English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 113646/144632 (79%)
Visitors : 51500389      Online Users : 301
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    政大機構典藏 > 教育學院 > 教育學系 > 學位論文 >  Item 140.119/33004
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/33004


    Title: 國民教育經費分配模式公平性與適足性之研究
    Measuring the Equity and Adequacy of Distributive Models for Financing Compulsory Education
    Authors: 王立心
    Wang, Li-Hsin
    Contributors: 陳聽安
    Chen, Tin-An
    王立心
    Wang, Li-Hsin
    Keywords: 教育財政
    公平性
    適足性
    教育成本指數
    school finance
    equity
    adequacy
    cost of education index
    Date: 2004
    Issue Date: 2009-09-17 15:04:10 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 民國89年12月13日公布的「教育經費編列與管理法」,不但重新訂定保障政府教育經費額度的條文,並建構了迥異於以往的教育經費編列與分配模式,本研究之目的在檢證該法實施前後不同分配模式下,國民教育經費分配的公平性與適足性。
    本研究由公共資源分配的理論出發,探討分配正義的議題,並涉及府際間財政收支與移轉支付體系,以及教育經費補助法制化、公式化的相關學理與實徵研究,以建構本研究之理論基礎,並據以發展立論各異的國民教育經費分配模式。
    本研究依循 Berne與Stiefel(1984, 1999)及 Odden與Picus (2004)所發展之概念架構,取87至92會計年度間各相關之財政、教育年報及會議資料進行分析,所採用之衡量量數,計有McLoone指數、Verstegen指數、Gini係數、相關係數、斜率、調整關係量數,以及Odden-Picus適足性指數等;此外,本研究轉換美國各學區採行的補助公式,發展定額模式、基準模式、百分比均等化模式、保障稅基模式、統籌統支模式及結合模式等六個分配模式,以92會計年度的數據資料,檢證並比較不同分配模型間所能達成的公平性與適足性。
    本研究主要發現如下:
    一、法定模式所達成的政策效果,與美國基準方案相類似。
    二、依法定模式編列之國民教育預算,與縣市實際需求仍有落差。
    三、法定模式編列一般教育補助,尚能考量到地方的財政能力。
    四、不同縣市間國民教育成本指數有相當的差距。
    五、就不同年度間的比較而言,教育經費編列與管理法實施後各年度國民教育經費分配達成公平性及適足性的程度較高。
    六、就不同模式間的比較而言,法定模式的國民教育經費分配與仍有改進的空間,以更符合公平性及適足性的原則。
    依據研究發現,本研究提出對現行國民教育經費分配模式及相關研究之建議:
    一、釐清國民教育經費基本需求的成分與單位額度。
    二、法定模式的估算應擴大地方政府參與,以適時反應實際需求。
    三、法定模式的估算應納入激勵縣市教育財稅努力的因素。
    四、發展國民教育成本指數及並建立經費適足標準。
    五、對國民教育經費分配的公平性與適足性,進行長期性的評估。
    六、依據公平性與適足性原則,修正法定分配模式。
    七、配合財政收支劃分法的修訂,調整法定分配模式。
    The Compilation and Administration of Education Expenditures Act (CAEEA) was signed into law by president on December 13, 2000. The new law was an attempt by the legislature to set a minimum guaranteed funding rate for educational budgeting, and to be more equitably and adequately distribute funds for education. The purpose of this study was to analyze how different funding models affect the equitable and adequate distribution of funds for compulsory education.
    The theoretical and empirical literatures were thus analyzed in this study, including the issues related to public resources allocation, distributive justice, intergovernmental fiscal relations, and school finance formulas. The conceptual framework developed by Berne and Stiefel (1984, 1999) and Odden and Picus (2004) served as the basis for defining and measuring the degree of equalization and adequacy of the financial system. The financial and educational data incorporated into this study have been taken from MOE`s and MOF`s annual reports and meeting records from 1998 to 2003. A series of measures were selected for assessing equity and adequacy in school finance, including the McLoone index, Verstegen index, Gini coefficient, correlation coefficient, slope, adjusted relationship measure, and the Odden-Picus adequacy index. In addition, in this study the school funding formulas that the various states continue to use to distribute education funds to local school districts in the USA were converted into six different funding models: a Flat Grants Model, Foundation Model, Percentage Equalization Model, Guaranteed Tax Base Model, Full Centralized Funding Model, and Tier Model. This was in order to determine the extent to which these models have improved the equity and adequacy of the system for funding compulsory education.
    The findings from the data analysis were as follows: (1) The CAEEA Funding Model and Foundation Model have the same impact, as far as policy is concerned, on fiscal equity and adequacy; (2) the results of budget preparation using the CAEEA Funding Model are not commensurate with the needs of counties and cities; (3) in the distribution of general education subsidies, some measure of local fiscal capabilities must be taken into consideration; (4) there is a noticeable difference in the cost of education indices for counties and cities; (5) The full funding and implementation of the CAEEA Funding Model has a positive impact on fiscal equity and adequacy; (6) it is necessary to reform the CAEEA Funding Model in order to satisfy the conditions of equity and adequacy.
    Based on the policy implications of these findings, it was recommended that: (1) The basic needs of education expenditures be formulated precisely in terms of composition and unit volume; (2) the CAEEA Funding Model be extended to involve local opinions, so as to take into consideration the local educational demands; (3) incentive factors be incorporated into the CAEEA Funding Model, in order to increase the local tax effort; (4) a cost of education index be developed and the adequacy level be identified; (5) a long-term assessment of the equity and adequacy of funding allocation be undertaken; (6) the CAEEA Funding Model be improved according to the principles of equity and adequacy; (7) the CAEEA Funding Model be adjusted to meet the revised provisions of the Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures.
