东篱科研大数据发现系统（DRDS）

位置：成果数据库 > 期刊 > 期刊详情页

义务教育阶段城镇家庭教育支出的构成及不平等：来自2007和2011的实证证据

ISSN号：1003-4870
期刊名称：《教育与经济》
时间：0
分类：F08[经济管理—政治经济学] G40-054[文化科学—教育学原理;文化科学—教育学;文化科学—教育技术学]
作者机构：[1]四川大学商学院,四川成都610023, [2]清华大学经济管理学院,北京100084, [3]武汉大学经济与管理学院,湖北武汉430072
相关基金：国家自然科学基金创新群体项目“复杂变化环境下企业组织管理整体系统及其学习变革研究”（项目编号：71121001）;国家自然科学基金青年项目“团队集体心理资本的影响与扩散：基于心理资本趋同的跨层次研究”（项目编号：71402108）;教育部人文社会科学青年基金项目“混合雇佣团队的有效管理：基于团队内部子群体互动机制的跨层次研究”（项目编号：14YJC630103）.

关键词：家庭教育支出结构, 教育支出不平等, 校外教育支出, the formation of household education expenditure, inequality of education expenditure, outside school education expenditure

中文摘要：

采用2007和2011年国家统计局的教育支出专项调查数据，本文对义务教育阶段家庭教育支出的结构和不平等进行分析，通过两年数据的比较，研究发现：城镇居民家庭教育支出大幅增加的同时，家庭教育支出的结构发生了显著变化。一方面，校内教育支出得到了严格控制，低收入家庭支出的学杂费、书本费占收入比重明显下降，另一方面，各收入分位家庭的校外教育支出大幅增加，并体现出“刚性”特点。校内教育支出下降带来的“减负”无法弥补校外教育支出的“增负”；家庭收入越低，教育支出占收入的比重越大，低收入家庭承受的负担日益加重。此外，我们还发现外地农业户口的家庭并没有平等地从义务教育政策受益，相比其他户口类型的家庭，他们需要为子女在校内教育方面花费更多。

英文摘要：

Using the special education expenditure survey data from State Statistic Bureau from 2007 to 2011, this paper analyzes the formation and inequality of household education expenditure in compulsory education stages. By the comparing of data in two years, the study found that there is a significantly change in the formation of household education expenditure, following the great increase of urban household education expenditure. On one hand, the in-school education expenditure has been strictly curbed, so the proportion of tuition and textbook fees in the whole income of low income family has fallen down greatly; On the other hand, the education expenditure on outside school education of households in different income levels has grown obviously, and showing the characteristic of Rigidity. The decrease of in-school education expenditure cannot make up for the increase of education expenditure in outside school. The smaller the household income is, the bigger percentage it is in the whole education expenditure and the heavier burden it is for the low income family, s Moreover, we also provide evidence that non-local rural residents may not benefit equally from the compulsory education policy by the same extent as the local residents and thus have to spend more on the child＇ s in-school education.