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：社會變遷與教育供需環境改變對子女教育投入決策之台灣圖像
作者：陳佳蓉
作者(外文)：Chen, Chia-Zung
校院名稱：國立政治大學
系所名稱：經濟學系
指導教授：李浩仲
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2022
主題關鍵詞：社會變遷；教育投入；國民移轉帳；NTA；Societal changes；Education investment；National Transfer Account；NTA
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:0
本論文採用1993-2018年家庭收支調查資料，透過董安琪（2011）所使用之國民移轉帳（National Transfer Account，NTA）方法，分別研究兩篇主題，一是「社會變遷與子女教育支出決策—產業轉型、教育擴張下的台灣圖像」，二是「社會教育環境與家庭特性對子女補習支出決策之影響」，試圖看出台灣家庭對子女教育投入的情形；實證結果發現，家庭對國中以下子女的教育支出隨時間增加，但對高中職階段的子女則先增後減，而補習支出則皆隨時間增加，尤其以國小最為明顯；在家庭特性方面，父母親年紀愈輕，教育支出愈多，除了國小階段外，國中及高中階段的子女其補習支出皆隨父母年紀愈大，支出愈多；父親就業狀態在高中階段，與教育支出呈顯著正相關，與補習支出呈負相關，母親就業狀態在國中階段與補習支出呈顯著負相關；另外父母學歷或社經地位愈高、家戶實質可支配所得愈高都會使得教育投入增加；家中有公部門成員對教育支出無影響，但會增加對國小及高中職階段子女的補習支出；此外，不論在教育支出或補習支出的影響上，一致性地看出家庭會隨著人口數的增加而受到資源分配的排擠。在地區特性方面，結果仍存在城鄉差距；而在教育環境特性方面，觀察到當進入高中或高職變容易時，家庭對國中階段子女的教育支出減少，但會增加補習支出，尤其進入高中變容易時對子女增加的補習支出會多於進入高職變容易時對子女增加的補習支出；另外，不論進入公私立大學是否容易，對高中職子女的補習支出決策沒有顯著影響，但大學以上學歷薪資愈高，大學教育薪資不均度愈大，大學以上失業率愈低，皆會增加高中職階段子女的補習支出。就不同所得組家庭而言，對各年齡層子女教育支出與補習支出結果的主要差異在於，最低所得組家庭在國中以下子女的補習支出有增加的趨勢，高中則無；除了十二年國民基本教育（高中職免學費施行）補習支出並沒有如同教育支出一樣於2011年後呈現減少趨勢外，在最高所得組家庭仍舊可看出父母自孩童年幼時即積極培養。最後，就整體而言，不論是九年一貫或十二年國民基本教育，皆會增加國小階段的補習支出，大學多元入學政策的實施，家戶會增加高中職子女的補習支出；而各所得群組對各項教育政策實施後的補習支出反應不盡相同。本文同時發現中間所得家庭對國中小子女的補習支出皆隨時間顯著增加，最低所得組對國小子女補習支出隨時間增加，最高所得組則對國中子女補習支出隨時間增加；總之，各所得組家庭皆重視自小培養孩童的能力。
This paper uses the household income and expenditure survey data from 1993 to 2018, and uses the National Transfer Account (NTA) method used by Tung (2011) to study two themes, one is "Industrial upgrading, education expansion, and educational expenditure on children among Taiwanese households”, and the second is “The influence of social education environment and family characteristics on children’s tuition spending decisions”, trying to see the situation of Taiwanese families’ investment in children’s education. The empirical results found that the educational expenditure of families for children below middle school level increases over time, but for children in the senior secondary vocational level, it increases first and then decreases, and tuition expenditures all increase over time, especially in elementary schools. The younger the parents are, the higher the education expenditure, except for elementary school, children in middle school and high school spend more on tutoring as their parents get older; the father’s employment status in high school is significantly positively correlated with education spending, and negatively correlated with tutoring spending. There is a significant negative correlation between the mother’s employment status and the tuition expenditure in the middle school stage; in addition, the higher the parents’ educational background or social and economic status, and the higher the household’s real disposable income will increase the education investment; having members of the public sector in the family has no effect on education expenditure. , but it will increase the tuition expenditures for children in elementary and senior high schools; in addition, regardless of the impact of education expenditures or tuition expenditures, it is consistent to see that families will be crowded out by resource allocation as the population increases. In terms of regional characteristics, there is still a gap between urban and rural areas; and in terms of educational environment characteristics, it is observed that when it becomes easier to enter high school or higher vocational education, families spend less on education for their children in the middle school stage, but increase tuition expenditure, especially when it becomes easier to enter high school, the increase in tuition expenses for children will be more than the increase in tuition expenses for children when it becomes easier to enter higher vocational education; in addition, whether it is easy to enter public and private universities, it does not affect the education investment decision of children in high school vocational education. However, the higher the salary for a college degree or above, the greater the inequality of college education salaries, and the lower the unemployment rate for college students and above, all of which will increase the tuition expenses for children at the high school level. For families with different income groups, the main difference in the results of children's education expenditures and tuition expenditures for each age group is that the tuition expenditures for children below middle school level in the lowest income group tend to increase, but not in high school; except for the 12-year national basic education (the implementation of high school vocational tuition exemption), the tuition expenditure did not show a decreasing trend after 2011 like the education expenditure, the highest income group of families can still see that parents have been actively cultivating since childhood. Finally, on the whole, whether it is nine years of consistent or 12 years of national basic education, will increase the tuition expenditure at the elementary school stage, and the implementation of the policy of multiple enrollment in universities will increase the tuition expenditure of children in high school vocational schools; Responses to tutoring spending following the implementation of various education policies varied among the groups obtained. At the same time, this paper finds that the tutoring expenditures of families for elementary and middle school children increase significantly over time. The lowest-income group’s tutoring expenditures for elementary school children increase with time, and the highest-income group’s tutoring expenditures for middle-school children increase with time. Families value the ability to nurture their children from an early age.
于若蓉與羅淇 (2003), “補習與升學機率：台灣的實證分析”, 台灣經濟學會研討會, 2003年12月。
吳乃德 (1997),“台灣階級流動的族群差異及原因”。《台灣社會學研究》1: 137-167。
吳慧瑛 (2007), “家庭背景與教育成就：五個出生世代的比較分析”,《人口學刊》, 34, 109-143.
李浩仲、李文傑與連賢明 (2016), “多「錢」入學？從政大學生組成看多元入學”, 《經濟論文》, 44(2), 207-250.
李浩仲、連賢明、李文傑、王平與簡錦漢 (2020),“哪類孩子最受教？從政大校務資料看學生表現”, 《經濟論文叢刊》, 48(2): 139-185.
李敦義 (2006),“補習有助於升學嗎?—分析補習、多元入學與教育取得間的關係”, 《教育與心理研究》, 29(3): 489-516.
林依伶與楊子霆(2018),“經濟成長、薪資停滯?初探台灣實質薪資與勞動生產力成長脫鉤之成因,”《經濟論文》46(2): 263-322.
林忠正、黃璀娟 (2009), “補習文化”, 《人文及社會科學集刊》, 21(4), 587–643.
林庭妤 (2019), “台灣補習產業競爭程度對於家戶補習支出之實證分析”, 台灣大學農業經濟研究所碩士論文。
林晉男 (2008), “台灣地區補教支出之實證分析”, 中正大學國際經濟所碩士論文。
林大森與陳憶芬 (2006), “臺灣高中生參加補習之效益分析”, 《教育研究集刊》, 52(4), 35-70.陳婉琪 (2005), “族群、性別與階級：再探教育成就的省籍差異”, 《台灣社會學》10: 1-40.
莊奕琦與陳晏羚 (2012), “決定台灣私人教導支出的影響因素—父母時間與金錢投入關係”,《經濟論文》, 40(2), 237-268.
莊奕琦與賴偉文 (2008), “影響教育成就的因素與九年國民義務教育政策效果評析台灣實證”,《人文及社會科學集刊》, 20(1), 25-65.
孫清山與黃毅志 (1996), “補習教育、文化資本與教育取得＂，《台灣社會學刊》，19：95-139.
陳怡靖、鄭燿男 (2000), “臺灣地區教育階層化之變遷＂，《人文及社會科學集刊》,10(3), 416-434.
陳佳蓉與李浩仲 (2021), “社會變遷與子女教育支出決策—產業轉型、教育擴張下的台灣圖像”, 《經濟論文》, 49(4), 609-649.