    Reference: 丁志仁(民92)。我國教育經費試算網路資料庫。臺北市:教育部。
    丁志權(民86)。英國中央與地方政府教育支出之研究。嘉義師院學報,11,1-26。
    丁志權(民88)。中美英三國教育經費財源與分配制度之比較研究。臺北市:師大書苑。
    王立心(民83)。臺灣省國民教育經常支出水平公平與財政中性狀況之探討:五十七至八十二會計年度。未出版之碩士論文,高雄市,高雄師範大學。
    王立心(民84)。臺灣省國民教育經常支出公平性之探討。教育與心理研究,18,193-224。
    王保進(民91)。視窗版SPSS與行為科學研究(二版)。臺北市:心理。
    王崑源(民85)。我國國民教育經費補助政策之研究。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,臺灣師範大學。
    王瑞夆(民91)。我國財政補助制度改革之研究:規範面與實務面的落差。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,臺北大學。
    田宜芳(民90)。墨子的正義論。哲學與文化,28(11),988-996。
    石元康(民80)。從原初的境況到公正的社會:洛爾斯的契約論。載於周陽山(編),當代政治心靈:當代政治思想家。臺北市:正中。
    石元康(民84)。社群與個體──社群主義與自由主義的論辯。當代,114,94-104。
    石慧瑩(民87)。海耶克與老子自由思想之比較。社會文化學報,7,25-50。
    朱澤民(民85)。府際間財政收支劃分基本原則之探析(二)。植根雜誌,12(2),51-58。
    羊憶蓉(民83)。教育與國家發展:臺灣經驗。臺北市:桂冠。
    何包鋼(民90)。沃爾澤的多元正義理論評析。二十一世紀,66,128-133。
    何信全(民80)。海耶克對社會正義概念的批判。載於戴華、鄭曉時(編),正義及其相關問題(頁239-256)。臺北市:中央研究院中山人文社會科學研究所。
    余桂霖(民83)。論海耶克的自由與法治思想。復興崗學報,53,101-124。
    余桂霖(民85)。「正義」釋名之研究。復興崗學報,59,1-36。
    余桂霖(民86)。論功利主義。復興崗學報,60,61-90。
    吳育仁(民89)。勞動關係新思維:英國第三條的政治經濟哲學。理論與政策,14(4),91-112。
    吳宜玲(民90)。功利主義的正義說──論約翰.史敦.米爾的功利主義。實踐學報,32,283-310。
    吳幸怡(民92)。臺灣學校教育財政的法建構。未出版之碩士論文,臺南市,成功大學。
    吳明益(民83)。國家管制教育市場的合理地位與制度因應:以教育權的保障為中心。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,臺灣大學。
    吳建志(民90)。從分配政治觀點論中央對各縣市資本門教育經費補助(1995-2000年)之研究。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,東吳大學。
    吳清山、林天祐(民86)。學區制。教育資料與研究,14,97。
    吳惠林(民85)。一代思想大師海耶克的生平、學術生涯及貢獻。經濟前瞻,27,128-133。
    呂宗麟(民84)。論民生主義中的社會正義內涵──從分配正義與交換正義層面思考。世界新聞傳播學院人文學報,3,27-39。
    呂炳寬(民74)。我國大學教育機會均等政策之評估。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,政治大學。
    巫永森(民91)。幼兒教育券政策實施情形之調查研究──以彰化縣為例。未出版之碩士論文,台中縣,靜宜大學。
    巫秀菊(民92)。臺灣省各縣市地方育發展基金之研究。未出版之碩士論文,花蓮縣,東華大學。
    李秀鳳(民89)。我國大學教育階段學費補助之研究。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,臺灣師範大學。
    李酉潭(民88)。自由、平等與民主──約翰彌勒與孫中山的政治思想。臺北市:國立編譯館。
    李佩瑜(民89)。臺灣地區統籌分配稅制度演變之研究。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,政治大學。
    李金桐(民74)。美國三級政府間的補助制度。財稅研究,17(2),7-17。
    李真文(民87)。臺灣教育改革中的「正義」問題研究。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,政治大學。
    李翰林(民90)。沃爾澤的分配公正理論。社會理論學報,4(2),413-443。
    李顯峰(民87,5月)。省府精簡後補助款制度之規畫研究。發表於政治大學公共行政學系與臺灣省經濟建設及研究考核委員會主辦,修憲後地方政治與行政發展學術研討會。
    沈姍姍(民83)。英國進入二十一世紀的教育改革──一九八八年以來變革與紛擾。比較教育通訊,34,32-40。
    沈姍姍(民87)。教育機會均等理念之式微?──自教育改革趨勢探討。載於中華民國比較教育學會、中國教育學會(編),社會變遷中的教育機會均等(頁29-54)。臺北市:楊智文化事業。
    周保松(民88)。當代哲學祭酒羅爾斯──要了解當代政治哲學自「正義論」始。當代,145,46-63。
    林天祐(民87)。特許學校──公立學校組織再造的新機制。國教月刊,45(1),46-54。
    林文達(民72)。教育財政學。臺北市:三民。
    林全、王震武、林文瑛(民85)。中央對國民中學教育經費補助制度之研究。臺北市:行政院教育改革審議委員會。
    林秀珍(民83)。羅爾斯正義原則及教育涵義研究。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,臺灣師範大學。
    林秀珍(民86)。西方的正義概念初探。鵝湖,23(4),49-56。
    林枝明(民91)。國立高級中學教育資源分配公平性之研究──以臺灣省為例。未出版之碩士論文,臺東市,臺東師範學院。
    林思惟(民83)。中央與地方政府財政關係的變遷──英、美與我國的比較分析。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,政治大學。
    林清山(民69)。多變項分析統計法。臺北市:東華。
    林清山(民74)。群聚分析的理論和統計方法及應用群聚分析的實徵性研究。中國測驗學會測驗年刊,32,155-180。
    林清山(民81)。心理與教育統計學。臺北市:東華。
    林清江(民70)。教育社會學新論──我國社會與教育關係之研究。臺北市:五南。
    林錫俊(民90)。地方財政管理要義。臺北市:五南。
    林靜秋(民91)。精省效應對國民教育財政影響之研究。未出版之碩士論文,高雄市,高雄師範大學。
    邱鈺惠(民91)。臺北市國民小學教育資源分配公平性之研究。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,臺北市立師範學院。
    俞寬賜(民91)。從國際人權法、國際人道法及國際刑法研究個人的國際法地位問題。臺北市:國立編譯館。
    姚大志(民92)。從「正義論」到「正義新論」。全國律師,7(1),35-49。
    洪鎌德(民84)。諾錫克政治哲學的析評。哲學與文化,22(5),410-422。
    徐仁輝(民87,5月)。精省後中央與地方財政關係規劃之研究。載於政治大學公共行政學系與臺灣省經濟建設及研究考核委員會主辦,修憲後地方政治與行政發展學術研討會論文合輯。
    秦夢群(民89)。教育行政──實務部分(二版)。臺北市:五南。
    翁榮銅(民86)。我國教育優先區政策執行之研究。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,臺灣師範大學。
    財政部統計處(民89)臺灣省財政統計年報第四十一期(中華民國八十八年版)。臺北市:編者。
    財政部統計處(民90)臺灣省財政統計年報第四十二期(中華民國八十九年版)。臺北市:編者。
    財政部統計處(民91)臺灣省各縣市財政統計年報第四十三期(中華民國九十年版)。臺北市:編者。
    財政部統計處(民92)臺灣省各縣市財政統計年報第四十四期(中華民國九十一年版)。臺北市:編者。
    財團法人臺灣營建研究院(民92)。營建物價第37期。臺北縣:編者。
    馬信行(民82)。臺灣地區近四十年來教育資源之分配情況。國立政治大學學報,67,19-56。
    馬駿(民86a)。中央與地方的財政關係。財稅研究,29(4),58-76。
    馬駿(民86b)。政府間財政轉移支付──九個國家的比較(上)。財稅研究,33(2),7-26。
    涂巧玲(民91)。以專家判斷法決定國民小學教育經費充足 : 一個方法的試探 。未出版之碩士論文,花蓮市,花蓮師範學院。
    涂玉枝(民91)。國教經費預算編列模式改變之探討以──以臺北市國民中小學為例。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,臺北大學。
    張明正(民62)。臺灣省各縣市教育經費問題。臺北市:財政部財稅人員訓練所。
    張則堯(民89)。赤字財政與民主政治簡論──追述布坎南等對凱因斯赤字財政論的批判。華信金融季刊,10,149-152。
    張炳煌(民87)。國中生家長學校選擇權之研究。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,臺灣師範大學。
    張紘炬(民76)。統計學:方法與應用。臺北市:華泰。
    張清溪(民73)。所得不均度與流動測度。經濟論文叢刊,12,5-116。
    張清溪、許嘉棟、劉鶯釧與吳聰敏(民82)。經濟學:理論與實際(二版)。臺北市:著者。
    張清溪、許嘉棟、劉鶯釧與吳聰敏(民91)。經濟學(二版)。臺北市:著者。
    張福建(民80)。羅爾斯的差異原則及其容許不平等的可能程度。載於戴華、鄭曉時(編),正義及其相關問題(頁281-304)。臺北市:中央研究院中山人文社會科學研究所。
    教育部(民92a)。十二年國教暨國教向下延伸K教育計畫專案報告。臺北市:教育部。民國93年6月8日,取自 http://www.edu.tw/edu_web/edu_mgt/ e0001/eduion001/menu01/sub05/01050019b.htm
    教育部(民92b)。中華民國教育統計指標。臺北市:編者。
    教育部(民92c)。中華民國教育統計。臺北市:編者。
    教育部中部辦公室(民89)。中華民國八十八學年臺灣省教育統計年報。臺中縣:編者。
    教育部中部辦公室(民90)。中華民國八十九學年臺灣省教育統計年報。臺中縣:編者。
    教育部中部辦公室(民91)。中華民國九十學年臺灣省教育統計年報。臺中縣:編者。
    教育部中部辦公室(民92)。中華民國九十一學年臺灣省教育統計年報。臺中縣:編者。
    教育部教育研究委員會(民83)。中央國教經費補助款運用之研究(施能傑主持),臺北市:編者。
    曹俊漢(民83,5月)。美國聯邦補助金制度之研究:執行績效的評析。論文發表於中西社會政策學術研討會,臺北市:中央研究院歐美研究所。
    莊勝義(民78)。臺灣地區高級中等教育機會均等問題之研究。未出版之碩士論文,高雄市,高雄師範大學。
    莊勝義(民87)。教育機會均等的理念、研究與實踐──回顧與展望。載於中華民國比較教育學會、中國教育學會(編),社會變遷中的教育機會均等(頁403-446)。臺北市:楊智文化事業。
    許添明(民84)。School finance equity in Taiwan, Republic of China: A longitudinal analysis, 1981-1990。花蓮市:花蓮師範學院。(0103-H-83-FA-2025)
    許添明(民92)。教育財政學新論。臺北市:高等教育文化事業。
    郭為藩、高強華(民77)。教育學新論。臺北市:正中。
    郭秋永(民80)。民主精英論及其政治平等概念。載於戴華、鄭曉時(編),正義及其相關問題(頁343-368)。臺北市:中央研究院中山人文社會科學研究所。
    郭雅筑(民90)。幼稚教育機會均等指標建構之研究:以嘉義縣為例。未出版之碩士論文,嘉義縣,中正大學。
    陳秀容(民86)。近代人權觀念的輔變:一個社會生態觀點的分析。人文及社會科學集刊,9(2),101-132。
    陳孟哲(民90)。國教經費補助項目與國小教育機會均等之分析。未出版之碩士論文,臺南市,臺南師範學院。
    陳宜中(民88)。英國工黨與「第三條路」。當代,140,80-87。
    陳宜中(民89)。第三條路:新時代的新政治?臺灣社會研究,40,153-179。
    陳怡文(民90)。臺北市公立國民中小學教育經費分配公平性之研究。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,臺北市立師範學院。
    陳秋政(民89)。地方政府管理之理論與實踐。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,政治大學。
    陳香吟(民92)。屏東縣國民小學教育計畫經費分配之水平公平研究。未出版之碩士論文,屏東市,屏東師範學院。
    陳鳳慶(民90)。英、法兩國地方財政補助制度之研究。財稅研究,29(2),7-26。
    陳靜嬋(民88)。美國委辦學校之研究。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,臺灣師範大學。
    陳麗珠(民81)。我國國民教育財政系統公平性之研究。高雄市:高雄師範大學。(NSC80-0301-H-017-004)
    陳麗珠(民83)。國民教育經費補助公式之模擬研究。高雄市:高雄師範大學。
    陳麗珠(民86)。我國國民教育經費補助公式之模擬研究:垂直公平考量。高雄市:高雄師範大學。(NSC86-2413-H-017-005)
    陳麗珠(民91)。九十二年度地方政府教育經費基本需求試算。教育部委託專題研究。
    陳麗珠(民92)。教育經費編列與管理法實施之檢視:中央政府建立教育經費分配機制之研究(I)。高雄市:高雄師範大學。(NSC91-2413-H-017- 006)
    陳聽安(民60)。教育投資問題──論資源在教育方面之有效分配。臺北市:財政部財稅人員訓練所。
    陳聽安(民91)。財劃法及其相關問題之省思。經濟前膽,81,38-43。
    陳聽安、張慶輝(民72)。大專院校學費之研究。臺北市:行政院研究發展考核委員會。
    曾巨威、李顯峰(民91)。地方政府財政能力與教育經費負擔能力之分析。教育部委託專題研究。
    曾榮祥、吳貞宜(民90)。開啟教育財政革新之新頁──「教育經費編列與管理法」內涵之芻議。學校行政雙月刊,12,85-92。
    覃怡輝(民80)。社會安全政策的公平和效率問題。載於戴華、鄭曉時(編),正義及其相關問題(頁369-415)。臺北市:中央研究院中山人文社會科學研究所。
    黃世鑫(民87)。「高」等教育「高」學費──經濟問題還是社會問題。當代,129,58-68。
    黃世鑫(民92)。財政學概論(修訂再版三刷)。臺北縣:空中大學。
    黃光國(民80)。儒家思想中的正義觀。國家科學委員會研究彙刊:人文及社會科學,1(1),64-76。
    黃崇松(民86)。教育機會均等與教育改革。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,政治大學。
    黃湘菁(民82)。臺灣地區公立高級中學經費公平性之研究。未出版之碩士論文,高雄市,高雄師範大學。
    黃增榮(民86)。政府補助地方國民教育經費指標模型之研究。未出版之博士論文,臺北市,政治大學。
    楊瑩(民77)。臺灣地區教育擴展過程中,不同家庭背景子女受教機會差異之研究。未出版之博士論文,臺北市,臺灣師範大學。
    楊瑩(民88)。教育機會均等──教育社會學的探究(三版)。臺北市:師大書苑。
    萬曉芳(民90)。我國教育優先區資源分配準則之研究。未出版之碩士論文,高雄市,中山大學。
    葉淑玲(民87)。北、高兩市實施教育代金制度之研究。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,臺灣師範大學。
    雷萬鵬、鍾宇平(民91)。教育發展中的政府作用:財政學思考。教育學報,30(1),41-61。
    鄔昆如(民80)。柏拉圖理想國的「正義」概念及其現代意義。載於戴華、鄭曉時(編),正義及其相關問題(頁9-30)。臺北市:中央研究院中山人文社會科學研究所。
    廖碧慧(民83)。柏拉國教育哲學。未出版之碩士論文,臺中市,東海大學。
    臺灣省政府財政廳(民88)臺灣省財政統計年報第四十期(中華民國八十七年版)。南投縣:編者。
    臺灣省政府教育廳(民87)。中華民國八十六學年臺灣省教育統計年報。臺中縣:編者。
    臺灣省政府教育廳(民88)。中華民國八十七學年臺灣省教育統計年報。臺中縣:編者。
    蓋浙生(民78)。教育財政學(三版)。臺北市:東華。
    蓋浙生(民82)。教育經濟與計畫。臺北市:五南。
    蓋浙生(民90)。教育經費計算基準之研究。教育部委託專題研究。
    蓋浙生、陳麗珠(民88)。我國教育經費籌措及其運作之研究:憲法第一六四條凍結後之因應。教育部委託專題研究。
    趙敦華(民81)。勞斯的正義論解說。臺北市:遠流。
    劉秀曦(民91)。我國大學教育財政改革之研究。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,臺灣師範大學。
    劉其昌(民84)。財政學。臺北市:五南。
    劉祐彰(民90)。教育經費編列與管理法之探討與評析。師友,411,57-61。
    蔡文標(民86)。臺灣地區國民教育階段特殊教育資源分配公平性之研究。未出版之碩士論文,嘉義市,嘉義師範學院。
    蔡正雄(民90)。我國中央補助地方國民教育經費計畫執行績評估模式之研究。未出版之碩士論文,高雄市,中山大學。
    蔡淑玲,瞿海源(民81)。臺灣教育階層化的變遷。國家科學委員會研究彙刊:人文及社會科學,2(1),98-118。
    蔡菁芝(民88)。我國教育經費保障問題之研究。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,臺灣師範大學。
    鄭昭民(民88)。中央與地方政府之財政關係:一般補助與重分配稅之研究。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,臺灣大學。
    鄧鈞文(民91)。教育經費編列與管理法評析。論文發表於教育社會學會主辦:教育研究與實務的對話──回顧與展望國際學術研討會。12月14-16日,嘉義市:嘉義大學。
    蕭琦蓉(民92)。英美兩國教育民營化發展趨勢對我國國民教育之啟示。教育研究月刊,114,68-81。
    賴明怡(民80)。臺灣省對各縣市國民教育經費補助制度之研究。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,政治大學。
    賴明福(民88)。英國學校管理委員會在我國中小學實施之可行性研究。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,臺灣師範大學。
    賴淑娟(民91)。我國地方教育財政改革之研究。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,臺灣師範大學。
    駱明慶(民91)。誰是台大學生?性別、省籍和城鄉差異。經濟論文叢刊,30(1),113-147。
    戴玉綺(民82)。臺灣地區各縣市教育機會公平性之探討。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,政治大學。
    戴曉霞(民89)。高等教育的大眾化與市場化。臺北市:揚智文化。
    戴曉霞(民93年6月8日)。美國大學生,八成念公立。聯合報,A15。
    薛承泰(民85)。影響國初中後教育分流的實證分析。臺灣社會學刊,20,49-84。
    薛承泰(民93,2月)。臺灣近五十年的人口變遷與教育發展──兼論教改的方向。發表於教育部主辦,學齡人口減少對國民教育的影響及因應對策研討會。
    謝文全(民84)。比較教育行政。臺北市:五南。
    謝廣錚(民90)。英國1988年以降官方教育政策之研究:以新右派市場機制理論分析。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,臺灣師範大學。
    藍順德、王俊權(民90)。教育經費編列與管理法主要內涵及其影響。主計月刊,551,36-48。
    顏月珠(民77)。商用統計學(四版)。臺北市:三民。
    顏玉如(民90)。公立國民中學學校本位預算之分析:以南投縣為例。未出版之碩士論文,南投縣,暨南國際大學。
    顏泳禛(民92)。臺北市國民小學教育經費適足性評估之研究。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,臺北市立師範學院。
    顏國樑(民91)。教育經費編列與管理法的立法過程、內涵分析及其對我國教育發展的影響。初等教育學報,8,251-288。
    譚光鼎(民81)。中等教育選擇功能之研究──國中學生升學機會與社會階層再製關係之探討。未出版之博士論文,臺北市,臺灣師範大學。
    蘇建勳(民91)。全球化下歐美與臺灣社會的教育改革。未出版之碩士論文,臺北市,臺灣大學。
    蘇錢金山(民89)。我國地方補助款政策之研究──中央、省對臺灣省各縣市補助案例。未出版之博士論文,臺北市,政治大學。
    永井憲一(1985)。憲法シ教育基本權。東京都:勁草書房。
    Alexander, K., & Salmon, R. G. (1995). Public school finance. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
    Alexander, K., Augenblick, J., Driscoll, W., Guthrie, J., & Levin, R. (1995). Proposals for the elimination of wealth-based disparities in public education. Columbus, OH: Department of Education.
    Allison, P. D. (1978). Measures of inequality. American Sociological Review, 43(6), 865-880.
    Apple, M. W. (2001a). Comparing Neo-liberal projects and inequality in education. Comparative Education, 37(4), 409-423.
    Apple, M. W. (2001b). Creating profits by creating failures: Standards, markets, and inequality in education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 5(2/3), 103-118.
    Arikan, G. G. (2004). Fiscal decentralization: A remedy for corruption? International Tax and Public Finance, 11(2), 175-195.
    Astiz, M. F., Wiseman, A. W., & Baker, D. P. (2002). Slouching towards Decentralization: Consequences of globalization for curricular control in national education systems . Comparative Education Review, 46(1), 66-88.
    Bacotti, A. (1996). Toward a sustainable school finance formula in New Jersey. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University Teachers College, New York.
    Ball, S. J. (1986). Education. London: Longman.
    Barrow, R. (1975). Plato, utilitarianism and education. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
    Beattie, C.(1982). Rawls and the distribution of education. Canadian journal of education. 7(3), 39-50.
    Berne, R., & Stiefel, L. (1984). The measurement of equity in school finance: Conceptual, methodological, and empirical dimensions. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
    Berne, R., & Stiefel, L. (1999). Concepts of school finance equity: 1970 to the present. In H. F. Ladd, R. A. Chalk, & J. S. Hansen (Eds.), Equity and adequacy in education finance : Issues and perspectives (pp.7-33). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
    Bodenheimer, E. (1974). Jurisprudence, the philosophy and method of the law. Cambridge, MD: Harvard University Press.
    Bok, S. (2000). Henry Sidgwick`s practical ethics. Utilitas, 12(3), 361-378.
    Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (1976). Schooling in capitalist America. NY: Basic Books Inc.
    Brown, L., Ginsburg, A., Killalea, J., Rosthal, R., & Tron, E. (1978). School finance reform in the seventies: Achievements and failures. Journal of Education Finance, 4(1), 195-212.
    Bruce, N. (2001). Public finance and the American economy (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
    Brueckner, J. K. (2004). Fiscal decentralization with distortionary taxation: Tiebout vs. tax competition. International Tax and Public Finance, 11(2), 133-153.
    Buchanan, J. M., & Musgrave R. A. (1999). Public finance and public choice: Two contrasting visions of the state. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    Bush, V. L., Burley, H., & Causey-Bush, T . (2001). Magnet schools: Desegregation or resegregation? Students` voices from inside the walls. American Secondary Education, 29(3), 33-50.
    Campbell, T. (1989). Seven theories of human society. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    Chambers, J., & Parrish, T. (1994). Modeling resource costs. In W. S. Barnett (Ed.), Cost analysis for education decisions: Methods and examples (Vol.4, pp. 7-21). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
    Chambers, J. G. (1995). Public school teacher cost differences across the United States: Introduction to a teacher cost index. In W. J. Fowler, Jr. (Ed.), Developments in School Finance, 1995 (pp.19-32). Retrieved June 21, 2004, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=96344
    Chan, D., & Mok, K. (2001). Educational reforms and coping strategies under the tidal wave of marketization: A comparative study of Hong Kong and the mainland. Comparative Education, 37(1), 21-41.
    Chatterjee, P., & D`Aprix, A. (2002). Two tails of justice. Families in Society, 83(4), 374-386.
    Clune, W. H. (1995). Accelerated education as a remedy for high-poverty schools. University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 28(3), 481-491.
    Cohn, E., & Geske T. G. (1990). The economics of education(3rd ed.). NY: Pergamon.
    Coleman, J. S. (1968). The concept of equality of educational opportunity. Harvard Educational Review, 38(1), 7-22.
    Coleman, J. S. (1975). What is meant by "an equal educational opportunity" ? Oxford Review of Education, 1(1), 27-29.
    Coleman, J. S. (1991). What constitutes educational opportunity? Oxford Review of Education, 17(2), 155-159.
    Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., Mcpartland, J., Mood, A. M., Weinfeld, F. D., & York, R. L. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
    Cubberly, E. P. (1905). School funds and their apportionment. NY: Teacher College Press.
    Daly, J. (2000). Marx and justice. International Journal of Philosophy Studies, 8(3), 351-370.
    Darwall, S. (1998). Under Moore`s spell. Utilitas, 10(3), 286-291.
    Department for Education and Skill. (2003). Statistics of education: Education and training expenditure since 1993-94. London: HMSO.
    Dickinson, G. B., Holifield, M. L., Holifield, G., & Creer, D. G. (2000). Elementary magnet school students` interracial interaction choices. Journal of Educational Research, 93(6), 391-394.
    Donnelly, J. (1989). Universal human rights in theory and practice. Ithaca: Cornell Univ. Press.
    Duncombe, W., Ruggiero, J., & Yinger, J. (1996). Alternative approach to measuring the cost of education. In H. F. Ladd (Ed.), Holding schools accountable: Performance-based reform in education. (pp. 327-356). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
    Ealy, C. C. (2003). Achieving equity and adequacy in Texas school funding: A Delphi approach. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University, College Station.
    Ekelund, R. B., & Tollison, R. D. (1976). The new political economy of J.S. Mill: the means to social justice. Canadian Journal of Economics, 83(2), 213-231.
    Finlayson, A. (1999). Third way theory. The Political Quarterly, 70(3), 271-279 .
    Fisher, R. C. (1996). State and local public finance (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: Irwin.
    Fisher, R. C & Papke, L. E. (2000). Local government responses to education grants. National Tax Journal, 53(1), 153-168.
    Fowler, W. Jr., & Monk, D. (2001). A primer for making cost adjustments in Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
    Freeden, M. (1991). Rights. Buckingham: Open Univ. Press.
    Friedman, M. (1997). Public schools: Make them private. Education Economics, 5(3), 341-344 .
    Friedman, M. (2002). Capitalism and freedom(40th anniversary ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
    Gale, T. (2000). Rethinking social justice in schools: how will we recognize it when we see it? International Journal of Inclusive Education, 4(3), 253-269.
    Garms, W. I. (1979). Measuring the equity of school finance systems. Journal of Education Finance, 4(4), 415-435.
    General Accounting Office. (1997). School finance: State efforts to reduce funding gaps between poor and wealthy districts. Washington, DC: Author.
    Gersti-Pepin, C. (2002). Magnet schools: A retrospective case study of segregation. High School Education, 85(3), 47-52.
    Goldhaber, D., & Callahan, K. (2001). Impact of the basic education program on educational spending and equity in Tennessee. Journal of Education Finance, 26(4), 415-436.
    Goode, S. (2002 February 11). Bolick battles for school choice. Insight on the News, 18(5), 36-38.
    Guthrie, J. W., Garms, W. I., & Pierce, L. C. (1988). School finance and education policy: Enhancing educational efficiency, equality, and choice (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
    Guthrie, J. W., Hayward, G. C., Smith, J. R., Rothstein, R., Bennett, R. W., Koppich, J. E., Bowman, E., DeLapp, L., Brandes, B., & Clark, S. (1997). Cost based block grant model for Wyoming school finance. Retrieved June 25, 2004, from http://legisweb.state.wy.us/schoolx/cost/final/final.htm
    Guthrie,J.W., Garms, W. I., & Pierce, L. C. (1988). School finance and education Policy: Enhancing educational efficiency, equality and choice (2nd ed.). NJ: Prentice Hall.
    Hadderman, M. (2002). School-based budgeting. Teacher Librarian, 30(1), 27-29. Retrieved March 2, 2003, form EBSCO Academic Search Premier database.
    Hanushek, E. A. (1989). The impact of differential expenditures on school performance. Educational Researcher, 18(4), 45-65.
    Hanushek, E. A. (1996). School resources and student performance, In G. Burtless (Ed.), Does Money Matter? The Effect of School Resources on Student Achievement and Adult Success (pp.43-73). DC: The Brookings Institution.
    Hanushek, E. A. (2003). The failure of input-based schooling policies. The Economic Journal. 113, 64-98.
    Hayek, F. A. (1973). Law, legislation and liberty: a new statement of the liberal principles of justice and political economy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
    Henry, N. (2001). Public administration and public affairs (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
    Hertert, L., Busch, C. A., & Odden, A. R. (1994). School financing inequities among the states: The problem from a national perspective. Journal of Education Finance, 19(3), 231-255.
    Hirth, M. (1994). An multistate analysis of school finance issues and equity trends in Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan, 1982-1992. Journal of Education Finance, 20(2), 163-190.
    Ho, H. F. (2001). A comparative study of resources allocation differences between private ad public senior high schools in Taiwan. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University Teachers College, New York.
    Hoffman, L. M. (2003). Overview of public elementary and secondary schools and districts: School year 2001-02 . Retrieved January 23, 2004, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2003/2003411.pdf
    Holmes, D. O. W. (1936). Does Negro education need reorganization and redirection? A statement of the problem. Journal of Negro Education, 5(3), 314-323.
    Holmes, D. R. (2001). Equality of educational opportunity: A student-level analysis of the distribution of teacher resources. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Florida State University, Tallahassee.
    Holtman, S. W. (1999). Kant, ideal theory, and the justice of exclusionary zoning. Ethics, 110(1), 32-58.
    Hood, J. (2002). Competition and safety in UK local authorities: A empirical study. Public Management Review, 4(1), 575-592.
    Hooker, B. (2000). Sidgwick and common-sense morality. Utilitas, 12(3), 347-360.
    Johnson, G., & Pillianayagam, G. (1991). A longitudinal equity study of Ohio`s school finance system: 1980-89. Journal of Education Finance, 17(1), 60-82.
    Kalenberg, R. D. (2001). Learning from James Coleman. Public Interest, 144, 54-72.
    Kangas, O. (2000). Distributive justice and social policy: Some reflections on Rawls and income distribution. Social Policy & Administration, 34(5), 510-528.
    Kellogg, C. (1998). The messianic without Marxism: Derrida`s Marx and the question of justice. Cultural Values, 2(1), 51-69.
    King, R. A., Swanson, A. D., & Sweetland, S. R. (2003). School finance: Achieving high standards with equity and efficiency (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
    Lamb, M. K. (1996). The challenge to achieve fiscal equity in education: An equity analysis of Missouri`s new funding formula. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University Teachers College, New York.
    Lane, C. K. (1993). Measuring the equity of educational funding in New Jersey under the Quality Education Act. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University Teachers College, New York.
    LeGrand, J., & Robinson, R. (1984). The economics of social problems. London: Macmillan.
    Lehr, C. A., & Lange, C. M. (2003). Alternative schools serving students with and without disabilities: What are the current issues and challenges. Preventing School Failure, 47(2), 59-65.
    Lieberman, M. (1989). Privatization and educational choice. Hampshire : Macmillan.
    Li-Ju, Chen. (1988). A equity analysis of Michigan`s school finance system. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
    Lin, Qiuyun. (2001). An evaluation of charter school effectiveness. Education, 122(1), 166-176.
    Lund, B. (1996). Robert Nozick and the politics of social welfare. Political Studies, 44(1), 115-122.
    Mac Iver, M. A. (2000). Seeking justice in education opportunity: An analysis of the evidence on school vouchers and children placed at risk. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 5(4), 397-412.
    McDill, E. L., & Natriello, G. (1998). The effectiveness of the Title I Compensatory Education Program: 1965-1997. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 3(4), 317-335.
    McIntyre, J. P., Jr. (2003). An analysis of the state public education aid funding mechanism established by the Massachusetts Education Reform Act. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Boston.
    McMahon, W. W. (1994). Intrastate cost Adjustments. In W. J. Fowler, Jr. (Ed.), Selected papers in school finance, 1994 (pp.89-114). Retrieved June 21, 2004, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=96068
    Mead, P. K., III. (1992). Disparities in educational expenditures in New York State: In pursuit of equity, 1960-1990. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University Teachers College, New York.
    Metcalf, K. K., & Legan, N. A. (2002). Educational vouchers: A primer. The Clearing House, 76(1), 25-29.
    Mildred, W. (2001). State policy under devolution: Redistribution and centralization. National Tax Journal, 54(3), 541-556.
    Miller, D. (1976). Social justice. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    Miller-DeFrancesco, S. J. (1996). Intradistrict equity: A proposed methodology for resource allocation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Nevada, Las Vegas.
    Minorini, P. A., & Sugarman, S. D. (1999). Educational adequacy and courts: The promise and problems of moving to a new paradigm. In H. F. Ladd, R. A. Chalk & J. S. Hansen (Eds.), Equity and adequacy in education finance : Issues and perspectives (pp.175-208). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
    Monk, D. H. (1992). Educational productivity research: An update and assessment of its role in education finance reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14, 307-332
    Mort, P. R. (1933). State support for public education. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
    Mulder, L., & van der Werf, G. (1997). Implementation and effects of Dutch educational priority policy: Results of four years of evaluation studies. Educational Research and Evaluation, 3(4), 317-339.
    Murphy, J., Qilmer, S. W., Weise, R., & Page, A. (1998). Pathways to privatization in education. London: Ablex.
    Murray, S., Evans, W., & Schwab, R. (1998). Education finance reform and the distribution of education resources. American Economic Review, 88(4), 789-812.
    Nathan, J. (1996). Charter schools : creating hope and opportunity for American education. San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass.
    National Center for Education Statistics. (2001). Overview of public elementary schools and districts: School year 1999-2000. Retrieved March 1, 2002, from: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2001/overview/index.asp
    Noden, P. (2000). Rediscovering the impact of marketization: Dimensions of social segregation in England`s secondary schools, 1994-99. British Journal of Sociology Education, 21(3), 371-390.
    Novak, M. (2000). Defining social justice. A Monthly Journal of Religion & Public Life, 108, 11-13.
    Oates, W. E. (1999). An essay on fiscal federalism. Journal of Economic Literature, 37(3), 1120-1148.
    Oates, W. E. (2000). Musgrave and Buchanan on the role of the state. Regulation, 23(4), 40-44.
    Odden, A., & Archibald, S. (2000). Reallocating resources: How to boost student achievement without asking for more. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
    Odden, A., & Busch, C. (1998). Financing schools for high performance: Strategies for improving the use of educational resources. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Odden, A. (1992). Broadening impact aid`s view of school finance equalization. Journal of Education Finance, 18(1), 63-88.
    Odden, A. (1997). The finance side of implementing New American Schools. Paper prepared for the New American Schools, Alexandria, VA.
    Odden, A. R., & Picus, L. O. (2004). School finance: A policy perspective (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
    Office for National Statistics. (2003). UK 2004. London: HMSO.
    Office of Management and Budget (2002). A citizen`s guide to federal budget. Retrieved January 22, 2004, from http://www.house.gov/budget_democrats/budget_facts/cguide03.pdf
    Orend, B. (2001). Walzer`s general theory of justice. Social Theory & Practice, 27(2), 207-229.
    Pettit, P. (1980). Judging justice: An introduction to contemporary political philosophy. London: Routedge & Kegan Paul.
    Picus, L. O., Odden, A., & Fermanich, M. (2004). Assessing the equity of Kentucky`s SEEK formula: A 10-year analysis. Journal of education finance, 29(4), 315-336.
    Pinch, P. L., & Patterson, A. (2000). Public sector restructuring and regional development: The impact of compulsory competitive tendering in the UK. Regional Studies, 34(3), 265-275.
    Pojman, L. P. (Ed.). (1989). Ethical theory : Classical and contemporary readings. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
    Popper, K. R. (1966). The open society and its enemies. Princeton, NY: Princeton University Press.
    Poter, T. S. (1991). Equity and changes in the tax base of Ohio`s public schools: 1980-89. Journal of Education Finance, 16(4), 515-530.
    Prince, H. (1997). Michigan`s school finance reform: Initial pupil-equity results. Journal of education finance, 22(4), 394-409.
