. (2000). Financing higher student performance standards: the case of New York State. Economics of Education Review, 19, 363-386.
Duncombe, W., & Yinger J. (2005a). How much more does a disadvantaged student cost? Economics of Education Review, 24, 513-532.
Duncombe, W., & Yinger J. (2005b). Estimating the costs of meeting student performance outcomes adopted by the Kansas State Board of Education. Retrieved October 1, 2007, from http://www-cpr.maxwell.syr.edu/efap/Special_Reports/Kansas_Report.pdf
Duncombe, W., Lukemeyer, A., & Yinger, J. (2004). Education finance reform in New York: calculating the cost of a "sound basic education" in New York City (Tech. Rep. No. 28). New York: Syracuse University, Center for Policy Research, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Pubic Affairs.
Duncombe, W., Ruggiero, J., & Yinger, J. (1996). Alternative approaches to measuring the cost of education. In H. F. Ladd (Eds.), Holding schools accountable: performance-based reform in education (pp. 327-356). Washington, D.C. : Brookings Institution Press.
Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., Forsund, F. R., Hayes, K., & Heshmati, A. (2006). Measurement of productivity and quality in non-marketable services-with application to schools. Quality Assurance in Education, 14(1), 21-36.
Gordon, R. J. (2006). Macroeconomics (10th edition). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Gronberg, T. J., Jansen, D. W., Taylor, L. L., & Booker, K. (2004). School outcomes and school costs:the cost function approach. Retrieved November 8, 2007, from http://www.schoolfunding.info/states/tx/march4%20cost%20study.pdf
Guthrie, J. W. & Springer M. G. (2007). Adequacy advocates turn guesstimates into gold. Education Next, 20-27.
Guthrie, J. W., & Rothstein. R. (1999). Enabling “adequacy” to achieve reality: translating adequacy into state school finance distribution arrangements. In Ladd, H. F., Chalk, R., & Hansen, J. S. (Eds.), Equity and adequacy in education finance: issues and perspectives. (pp. 209-259). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Guthrie, J. W., Garms, W. I., & Pierce, L. C. (1988). School finance and education policy: enhancing educational efficiency, equality, and choice (2nd edition). Boston : Allyn and Bacon.
Hanushek, E. A. (1989). The impact of differential expenditures on school performance. Educational Researcher, 18(4), 45-62.
Hanushek, E. A. (2005a). Pseudo-science and a sound basic education: voodoo statistics in NewYork. Education Next, 5(4), 67-73.
Hanushek, E. A. (2005b). The alchemy of' costing out and adequate education. Retrieved October 13, 2007, from http://edpro.stanford.edu/hanushek/admin/pages/files/uploads/alchemy.final.pdf
Hanushek, E. A. (2007). The confidence men: selling adequacy, making million. Education Next 7(3), 73-78.
Hedges, L. V., Laine, R. D. & Greenwald, R. (1994). Does money matter? a meta-analysis of studies of the effects of differential school inputs on student outcomes. Educational Researcher, 23(3), 5-14.
Imazeki, J., & Rechovsky, A. (2005). Assessing the use of econometric analysis in estimating the costs of meeting state education accountability standards: lessons from Texas. Peabody Journal of Education, 80(3), 96-125.
Imazeki, J., & Reschovsky, A. (2004). Estimating the costs of meeting Texas education accountability standards. Retrieved October 16, 2007, from http://www.investintexasschools.org/schoolfinancelibrary/studies/files/2005/january/reschovsky_coststudy.doc
King, R. A., Swanson, A. D., & Sweetland, S. R. (2005). Designing finance structures to satisfy equity and adequacy goals. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(15), 1-25.
Lefkowits, L. (2004). School finance: from equity to adequacy. Retrieved September 10, 2007, from http://www.mcrel.org/PDF/PolicyBriefs/5042PI_PBSchoolFinanceBrief.pdf
National Conference of State Legislatures (1998). Educational adequacy: building an adequate school finance system. Denver, CO: Author.
Odden, A. R. (2000). The costs of sustaining educational change through comprehensive school reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 81(6), 433-438.
Odden, A. R. (2003). Equity and adequacy of school finance today. Phi Delta Kappan, 85(2), 120-125.
Odden, A. R., & Picus, L. O. (2004). school finance: a policy perspective (3rd edition). New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Odden, A. R., Goetz, M., & Picus, L. O. (2007). Paying for school finance adequacy with the national average expenditure per pupil. (Tech. Rep. No. 2) Seattle, WA: University of Washington, Evans School of Public Affairs.
Odden, A. R., & Wallace, M. (2007). Rewarding teacher excellence: A teacher compensation handbook for state and local policy makers. Madison, WI: consortium for Policy Research in Education, Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin.
Olson, L. (2005). Financial evolution. Education Week, 24(17), 8-13.
Picus, L. O. (2004). School finance adequacy: implications for school principals. NASSP Bulletin, 88(3), 3-11.
Primont, D. F., & Domazlicky, B. (2006). Student achievement and efficiency in Missouri schools and the No Child Left Behind Act. Economics of Education Review 25, 77-90.
Ray, S. C. (1991). Resource-use efficiency in public schools: a study of Connecticut data. Management Science, 37(12), 1620-1628.
Rebell, M. A. (2007). Professional rigor, public engagement and judicial review: a proposal for enhancing the validity of education adequacy studies. Teachers College Record, 109(6), 1303-1373.
Rice, J. K. (2004). Equity and efficiency in school finance reform: competing or complementary goods? Peabody journal of Education, 79(2), 134-151.
Roellke, C., Green, P., & Zielewski, E. H. (2004). School finance litigation: the promises and limitations of the third wave. Peabody journal of Education, 79(2), 104-133.
Rossmiller, R. A. (1994). Equity or adequacy of school funding. Education Policy, 8(4), 616-625.
Ruggiero, J. (2007). Measuring the cost of meeting minimum educational standards: an application of data envelopment analysis. Education Economics, 15(1), 1-13.
Sjoquist, D. L., & Khan, A. (2006). Adequate funding of education in Georgia: what does it mean, what might it cost, how could it be implemented? (FRC Report No. 129). Georgia State University, GA: Fiscal Research Center.
Taylor, L. L. (2005). Adjusting for geographic variations in teacher compensation: updating the Texas cost-of-education index technical supplement. Retrieved October 15, 2007, from http://bush.tamu.edu/research/faculty_projects/txschoolfinance/papers/CEITechnicalSupplement.pdf
Toutkoushian, R. K., & Michael, R. S. (2007). An alternative approach to measuring horizontal and vertical equity in school funding. Journal of Education Finance, 32(4), 395-421.
Verstegen, D. A. (2006). A framework for determining the cost of an adequate education: a tale of two states. Journal of Education Finance, 32(2), 202-236.
Verstegen, D. A., & Whitney, T. (1997). From courthouses to schoolhouses: emerging judicial theories of adequacy and equity. Educational Policy, 11(3), 330-352.
Wall, A. F. (2006). Estimating the cost of adequate educational programs: the case of Illinois. Journal of Education Finance, 32(2), 237-263.
Waxman, H. C., Huang, S. L., Anderson, L., & Weinstein, T. (1997). Classroom process differences in inner-city elementary schools. The Journal of Educational Research, 91(1), 49-59.
Worthington, A. (2001). An empirical survey of frontier efficiency measurement techniques in education. Education Economics, 9(3), 245-268.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