陳奕奇與劉子銘 (2008), “教育成就與城鄉差距: 空間群聚之分析”,《人口學刊》, Vol.37, 1-43.
陳婉琪、陳承佑、林明仁 (2016), “多元入學與選材機制：台北大學學生表現之校務資料分析”。台灣經濟學會2016年年會。台北：台大社科院，12月17日。黃竹君 (2011), “台灣家庭結構與國中生補習支出之實證分析”，成功大學經濟學研究所碩士論文.
黃瀞儀 (2012), “臺灣1976-2010家戶教育支出的影響因素分析”, 中央大學經濟學研究所碩士論文.
董安琪 (2011), “一代比一代消費更多? 國民移轉帳 (NTA) 方法對臺灣幼齡人口消費的估計”, 《臺灣經濟預測與政策》, 42(1), 119-148.
董安琪與蔡青龍 (2013), “少子化下依賴人口消費及代間移轉之研究”, 中央研究院。行政院經濟建設委員會委託研究報告。
葉高華 (2018), “大學多元入學 是否有利「家境好」的學生？”, 《臺灣社會學刊》,64: 171-195.
銀慶貞、陶宏麟與洪嘉瑜 (2012), “補習對考大學真的有用嗎?”，《經濟論文叢刊》40:1 73-118.劉錦龍與許菁君(2003), “孩童養育成本衡量—臺灣的實證研究”, 《人文及社會科學集刊》,15(1), 113–143.
劉正 (2006), “補習在台灣的變遷、效能與階層化”, 《教育研究集刊》, 52(4), 1-33.
駱明慶 (2001),“教育成就的省籍與性別差異”, 《經濟論文叢刊》29(2), 117-152.
駱明慶 (2002),“誰是臺大學生? - 性別、 省籍與城鄉差異”, 《經濟論文叢刊》, 30(1), 113-147.
駱明慶 (2004),“升學機會與家庭背景”, 《經濟論文叢刊》,32(4), 417-445.
駱明慶 (2018), “誰是臺大學生? (2001-2014)-多元入學的影響”, 《經濟論文叢刊》46(1), 47-95.
薛承泰 (1996), “影響國初中後教育分流的實證分析: 性別、省籍、與家庭背景的差異”,《臺灣社會學刊》, 20: 49–84.
賴偉文 (2007), “教育報酬、工資不均與異質性人力資本的研究”, 政治大學經濟研究所博士論文。
蘇倍均 (2009), “台灣家庭就學補習費和各項技藝補習費之實證研究”, 中正大學國際經濟所碩士論文。
行政院主計總處 (2019)。107年家庭收支調查(AA170043)【原始數據】取自中央研究院人文社會科學研究中心調查研究專題中心學術調查研究資料庫。doi:10.6141/TW-SRDA-AA170043-1
行政院主計總處 (2019)。107年人力資源調查(AA000041)【原始數據】取自中央研究院人文社會科學研究中心調查研究專題中心學術調查研究資料庫。doi:10.6141/TW-SRDA-AA000041-1
行政院主計總處 (2019)。107年人力運用調查(AA020041)【原始數據】取自中央研究院人文社會科學研究中心調查研究專題中心學術調查研究資料庫。doi:10.6141/TW-SRDA-AA020041-1
高雄市政府教育局 (2018), “直轄市及各縣市短期補習班資訊管理系統”, URL: https://bsb.kh.edu.tw/
教育部統計處 (2019)。107學年度高級中等學校教育消費支出調查概況。URL: https://www.edu.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=829446EED325AD02&sms=26FB481681F7B203&s=6A28A255772192BA
Abadie, A., Athey, S., Imbens, G.W., and J. Wooldridge (2017), “When Should You Adjust Standard Errors for Clustering?” NBER Working Paper 24003.
Baker D. P., Akiba M., Letendre G. K., Wiseman A. W. (2001), “Worldwide shadow education: outside-school learning, institutional quality of schooling, and cross-national mathematics achievement.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23, 1–17.
Barro, Robert J., and Jong-Wha Lee (1993), “International Comparisons of Educational. Attainment” Journal of Monetary Economics, 32(3): 363-394.
Becker, G.S. (1960), “An Economic Analysis of Fertility,” in Demographic and Economic Change in Developed Countries, (pp. 209–240), Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Becker, G.S. (1960), “An Economic Analysis of Fertility,” in Demographic and Economic Change in Developed Countries, (pp. 135–187), Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Becker, G. S., and H. G. Lewis (1973), “On the interaction between the quantity and quality of children.” Journal of Political Economy 8(2): S279–S288.
Blake, J. (1985), “Number of Siblings and Education Mobility.” American Sociological Review, 50, 84-94.
Bodovski, Katerina, and George Farkas. (2008), “‘Concerted Cultivation’ and Unequal Achievement in Elementary School.” Social Science Research 37(3):903–919.
Bound, John, Brad Hershbein, and Bridget Terry Long. (2009), “Playing the Admissions Game: Student Reactions to Increasing College Competition.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 23, no. 4 (Fall): 119–46.
Bourdieu, Pierre. (1980), "Le capital social: notes provisoires." Actes de la recherché en sciences socials: 2–3.
Bray M., Lykins C. (2012), “Shadow Education: Private Supplementary Tutoring and Its Implications for Policy Makers in Asia.” Asian Development Bank Comparative Education Research Centre (CERC), Faculty of Education. Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong.
Bray M. (2014), “The impact of shadow education on student academic achievement: Why the research is inconclusive and what can be done about it.” Asia Pacific Education Review, 15(3), 381-389.
Bray, M., Zhan, S., Lykins, C., Wang, D., & Kwo, O. (2014), “Differentiated demand for private supplementarytutoring: Patterns and implications in Hong Kong secondary education.” Economics of Education Review, 38, 24–37.
Byun S. Y., Chung H. J., Baker D. P. (2018), “Global patterns of the use of shadow education: Students, family, and national influences.” Research in the Sociology of Education, 20, 71-105.
Chang, C.H. (1992), “Historical trends in the equality of educational opportunity in Taiwan”, Taiwan Economic Review, 20:1, 23–50.
Chen, Hsiao-Hui (2002), “Shadow Education in Taiwan：Study of Parental Investment and Educational Achievement.” University of Oxford, Department of Sociology, M. Phil. Thesis.
Chen, Stacy, Chen, Yen-Chien, and Jin-Tan Liu (2019), “The Impact of Family Composition on Educational Achievement” Journal of Human Resources, 54(1): 122-170.
Cheo, R., & Quah, E. (2005), “Mothers, maids and tutors: An empirical evaluation of their effect on children's academic grades in Singapore.” Education Economics, 13(3), 269–285.
Chiswick, B.R. (1988), Differences in education and earnings across racial and ethnic groups: tastes, discrimination, and investments in child quality, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 103, 571–597.
Coleman, James S. (1988), "Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital." American Journal of Sociology, 94: 95–120.
Davies S. (2004), “School choice by default? Understanding the demand for private tutoring in Canada.” American Journal of Education, 110, 233-255.
DiPrete, Thomas A., and Claudia Buchmann (2006), “Gender-Specific Trends in the Value of Education and the Emerging Gender Gap in College Completion.” Demography 43(1):1–24.
Doepke, Matthias, Sorrenti, Giuseppe, and Fabrizio Zilibotti (2019), “The Economics of Parenting,” Annual Review of Economics, 11: 55-84.
Dougherty, Christopher. (2005), “Why Are the Returns to Schooling Higher for Women than for Men?” Journal of Human Resources 40(4):969–88.
Goldin, Claudia, Laurence F. Katz, and Ilyana Kuziemko. (2006), “The Homecoming of American College Women: The Reversal of the College Gender Gap.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 20(4):133–56.
Guill K., Bow W. (2014), “Effectiveness of private tutoring in mathematics with regard to subjective and objective indicators of academic achievement: Evidence from German secondary school sample.” Journal for Educational Research Online, 6, 34-67.
Guill, K. & Lintorf, K. (2019), “Private tutoring when stakes are high: Insights from the transition from primary to secondary school in Germany”, International Journal of Educational Development, 65, 172– 182.
Guill K., Oliver Ludtke, and Jasmin Schwanenberg. (2020), “A two-level study of predictors of private tutoring attendance at the beginning of secondary schooling in Germany: The role of individual learning support in the classroom.” British Educational Research Journal, 46(2), 437-457.
