臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：台灣高等教育院校績效評估研究
作者：宋安德
作者(外文)：SUNG, AN-DE
校院名稱：東吳大學
系所名稱：經濟學系
指導教授：傅祖壇
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2016
主題關鍵詞：高等教育；學校品質；隨機邊界法；資料包絡分析；共同邊界；Higher education；School quality；SFA；DEA；TFP；Meta Frontier
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:12
高等教育乃科技進步泉源，其辦學品質良窳，對國家社會整體發展實有重大且直接之影響。本文乃以學校品質差異為主軸，分別採參數法與非參數法估計，探討臺灣高等教育機構的經營績效、最適規模及生產力變動，並進一步與中國大陸高校實施共同邊界比較分析。研究結果發現：1.最適規模與學校品質呈正相關，就目前台灣高校平均品質水準而言，約有 46%之學校規模未達或超過最適規模水準，應設法擴大或縮小。2.效率改善所獲之成本節省，不低於調整規模所能產生成本效益，學校在調整規模時，仍應重視成本效率之提升。3.台灣高等教育產業之勞動生產力雖有衰退趨勢，然部分學校經裁汰無效勞動力後，逐步提升中。4.2010~2014年間台灣高等教育院校之經營效率優於大陸地區，台灣地區之 TFP 變動呈衰退趨勢，而大陸地區則成長 6.2%，究其成長主係受生產技術進步所驅動。5.學校品質的高低與經營效率、生產力變動呈正向關係，學校經營者在有限資源下，宜力求以品質提升為著眼。
Higher education institutions (HEIs) are the source of technological progress. The quality of HEIs exerts a direct and significant impact on the overall progress of country and society. With differences in HEI quality as the primary consideration, this study adopted SFA and DEA to examine the performance, optimal scale, and TFP change of HEIs. Furthermore, in order to understand how HEIs in Taiwan have developed differently from those in other countries, we conducted a cross-country comparison using data from HEIs in Mainland China. The findings of this study were as follows. 1. There was positive relationship between the quality of school and optimal scale. On average school quality, there were approximately 46% of schools that do not reach or exceed the optimal scale so as to should expand or reduce the scale. 2. The cost savings brought by efficiency improvement has more effects than adjustment the scale by cost efficiency. Hence, School should highlight the promote of cost efficiency when adjusting the scale. 3. Observation of the changes in labor and TFP indicated that labor productivity is on the decrease; however, some of the HEI categories presented increased labor productivity after cutting down on some of the inefficient labor.Research universitieswere unique in that their labor input continued to increase, but suitable adjustments enabled labor productivity to gradually move in a positive direction. 4. The MMPI of the HEIs in Taiwan declined by 1.9% every two years, whereas that in mainland China increased by 6.2%. We speculate that this was prompted by improvements in technology. 5.The quality of school has a positive relation with technology efficiency and TFP growth, which indicates that enhancing school quality increases operating efficiency and promotes growth in productivity.
References
1.Abbott, M. and Doucouliagos, C. (2009), “Competition and Efficiency: Overseas Students and Technical Efficiency in Australian and New Zealand Universities,” Education Economics, 17, 31-57.
2.Agasisti, T. (2011), “Performances and Spending in Higher Education: A European Comparison Through Non Parametric Approaches,” Education Economics, 19, 199-224.
3.Agasisti, T. (2015), “Cost Structure, Productivity and Efficiency of the Italian Public Higher Education Industry 2001–2011,” International Review of Applied Economics, 29, 1-22.
4.Agasisti, T. and Dal Bianco, A. (2009), “Reforming the University Sector: Effects on Teaching Efficiency – Evidence from Italy,” Higher Education, 57, 477-498.
5.Agasisti, T. and Johnes, G. (2009), “Beyond Frontiers: Comparing the Efficiency of Higher Education Decision-Making Units Across More Than One Country,” Education Economics, 17, 59-79.
6.Agasisti, T. and Pèrez-Esparrells, C. (2010), “Comparing Efficiency in a Cross Country Perspective: The Case of Italian and Spanish Universities,” Higher Education, 59, 85-103.
7.Agasisti T., Pohl C. (2012), “Comparing German and Italian public universities: Convergence or divergence in the higher education landscape?” Managerial and Decision Economics, 33(2), 71–85.
8.Agasisti, T. and Salerno, C. (2007), “Assessing the Cost Efficiency of Italian Universities,” Education Economics, 15, 455-471.
9.Aigner, D. J., and S. F. Chu (1968), “On estimating the industry production function,” American Economic Review, 58(4), 826-839.
10.Aigner, D. J., Lovell, C. A. K. and Schmidt, P. J. (1977), “Formulation and Estimation of Stochastic Frontier Production Function Models,” Journal of Econometrics, 6, 21-37.
11.Athanassopoulos, A. D., and Shale, E. (1997), “Assessing the comparative efficiency of higher education institutions in the UK by means of data envelopment analysis,” Education Economics, 5(2), 117−134.
12.Banker, R.D., Chanes A.and Copper W. W. (1984), “Some Models for EstimatingTechnical and Scale Inefficiencies in DataEnvelopment Analysis,” Management Science, 30(9), 1078-1092.
13.Black, D. A., and Smith, J. A. (2004), “How Robust Is the Evidence on the Effects of College Euality? Evidence from Matching,” Journal of Econometrics, 121(1-2), 99-124.
14.Brewer, D. J., Eide, E. and Ehrenberg, R. G. (1999), “Does It Pay to Attend an Elite Private College? Cross-Cohort Evidence on the Effects of College Type on Earnings,” Journal of Human Resources, 34(1), 104-123.
15.Caves, D. W., Christensen, L.R. and Diewert, E. (1982),“The economic theory of index numbers and the measurement of input, output, and productivity,” Econometrica, 50(6), 1393-1414.
16.Carrington, R., Coelli and Rao DSP (2005), “The performance of Australian universities: conceptual issues and preliminary results,” Economic Papers, 24(2), 145–163.
17.Charnes, A., Copper, W. W. and Rhodes, E. (1978), “Measuring The Efficiency ofDecision Making Units,”European Journal of Operational Research, 2, 429-444.
18.Chu, J.Y. (2009), “The impact and its strategies of low birth rate impact on higher education in Japan and its implication,” Bimonthly Journal of Educational Resources and Research, 86, 175-198.
19.Cohn, E. and Cooper, S. (2004), “Multi-Product Cost Functions for Universities: Economies of Scale and Scope,” In G. Johnes & J. Johnes (Eds.), International handbook on the economics of education (pp. 579-612). Bodmin, UK: Edward Elgar.
20.Cohn, E., Rhine, S. and Santos, M. (1989), “Institutions of Higher Education as Multi-Product Firms: Economies of Scale and Scope,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, 71(2), 284-290.
21.Dale, S. B. and Krueger, A. B. (2002), “Estimating the Payoff to Attending a More Selective College: An Application of Selection on Observables and Unobservables,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(4), 1491-1527.
22.De Groot, H., McMahon, W. W. and Volkwein, J. F. (1991), “The Cost Structure of American Research Universities,”The Review of Economics and Statistics, 73(3), 424-431.
23.Eide, E. and Showalter, M. H. (1998), “The Effect of School Quality on Student Performance: A Quantile Regression Approach,” Economics Letters, 58(3), 345-350.
24.Farrell, M. J. (1957), “The Measurement of Productive Efficiency,” Journal of the Royal Statistical, 120(3), 253-290.
25.Flegg, A.T., Allen, D.O., Field, K. and Thurlow, T.W. (2004), “Measuring the efficiency of British universities: a multi-period Data Envelopment Analysis,” Education Economics, 12(3), 231-249.
26.Fu, T. T., Huang, C. J. and. Tien, F. F (2008), “University Cost Structure in Taiwan,” Contemporary Economic Policy, 26(4), 651-662.
27.Färe, R., Grosskopf, S. and Margaritis, D. (2008), “Efficiency and productivity: Malmquist and more. In: Fried HO, Lovell CAK and Schmidt SS (eds),” The measurement of productive efficiency and productivity growth, Chapter 5. Oxford University Press: New York, 522-622.
28.Førsund, F.R., Kittelsen, S.A.C., Lindseth, F. and Edvardsen, D.F. (2006), “The tax man cometh - but is he efficient? ” National Institute Economic Review, 197(1), 106-119.
29.Glass, J. C., Mckillop, D. G., and Hyndman, N. S. (1995), “The Achievement of Scale Efficiency in UK Universities: A Multiple-Input Multiple-Output Analysis,” Education Economics, 3(3), 249-263.
30.Glass, J. C., McCallion, G., McKillop, D. G., Rasaratnam, S. and Stringer, K. S. (2006), “Implications of Variant Efficiency Measures for Policy Evaluations in UK Higher Education,” Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 40, 119-142.
31.Glass, J. C., McCallion, G., McKillop, D. G., Rasaratnam, S. and Stringer, K. S. (2009), “Best-Practice Benchmarking in UK Higher Education: New Nonparametric Approaches using Financial Ratios and Profit Efficiency Methodologies,” Applied Economics, 41, 249-267.
32.Grifell-Tatjé, E. and Lovell, C. A. K. (1995), “A note on the Malmquist productivity index,” Economics Letters, 47, 169-175.
33.Hashimoto, K. and Cohn, E. (1997), “Economies of Scale and Scope in Japanese Private Universities,” Education Economic, 5(2), 107-115.
34.Hsu, M.C. (2006), “Educational strategies and actions need to be taken in the era of low birth rate”, Retrieved September 8, 2006, fromhttp://old.npf.org.tw/PUBLICATION/EC/095/EC-R-095-003.htm
35.Johnes, J. (2008), “Efficiency and Productivity Change in the English Higher Education Sector from 1996/97 to 2004/5,” The Manchester School, 76(6), 653-674.
36.Johnes, G. Johnes, J.and Thanassoulis, E. (2008), “An analysis of costs in institutions of higher education in England,” Studies in Higher Education, 33, 527-549.
37.Johnes, J. and Yu, L. (2008), “Measuring the Research Performance of Chinese Higher Education Institutions Using Data Envelopment Analysis,” China Economic Review, 19, 679-696.
38.Joumady, O. and Ris, C. (2005), “Performance in european higher education: A non-parametric production frontier approach,” Education Economics, 13(2), 189-205.
39.Kempkes, G. and Pohl, C. (2010), “Efficiency of German universities–some evidence from nonparametric and parametric methods,” Applied Economics, 42(16), 2063–2079.
40.Kong, W.H. and Fu T.T. (2008), “Measuring the Student-base Performance of College of Business Using AR/DEA Model,” Taiwan Economic Review, 36(4), 483-514.
41.Koshal, R. K. and Koshal, M. (1995), “Quality and Economies of Scale in Higher Education,” Applied Economics, 27(8), 773-778.
42.Koshal, R. K. and Koshal, M. (1999), “Economies of Scale and Scope in Higher Education: A Case of Comprehensive Universities,” Economics of Education Reviews, 18(2), 269-277.
43.Laband, D. N. and Lentz, B. F. (2003), “New Estimates of Economies of Scale and Scope in Higher Education,” Southern Economic Journal, 70(1), 172-183.
44.Lewis, D. R. and Dundar, H. (1995), “Economies of Scale and Scope in Turkish Universities,” Education Economics, 3(2), 133-158.
45.Lloyd, P., Morgan, M. and Williams, R. (1993), “Amalgamation of Universities: Are There Economies of Scale or Scope?” Applied Economics, 25(8), 1081-1092.
46.Long, M. C. (2008), “College Quality and Early Adult Outcomes,” Economics of Education Review, 27(5), 588-602.
47.Lu, Y.H. and Fu, T.T. (2007), “Efficiency evaluation of polytechnic higher education institutions with considering output quality and institutional characteristics,” Management Review, 26(2), 1-21.
48.Lwo, L.S. (2007), “The impact and challenge of low birth rate on higher education in Taiwan,” Bimonthly Journal of Educational Resource and Research, 74, 133-150.
49.Margaritis, D. and Smart, W. (2011), “Productivity change in Australasian universities 1997-2005: a Malmquist analysis. Paper presented at the 52 Annual Conference of the New Zealand Association of Economics 29 June - 1 July 2011, Wellington, New Zealand,”
http://nzae.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2011/Session5/54_Smart.pdf
50.Parteka A., and Wolszczak-Derlacz, J. (2013),“The impact of trade integration with the EU on productivity in a post-transition economy. The case of Polish manufacturing sectors,” Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 49(2), 84-104.
51.Rumberger, R. W. and Thomas, S. L. (1993), “The Economic Returns to College Major, Quality and Performance: A Multilevel Analysis of Recent Graduates,” Economics of Education Review, 12(1), 1-19.
52.Shei, C.T. (2003), “Population change and educational development for Taiwan in the last 50 years: With comments on educational reform,” Paper presented at the 75th anniversary of National Taiwan University’s conference on “Promoting Competitiveness of Higher Education: University Educational Development in the 21st Century,” Taipei, Taiwan.
53.Worthington, A.C. (2001),“An Empirical Survey of Frontier Efficiency Measurement Techniques in Education,” Education Economics, 9(3), 245-268.
54.Worthington, A. C. and Higgs, H. (2011), “Economies of Scale and Scope in Australian Higher Education,” Higher Education. 61(4), 387-414.
55.Worthington, A.C. and Lee, B.L. (2008),“Efficiency, Technology and Productivity Change in Australian Universities, 1998 – 2003,” Economics of Education Review, 27, 285-298.
56.Wu C.S. (2011), “The Issues and Trends of Higher Education Reform in Taiwan,” Chang Gung Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 4(2), 241-280.
57.Zhang, L. (2005), “Do Measures of College Quality Matter? The Effect of College Quality on Graduates’ Earnings,” The Review of Higher Education, 28(4), 571-596.

 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：833（臺灣：826，外國：7） ／ 本年度總使用人次：2241491 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：68048511
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上