透過您的圖書館登入
IP:18.119.107.69
  • 期刊

2000年至2018年PISA數學學習成就與教育年數對國民所得影響分析

The Impact of PISA Mathematics Learning Achievement and Education Years on National Income from 2000 to 2018

摘要


本研究探討2000年至2018年參與國際學生評估計劃的數學學習成就與教育年數對國民所得之影響情形,以世界銀行發布的資料,納入62個國家包括臺灣,迴歸分析獲得結論如下:一、2000年至2018年每三年國家的教育年數對於同年度的國民所得,除了2009年有顯著預測力之外,其餘年度都沒有明顯預測力。二、2000年至2006年數學學習成就對於同年度的國民所得沒有明顯預測力,2009年至2018年的數學學習成就對於同年度的國民所得有提升效果。三、臺灣在2018年的教育年數與數學學習成就條件下,2018年的國民所得低於62個國家平均水準有21,115美元,代表臺灣的數學學習成就在62個國家相對高,但在國民所得相對低。本研究貢獻在於發現,數學學習成就比教育年數對國民所得預測力更大,因此宜加強數學與經濟發展聯結,臺灣更應提出因應策略。最後,針對結論深入討論,提出建議。

並列摘要


This study explored the impact of mathematics learning achievements and years of education that participated in the International Student Assessment Program from 2000 to 2018 on the national income. Based on the data released by the World Bank, 62 countries including Taiwan were included in the regression analysis and the conclusions were obtained: 1. The number of years of education in the country every three years from 2000 to 2018 had a significant predictive power for the national income of the same year, except for 2009, and there was no significant predictive power for the rest of the year. 2. The mathematics learning achievement from 2000 to 2006 had no significant predictive power on the national income of the same year, and the mathematics learning achievement from 2009 to 2018 had an effect on the national income of the same year. 3. Under the conditions of the number of years of education and mathematics learning achievement in Taiwan in 2018, the national income in 2018 was lower than the average of 62 countries at US$21,115, which meant that Taiwan's mathematics learning achievement was relatively high in 62 countries, but in the national income relatively low. The contributions of this research was to find that mathematics learning achievement was more effective than the number of years of education in predicting national income. Therefore, the linked between mathematics and economic development should be strengthened, and Taiwan should propose corresponding strategies. In-depth discussion of conclusions and recommendations.

參考文獻


OECD (2019). PISA 2018 results (volume I): What students know and can do, PISA. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en
Popović, G., Erić, O., Stanić, S., & Krajisnik, M. (2019). Education, technological changes and economic development of Bosnia and Herzegovina.  International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education,  7(2), 77‒86. http://dx.doi.org/10.5937/IJCRSEE1902077P
Psacharopoulos, G., & Patrinos, H. A. (2002). Returns to investment in education: A further update. Education Economics, 12(2), 111‒134. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0964529042000239140
Psacharopoulos, G., & Patrinos, H. A. (2018). Returns to investment in education: A decennial review of the global literature. Education Economics, 26(5), 445‒458. https://doi.org/10.1080/0964529042000239140
Schoellman, T. (2012). Education quality and development accounting. The Review of Economic Studies, 79(1), 388‒417. https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdr025 .

延伸閱讀