Guryan, Jonathan, Hurst, Erick, and Melissa Kearney (2008), “Parental Education and Parental Time with Children,” Journal of Economic Perspectives 22(3): 23–46.
Ha, Y., & Park, H.-J.,(2016), “Can after-school programs and private tutoring help improve students’ achievement? Revisiting the effects in Korean secondary schools.” Asia Pacific Education Review, 18(1), 65–79.
Haag, L. (2015), “Nachhilfe im Spannungsfeld zwischen Schule und Elternhaus – wirklich im Spannungsfeld? [Tutoring between school and home – are tensions inevitable?]”, Familiendynamik, 40(1), 30– 37.
Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2012), “Professional capital: Transforming　teaching in every school.” New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Hille, A., Spieß, C. K., & Staneva, M. (2016), “Private Tutoring: More and more students, especially those from middle-income households, are using private tutoring.” DIW Economic Bulletin, 6, 63-71
Hoxby, Caroline M. (2009), “The Changing Selectivity of American Colleges.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 23, no. 4 (Fall): 95–118.
Kornrich, Sabino, and Frank Furstenberg (2013), “Investing in Children: Changes in Parental Spending on Children, 1972-2007,” Demography 50(1): 1-23.
Kuan, P.‐Y. (2011), “Effects of cram schooling on mathematics performance: Evidence from junior high students in Taiwan”, Comparative Education Review, 55, 342– 368.
Lee, C. J., Park, H.-J. & Lee, H. (2009), “Shadow education systems, in: G. Sykes, B. L. Schneider, D. N. Plank & T. G. Ford (Eds)” Handbook of education policy research (New York, Routledge), 901–919.
Lee, Ronald and Andrew Mason (2011), “Introducing age into national accounts”, Population Aging and the Generational Economy, 55-77. UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
Lucas, Robert Jr. (1988), "On the mechanics of economic development," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, July 1988, 22(1):3-42.
Mori I., Baker D. (2010), “The origin of universal shadow education: What the supplemental education phenomenon tells us about the postmodern institution of education.” Asia Pacific Education Review, 11, 36-48.
Parish, William L. and Robert J. Willis (1993), “Daughters, Education, and Family Budgets: Taiwan Experiences.” Journal of Human Resources 28(4): 863-898.
Pei Gao, Yiqing Lü, Xin Zhou. (2019), “Does Access to Better Schools Affect Private Expenditure on Children? Evidence from China” ASIAN BUREAU OF FINANCE AND ECONOMIC RESEARCH (ABFER), Annual Conference.
Ramey, Garey and Valerie Ramey (2010), “The Rug Rat Race,” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Spring 2010, 129-176.
Ryu, D., & Kang, C. (2013), “Do private tutoring expenditures raise academic performance? Evidence from middle school students in South Korea.” Asian Economic Journal, 27(1), 59–83.
Schneider, Daniel, Hastings, Orestes P., and Joe LaBriola (2018), “Income Inequality and Class Divides in Parental Investments,” American Sociology Review 83(3): 475-507.
Stevenson, D. L., & Baker, D. P. (1992), “Shadow education and allocation in formal schooling: Transition to university in Japan.” American Journal of Sociology, 97(6), 1639–1657.
Tan, P.-L., & Gibson, J. (2017), “Does outsourcing household production harm future human capital? Evidence from Malaysia.” Singapore Economic Review, 62(5), 959–981.
Tsai, Shu-ling, Hill Gates and Hei-Yuan Chiu (1994), “Schooling Taiwan’s Women: Educational Attainment in the Mid-20th Century,” Sociology of Education 67(Oct.): 243-263.
Yamato, Y., & Zhang, W. (2017), “Changing schooling, changing shadow: Shapes and functions of juku in Japan.” Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 37(3), 329–343.
Zhang, W. (2014), “The demand for shadow education in China: Mainstream teachers and power relations.” Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 34(4), 436–454.
Zhang Yuhuan, Ma Xiao, and Wang Lidong (2020), “The Determinants of Private Tutoring Participation for Mathematics in China: Focusing on the Role of Student Metacognition”, Frontiers in Psychology, 11: 603.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關博士論文
 
無相關書籍
 
無相關著作
 
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：1181（臺灣：1167，外國：14） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1780212 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67594687
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