Is There A Neighborhood Effect in Participating in Shadow Education? Evidences from the China FamilyPanel Studies
-
摘要:
基于中国家庭追踪调查(CFPS)2010-2018年数据,运用二元Logit模型,探究学生参与影子教育是否存在邻里效应。研究结果表明:(1)学生参与影子教育存在邻里效应,同一社区影子教育参与率越高学生个体参与影子教育的概率越大,将同一社区影子教育参与率的滞后期纳入回归模型后结果依然显著。(2)影子教育的邻里效应逐渐减弱,同一社区影子教育参与率的系数呈逐年下降趋势。因此,建议教育行政部门、学校和社区有效落实"双减"政策,拓宽家校社共育途径,引导家长树立科学育儿观;居民社区应配合有关部门加大力度规范校外培训机构宣传内容,缓解家长教育焦虑,抑制影子教育的邻里效应,以期有效减轻学生负担。
Abstract:Based on the 2010-2018 data of the China Family Panel Studies (CFPS), the binary Logit model is used to explore whether there is a neighborhood effect on students' participation in shadow education. The results show that:(1) There is a neighborhood effect for students participating in shadow education. The higher the shadow education participation rate in the same community, the greater the probability of individual students participating in shadow education. The result is still dramatical after including the lag period of the shadow education participation rate of the same community in the regression model. (2) The neighborhood effect of shadow education has gradually weakened, and the coefficient of shadow education participation rate in the same community has shown a downward trend year by year. Therefore, it is recommended that education administrative departments, schools and communities effectively implement the "double reduction" policy, broadening the ways of family-school-community education, and guiding parents to establish a scientific conciousness of parenting; residents and communities should cooperate with relevant departments to increase efforts to regulate the publicity content of off-campus training institutions to ease parents' education anxiety, which can suppress the neighborhood effect of shadow education in order to effectively reduce the burden on students.
-
Key words:
- Shadow education /
- Neighborhood effect /
- "Double reduction" policy
-
[1] Bray M, Kwok P. Demand for private supplementary tutoring:conceptual considerations, and socio-economic patterns in Hong Kong[J]. Economics of Education Review, 2003, 22(6):611-620. [2] Song K O, Park H J, et al. A cross national analysis of the student and school level factors affecting the demand for private tutoring[J]. Asia pacific education review, 2013, 14(2), 125-139. [3] 薛海平,左舒艺.我国基础教育学生参加课外补习的现状与变化趋势[J].教育科学研究, 2021(1):16-25+36. [4] 张媛,薛海平.课外补习对我国初中生减负的影响研究——基于中国教育追踪调查(CEPS)2015数据分析[J].基础教育, 2020, 17(2):33-44. [5] 薛海平,李静.家庭资本、影子教育与社会再生产[J].教育经济评论, 2016, 1(4):60-81. [6] 李佳丽,胡咏梅.谁从影子教育中获益?——兼论影子教育对教育结果均等化的影响[J].教育与经济, 2017(2):51-61. [7] 宋海生,薛海平.初中生课外补习支出:现状、影响因素及政策启示[J].当代教育论坛, 2018(4):83-92. [8] 胡咏梅,王亚男.中小学生家庭对子女课外教育的投资及效果分析[J].首都师范大学学报(社会科学版), 2019(5):167-188. [9] 宗庆庆,李雪松.基础教育中的同伴效应估计[J].财经研究, 2018, 44(7):4-15. [10] 高翔,薛海平.家长参与、同伴影响和初中生学业成绩[J].教育科学研究, 2020(6):55-63. [11] 吴愈晓,张帆."近朱者赤"的健康代价:同辈影响与青少年的学业成绩和心理健康[J].