    Public Act 107-110, 20 U.S.C. 6301 note (2002). Retrieved January 22, 2004, from http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/107-110.pdf
    Ralston, J. W. (2003). Adequacy and equity of facility funding for the Kentucky public school system. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kentucky, Lexington.
    Rawls, J. (1971). The theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Rawls, J. (1999). The theory of justice (Rev. ed). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Rawls, J. (2001). Justice as fairness: A restatement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Reisch, M. (2002). Defining social justice in a socially unjust world. Families in Society. 83(4), 343-354.
    Reschovsky, A., & Imazeki, J. (2001). Achieving educational adequacy through school finance reform. Journal of Education Finance, 26(4),373-396.
    Rosen, H. S. (2004). Public finance (7th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
    Rubenstein, R., Doering, D., & Gess, L. (2000). The equity of public education funding in Georgia, 1988-1996. Journal of Education Finance, 26(2), 187-208.
    Sabbagh, S., Dar, Y., & Resh, N. (1994). The structure of social justice judgments: A facet approach, Social Psychology Quarterly, 57(3), 244-261.
    Sample, P. R., & Hartman,W. (1990). An equity simulation of Pennsylvania`s school finance simulation. Journal of Education Finance, 16(1), 49-69.
    Sartori, G. (1987). The theory of democracy revisited. NJ: Chatham House.
    Schwartz, M., & Moskowitz, J. (1988). Fiscal equity in the United States, 1984-85. Washington, D.C., MD: Department of Education, Office of Planning, Budget, and Evaluation. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED315852)
    Scorell, T. (2001). Hobbes and the morality beyond justice. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 82(3/4), 227-242.
    Shankweiler, P. W. (1936). Negro education in northern Alabama. Social Forces, 14(3), 410-416.
    Shivesh, C. T. (1996). Religion and Social Justice. London: Macmillan.
    Simmons, D. E. (2001). The effectiveness of wealth recapture legislation on achieving financial equity among independent school districts in Texas. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University, College Station.
    Stiglitz, J. E. (2000). Economics of the public sector(3rd ed.). NY: W. W. Norton.
    Stiglitz, J. E. (2003). Information and the change in the paradigm in economics, Part 1. American Economist, 47(2), 6-26.
    Stratton-Lake, P. (1997). Can Hooker`s rule-consequentialist principle justify Ross facie duties? Mind, 106(424), 751-758.
    Swanson, A. D., & King, R. A. (1997). School finance: Its economics and politics (2nd ed.). NY: Longman.
    The Limits of choice: School choice reform and state constitutional guarantees of educational quality. (1996). Harvard Law Review, 109(8), 2002-2019.
    Thompson, D. C., & Crampton, F. E. (2002). The impact of school finance litigation: A long view. Journal of Education Finance, 28(1), 133-172.
    Tian-Ming, S. (1993). School finance equity in Taiwan, Republic of China: A Longitudinal analysis, 1981-1990. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University Teachers College, New York.
    Trappenburg. M. (2000). In defense of pure pluralism: Two reading of Walzer`s Spheres of justice. Journal of Political Philosophy, 8(3), 343-362.
    U.S. Department of Education. (2003). Digest of education statistics 2002 (NCES 2003-060). Washington, DC: Author.
    Van Slyke, D. M. (2003). The mythology of privatization in contracting for social services. Public Administration Review, 63(3), 296-315.
    Verstegen, D. A., & Salmon, R. (1991). Assessing fiscal equity in Virginia: Cross-time comparisons. Journal of Education Finance, 16(4), 417-430.
    Vinovskis, M. A. (1999). Do federal compensatory education programs really work? A brief historical analysis of Title I and Head Start. American Journal of Education, 107(3), 187-209.
    Walzer, M. (1983). Spheres of justice: A defense of pluralism and equality. NY: Basic Books.
    Warke, T. (2000). Multi-Dimensional utility and the index number problem: Jeremy Bentham, J. S. Mill, and qualitative Hedonism. Utilitas, 12(2), 176-203.
    Wenglinsky, H. (1997). How money matters: The effect of school district spending on academic achievement. Sociology of Education, 70, 221-237.
    West, A., Pennell, H., & Wwest, R. (2000). New labour and school-based education in England: Changing the system of funding? British Educational Research Journal, 26(4), 523-536.
    Wiborg, S. (2000). Political and cultural Nationalism in education. The idea of Rousseau and Herder concerning national education. Comparative Education, 36(2), 235-243.
    Wilson, J. (1975). Education and equality: Some conceptual questions. Oxford Review of Education, 17(2), 223-230.
    Wood, R. C., Honeyman, D., & Bryers. (1990). Equity in Indiana school finance: A decade of local levy property tax restriction. Journal of Education Finance, 16(1), 83-92.
    Wright, D. S. (1988). Understanding intergovernmental relations (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
    Wright, D. S. (1999). Models of national, state and local relationships. In L. J. O`Toole, Jr. (Ed.), American intergovernmental relations: Foundation, perspective, and issue (3rd ed., pp.74-88). Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
    Wyckoff, J. H. (1992). The interstate equality of public primary and secondary education resources in the U.S., 1980-1987. Economics of Education Review, 11(1), 19-30.
    Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, 234 F.3d 945 (2002). No.00-1751. Retrieved January 21, 2004, from http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/27jun20021045/ www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/01pdf/00-1751.pdf
    Description: 博士
    國立政治大學
    教育研究所
    83152505
    93
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0831525052
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[教育學系] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    52505201.pdf167KbAdobe PDF21254View/Open
    52505202.pdf321KbAdobe PDF21864View/Open
    52505203.pdf123KbAdobe PDF21210View/Open
    52505204.pdf221KbAdobe PDF21402View/Open
    52505205.pdf907KbAdobe PDF22115View/Open
    52505206.pdf251KbAdobe PDF21519View/Open
    52505207.pdf453KbAdobe PDF21395View/Open
    52505208.pdf255KbAdobe PDF21419View/Open
    52505209.pdf331KbAdobe PDF21731View/Open
    52505210.pdf361KbAdobe PDF21859View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback