(3.235.108.188) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/02/25 06:49
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
: 
twitterline
研究生:唐錦屏
研究生(外文):Ching-ping Tang
論文名稱:比較台灣公私立大學畢業生畢業後一年之薪資-考慮選擇性偏誤的模型
指導教授:陳彧夏陳彧夏引用關係
指導教授(外文):Yu-hsia Chen
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:東吳大學
系所名稱:經濟學系
學門:社會及行為科學學門
學類:經濟學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2010
畢業學年度:98
語文別:中文
論文頁數:51
中文關鍵詞:公立大學私立大學薪資
外文關鍵詞:public universityprivate universityincome
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:1
  • 點閱點閱:570
  • 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:43
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
摘要
本文主要在估計台灣公私立大學畢業生畢業後一年之二薪資迴歸式且檢定其二薪資是否有顯著的差異。在此採用台灣高等教育整合資料庫「大專校院畢業生流向調查計畫」,取其92學年大一生至95學年畢業後一年之合併檔作為原始資料來源。由於台灣主要是以考試分數決定學生進入公私立大學,因此會產生選擇性偏誤的問題。為了修正選擇性偏誤的問題,在理論部分除了推導最常用的Heckman二階段估計法外,更進一步推導出最大概似法模型(Maximum Likelihood Model)同時估計決定個人進入公、私大學之Probit方程式與公、私立大學二薪資之迴歸式。但因某些技術上之因素,本文實證部分只採用Heckman二階段估計方法作分析。實證結果顯示,無論以公立代表性學生作為基礎所算出之估計薪資,或是以私立代表性學生作為基礎算出之估計薪資,兩者的結果皆為公立大學對剛畢業一年之估計薪資均大於私立大學,也就是就剛畢業一年之薪資而言,公立大學對薪資的貢獻大於私立大學。此外,本文進一步以適合大樣本的Z統計量檢定公、私立大學畢業生畢業後一年之薪資是否相同,檢定結果是在顯著水準為1%下的雙尾檢定與單尾檢定,皆為拒絕虛無假設,表示對同一代表性學生分別就讀公立大學畢業後一年所獲得的薪資與就讀私立大學畢業後一年所獲得的薪資是有顯著差異。





關鍵字:公立大學、私立大學、薪資
Abstract
This thesis tries to estimate the two income equations of students of public and private universities after one year’s graduation and test whether there exists any significant difference between the income of public and private graduates. The data used are from the survey of university graduates of Taiwan Integrated Postsecondary Education Database. In Taiwan, the score of the standardized test is essentially the most important factor determining the student’s entering public or private universities; therefore, there exists the problem of selectivity bias. To correct the problem of selectivity bias, in the theoretical part of this thesis, aside from the popular Heckman two-stage method, a maximum likelihood model which simultaneously estimates the Probit equation, which determines the student entering public and private universities, and the two income equations of public and private graduates is developed. However, due to some technical problems, only the Heckman two-stage method is used in the empirical study. The empirical results indicate the estimated income is higher for public graduates than that of private ones no matter a public or a private representative graduate is used as a basis for comparison. Moreover, a Z test, which is applicable to large samples, also shows that there exists a significant difference between the income of one-year graduates for the two groups of students. In other words, as far as the income of one year graduates is concerned, the contribution of public universities is greater than that of private universities.



Key words: public university, private university, income
目錄
圖目錄
表目錄
第一章 緒論…............................................................................................................... 1
第一節 研究背景與動機....................................................................................... 1
第二節 研究目的……………………………………………………………....... 4
第三節 研究架構與流程…………………………………..……………….…… 4
第二章 文獻回顧……………………………………………..………………….…… 5
第三章 實證理論模型................................................................................................. 12
第一節 Heckman二階段估計法………………………………………............ 12
第二節 最大概似法………………………………………………………….... 19
第三節 檢定公、私立大學每個解釋變數對薪資的邊際影響是否都相同之假設………………………………………………………………............ 25
第四章 資料分析......................................................................................................... 27
第一節 資料來源、選取與變數定義…………………………………………. 27
第二節 樣本資料敘述統計................................................................................. 30
第五章 實證結果......................................................................................................... 34
第一節 Heckman二階段之估計結果………………………………………..... 34
第二節 檢定公、私立大學畢業生畢業後一年之薪資..................................... 41
第六章 結論與建議..................................................................................................... 46
參考文獻........................................................................................................................... 48
參考文獻
一、中文部分:
于若蓉和朱敬一(1998),台大「惠我良多」?—論各大學畢業生初出校門的表現,經濟論文叢刊,26(1),65-89。
成嘉玲(1991),公私立大學畢業生所得與就業之比較研究—兼論政府對公私立大學教育投資的效率,台北:行政院青年輔導委員會。
吳惠林(1988),專上人力勞動報酬的決定因素—台灣的實證分析,經濟論文叢刊,16(3),357-369。
吳家聲和游孟龍(1994),教育投資與工資差異之分析,勞資關係論叢,2,27-51。
徐明珠(2006),少子化時代教育應有的對策與行動,97年9月8日,取自http://old.npf.org.tw/PUBLICATION/EC/095/EC-R-095-003.htm。
祝若穎(2009),日本高等教育對少子化衝擊的因應及其啟示,教育資料與研究,86,175-198。
符碧真(1996),教育投資報酬率長期變化之剖析—以我國教育發展個案為例,教育研究資訊,4(1),82-99。
陳彧夏(1999),比較台灣公、私立大學的相對效率—以在台就業者為例,東吳經濟商學學報,26,27-53。
陳俊豪(2007),高等教育素質對於畢業生薪資報酬之影響:比較一般大學與技職院效之實證研究,高雄大學經濟管理研究所碩士論文。
曾柏嘏(2005),高等教育素質對畢業生薪資影響之實證研究,清華大學經濟研究所碩士論文。
曾瑞譙(2006),大專技職校院面對「出生率降低」的學校經營管理壓力與因應之道,學校行政雙月刊,46,310-325。
鍾俊文(2004),少子化、人口老化及人口減少的成因、衝擊與對策,台灣經濟論衡,2(6),11-46。
羅綸新(2007),台灣少子化現象對高等教育之衝擊與挑戰,教育資料與研究,74,133-150。
二、英文部分:
Anderson, G. M., W. F. Shugart and R. D. Tollison(1991), “Educational Achievement and the Cost of Bureaucracy,” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 15(1), 29-45.
Bedi, A. S. and A. Garg(2000), “The Effectiveness of Private Versus Public Schools: the Case of Indonesia,” Journal of Development Economics, 61, 463-494.
Betts, J. R.(1995), “Does School Quality Matter? Evidence from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 77(2), 231-247.
Bjorklund, A. and C. Kjellstrom(2002), “Estimating the Return to Investments in Education: How Useful Is the Standard Mincer Education,” Economics of Education Review, 21, 195-210.
Blackburn M. and D. Neumark(1995), “Are OLS Estimates of the Return to Schooling Biased Downward? Another Look,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 77(2), 217-230.
Card, D. and A. B. Krueger(1992a), “Does School Quality Matter? Return to Education and the Characteristics of Public Schools in the U.S.,” Journal of Pulitical Economy, 100, 1-40.
Card, D. and A. B. Krueger(1992b), “School Quality and Black-White Relative Earnings: A Direct Assessment,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 57, 151-200.
Coleman, J. S. et al.(1966), “Equality of Educational Opportunity,” Washington: Government Printing Office.
Coleman, J., T. Hoffer and S. Kilgore(1982), “High School Achievement:Public, Catholic, and Private Schools Compare,” New York: Basic.
Coleman, J. and T. Hoffer(1987), “Public and Private High Schools: The Impact of Communitie,” New York: Basic.
Cox, D. and E. Jimenez(1991), “The Relative Effectiveness of Private and Public Schools: Evidence from Two Developing Countries,” Journal of Development Economics, 34, 99-121.
Evans, W. N. and R. M. Schwab(1995), “Finishing High School and Starting College: Do Catholic Schools Make a Difference?” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(4), 941–974.
Evans, W. N. and Robert M. Schwab(1996), “Who Benefits from a Catholic School Education?,” Mimeo, University of Maryland, July.
Figlio, D. N. and J. A. Stone(1997), “School Choice and Student Performance: Are Private Schools Really Better?” Working paper, University of Washington.
Figlio, D. N. and J. A. Stone(1999), “Are Private Schools are Better?” Research in Labor Economics, 18, 115–140.
Goldberger, A. S. and G. G. Cain(1982), “The Causal Analysis of Cognitive Outcomes in the Coleman, Hoffer, and Kilgore Report,” Sociology of Education, 55, 103–122.
Goldhaber, D. D.(1996), “Public and Private High Schools: Is School Choice an Answer to the Productivity Problem?” Economics of Education Review, 15(2), 93–109.
Hanushek, E.(1979), “Conceptual and Empirical Issues in the Estimation of Education Production Functions,” Journal of Human Resources, 14, 351-388.
Hanushek, E.(1986), “The Economics of Schooling: Production and Efficiency in the Public Schools,” Journal of Economic Literature, 25, 1141-1177.
Jimenez, E., M. Lockheed and N. Wattanawah(1988), “The Relative Efficiency of Private and Public Schools: The Case of Thailand,” World Bank Economic Review, 2(2), 139-164.

McGuinness, S.(2003), “University Quality and Labor Market Outcomes,” Applied Economics, 35, 1943-1955.
Neal, D.(1997), “The Effect of Catholic Secondary Schooling on Educational Attainment,” Journal of Labor Economics, 15(1), 98–123.
Noell, J.(1982), “Public and Catholic Schools: A Reanalysis of Public and Private Schools,” Sociology of Education, 55, 123–132.
Ono, H.(2004), “College Quality and Earnings in the Japanese Labor Market, Industrial Relation,” 43(3), 595-615.
Sander, W.(1996), “Catholic Grade Schools and Academic Achievement,” Journal of Human Resources, 31(3), 540–548.
Sander, W.(1997), “More on Unobservables and the Catholic School Effect on Academic Achievement,” Working Paper, DePaul University.
Sander, W. and A. C. Krautmann(1995), “Catholic Schools, Dropout Rates, and Educational Attainment,” Economic Inquiry, 33(2), 217–233.
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