教育研究, 2020, 41(7):123-142. [12] Bian Y J. Bringing strong ties back in:Indirect ties, network bridges, and job searches in China[J]. American Sociological Review, 1997, 62(3):366-385. [13] Eun C S, Wang L L, Xiao S C. Culture and R2[J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 2015, 115(2):283-303. [14] Nie P, Sousa-Poza A, He X B. Peer effects on childhood and adolescent obesity in China[J]. China Economic Review, 2015, 35:47-69. [15] Sampson R J. Great american city[M]. University of Chicago Press, 2012. [16] Manski C F. Identification of endogenous social effects:The reflection problem[J]. The review of economic studies, 1993, 60(3):531-542. [17] 晏艳阳,邓嘉宜,文丹艳.邻里效应对家庭社会捐赠活动的影响——来自中国家庭追踪调查(CFPS)数据的证据[J].经济学动态, 2017(2):76-87. [18] 汪毅.欧美邻里效应的作用机制及政策响应[J].城市问题, 2013(5):84-89. [19] 盛明洁,运迎霞.中国城市邻里效应研究框架初探[J].城市规划学刊, 2017(6):50-55. [20] 盛明洁.欧美邻里效应研究进展及对我国的启示[J].国际城市规划, 2017, 32(6):42-48. [21] Owens A. Neighborhoods and schools as competing and reinforcing contexts for educational attainment[J]. Sociology of Education, 2010, 83(4):287-311. [22] Wodtke G T, Elwert F, Harding D J. Neighborhood effect heterogeneity by family income and developmental period[J]. American journal of sociology, 2016, 121(4):1168-1222. [23] Chetty R, Hendren N, Katz L F. The effects of exposure to better neighborhoods on children:New evidence from the Moving to Opportunityexperiment[J]. American Economic Review, 2016, 106(4):855-902. [24] Wodtke G T, Parbst M. Neighborhoods, Schools, and Academic Achievement:A Formal Mediation Analysis of Contextual Effects on Reading and Mathematics Abilities[J]. Demography, 2017, 54(5):1653-1676. [25] 刘欣,夏彧.中国城镇社区的邻里效应与少儿学业成就[J].青年研究, 2018(3):1-11+94. [26] 孙伦轩.中国城镇青少年成长的邻里效应——基于"中国教育追踪调查"的实证研究[J].青年研究, 2018(6):31-38+92. [27] 余丽甜,詹宇波.家庭教育支出存在邻里效应吗?[J].财经研究, 2018, 44(8):61-73. [28] 方航,程竹,陈前恒.农村教育投资存在同群效应吗?——基于中国家庭追踪调查(CFPS)的实证研究[J].教育与经济, 2021, 37(3):51-58. [29] 周东洋,吴愈晓.教育竞争和参照群体——课外补习流行现象的一个社会学解释[J].南京师大学报(社会科学版), 2018(5):84-97. [30] 杨莉.同伴效应对初中生校外补习支出的影响研究——基于CEPS数据的实证分析[J].上海教育科研, 2021(5):29-34. [31] 金红昊,谢心怡,杨钋.学生课外补习参与的同伴效应研究[J].教育经济评论, 2021, 6(5):66-82. [32] Liu H, Sun Q, Zhao Z. Social learning and health insurance enrollment:Evidence from China's new cooperative medical scheme[J]. Journal of Economic Behavior&Organization, 2014, 97:84-102. [33] Ling C, Zhang A Q, Zhen X P. Peer effects in consumption among Chinese rural households[J]. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 2018, 54(10):2333-2347. [34] 罗伯特·K·默顿.社会理论和社会结构[M].唐少杰,齐心,译.南京:译林出版社, 2006:484. [35] 罗伯特·K·默顿.社会理论和社会结构[M].唐少杰,齐心,译.南京:译林出版社, 2006:456. [36] 余丽甜,詹宇波.家庭教育支出存在邻里效应吗?[J].财经研究, 2018, 44(8):61-73. [37] 吴愈晓,张帆."近朱者赤"的健康代价:同辈影响与青少年的学业成绩和心理健康[J].教育研究, 2020, 41(7):123-142. [38] 廖常君.城市邻里关系淡漠的现状、原因及对策[J].城市问题, 1997(2):37-39. [39] 杨贵庆.安得"高"厦千万间,大庇都市居民尽欢颜——上海城市高层住宅居住环境和社会心理调查分析与启示[J].城市规划汇刊, 1999(4):35-38+79-80. [40] 王丽娟.从一场纠纷透视农村邻里关系的变迁[J].中国青年研究, 2012(8):22-25. [41] 闫新华,杭斌.收入不平等与家庭教育支出——基于地位关注的视角[J].山西财经大学学报, 2017,(5):1-13. [42] 邱慧燕,柴江.家校合作体系构建的要素、困境及路径[J].内蒙古社会科学, 2021, 42(6):179-186. [43] 储朝晖.家校社协同育人实施策略[J].人民教育, 2021(8):33-36. [44] 赵文君.市场监管总局对校外培训机构突击开展现场检查15家校外培训机构被处以顶格罚款[N].中国教育报, 2021-06-02(3). -
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 330
- HTML全文浏览量: 59
- PDF下载量: 140
- 被引次数: 0
下载: