十二年國教實施與升學迷思？臺北市明星國中學區房價之實證

The implementation of the 12-year basic education and the myth of further education? Evidence of housing prices in the star junior high school districts of Taipei city

王安民(An-Ming Wang)

十二年國民基本教育 ； 明星國中 ； 學區 ； 房價 ； 差異中差異模型 ； 12-year basic education ； star junior high schools ； school districts ； housing prices ； difference-in-differences model

社會與區域發展學報

7卷1期（2022 / 12 / 01）

91 - 120

繁體中文;英文

十二年國教政策全面實施後，臺灣的教育環境是否逐漸朝向正常化發展，為本研究的主要探討目標。然而本研究並非直接針對教育之實質環境進行探討，而是間接透過明星學校學區之房價變化，以差異中差異模型分析社會大眾對於明星學區房地產之投資心態是否因十二年國教政策全面實施而產生結構性的改變。實證結果顯示，明星國中學區房價在全面實施十二年國教政策之後，較非明星國中學區之房價有更高程度（約5.02%）的上漲，表示全面實施十二年國教政策後並未能有效抑制社會大眾對於明星學區房屋之需求。甚者，十二年國教政策全面實施期間後半期，比前半期呈現出更高程度的明星與非明星學區之房價差異（約3.25%之差異）。但值得討論的是，明星與非明星學區房價之差異隨著十二年國教政策全面實施的深化發展，其房價差異程度由5.02%降為3.25%，似乎呈現出較為緩和的趨勢，然而此一趨勢目前尚無法達到統計檢定的顯著水準，亦即，5.02%與3.25%並不具有統計上顯著差異之意義。

After the full implementation of the 12-year basic education policy, whether Taiwan's educational environment is gradually developing towards normalization is the main purpose of this study. However, this study does not directly discuss the actual environment of education, but indirectly through the changes in housing prices in star school districts, and uses the difference-in-difference model to analyze whether the general public's investment mentality for real estate in star school districts has changed due to the full implementation of the 12-year basic education. The empirical results show that after the full implementation of the 12-year basic education policy, the housing prices in the star junior high school districts have a higher degree of rise (about 5.02%) than those in non-star junior high school districts. The meaning is that the full implementation of the 12-year basic education has not effectively curbed the public's demand for houses in star school districts. What's more, in the second half of the 12-year basic education period, there is a higher degree of price difference between star and non-star school districts than in the first half (about 3.25% difference). But it is worth discussing that the difference in housing prices between star and non-star school districts has been reduced from 5.02% to 3.25% with the deepening of the 12-year state education policy, which seems to be showing a relatively moderate trend. However, this trend has not yet reached the statistically significant level. That is, there is no the meaning of statistically significant difference between 5.02% and 3.25%.

1. 毛治文,吳文傑(2016)。以差異中差異配對分析法檢驗雙元所得稅制度對經濟成長的影響。經濟研究，52(2)，169-205。
   連結：
2. 林忠樑,林佳慧(2014)。學校特徵與空間距離對周邊房價之影響分析－以台北市為例。經濟論文叢刊，42(2)，215-271。
   連結：
3. 林素菁(2004)。台北市國中小明星學區邊際願意支付之估計。住宅學報，3(1)，15-34。
   連結：
4. 駱明慶(2018)。誰是台大學生？（2001-2014）－多元入學的影響。經濟論文叢刊，46(1)，47-95。
   連結：
5. 謝雨潔(2014)。初探「教育地理學」：教育主體、學習空間及鄰里社群。地理研究，60，87-106。
   連結：
6. Abdulkadiroğlu, A.,Sönmez, T.(2003).School choice: A mechanism design approach.American economic review,93(3),729-747.
7. Black, S. E.,Machin, S.(2011).Housing valuations of school performance.Handbook of the Economics of Education
8. Butler, T.,Hamnett, C.(2007).The geography of education: Introduction.Urban studies,44(7),1161-1174.
9. Chan, J.,Fang, X.,Wang, Z.,Zai, X.,Zhang, Q.(2020).Valuing primary schools in urban China.Journal of Urban Economics,115,103183.
10. Cheung, K. S.,Yiu, C. Y.,Zhang, Y.(2022).What matters more, school choices or neighbourhoods? Evidence from a socioeconomic based school zoning.Cities,128,103772.
11. Clapp, J. M.,Nanda, A.,Ross, S. L.(2008).Which school attributes matter? The influence of school district performance and demographic composition on property values.Journal of urban Economics,63(2),451-466.
12. Fack, G.,Grenet, J.(2010).When do better schools raise housing prices? Evidence from Paris public and private schools.Journal of public Economics,94(1-2),59-77.
13. Gibbons, S.(2003).Paying for Good Neighbours: Estimating the Value of an Implied Educated Community.Urban Studies,40(4),809-833.
14. Gibbons, S.,Machin, S.(2003).Valuing English primary schools.Journal of urban economics,53(2),197-219.
15. Gibbons, S.,Machin, S.,Silva, O.(2013).Valuing school quality using boundary discontinuities.Journal of Urban Economics,75,15-28.
16. Han, J.,Cui, L.,Yu, H.(2021).Pricing the value of the chance to gain admission to an elite senior high school in Beijing: The effect of the LDHSE policy on resale housing prices.Cities,115,103238.
17. Machin, S.(2011).Houses and schools: Valuation of school quality through the housing market.Labour Economics,18(6),723-729.
18. Nguyen-Hoang, P.,Yinger, J.(2011).The capitalization of school quality into house values: A review.Journal of Housing Economics,20(1),30-48.
19. Nijman, J.,Wei, Y. D.(2020).Urban inequalities in the 21st century economy.Applied Geography,117,102188.
20. Weimer, D. L.,Wolkoff, M. J.(2001).School performance and housing values: Using non-contiguous district and incorporation boundaries to identify school effects.National Tax Journal,54(2),231-253.
21. Wen, H.,Xiao, Y.,Hui, E. C.(2019).Quantile effect of educational facilities on housing price: Do homebuyers of higher-priced housing pay more for educational resources?.Cities,90,100-112.
22. Wen, H.,Xiao, Y.,Zhang, L.(2017).School district, education quality, and housing price: Evidence from a natural experiment in Hangzhou, China.Cities,66,72-80.
23. Wooldridge, J. M.(2019).Introductory econometrics: A modern approach.Cengage learning.
24. 吳清山,王令宜,林雍智,張佳絨(2017)。高級中等學校免試入學制度實施成效及未來改進之研究。教育行政研究，7(2)，1-30。
25. 李宗樺,李金玲,賴信忠(2013)。休閒農場套裝行程之消費者體驗、滿意度與忠誠度之研究－以桃園縣觀音鄉元音休閒農場為例。桃園區農業改良場研究彙報，74，65-79。
26. 李彥謀(2009年12月6日)。台北市明星國中大解析。冒牌自然老師。https://chendaneyl.pixnet.net/blog/post/31436424
27. 陳美蓮,曾璧光,宋修德(2022)。十二年國民基本教育完全免試入學政策之實踐探析。教育政策論壇，25(2)，43-76。
28. 戴其安(2016)。臺北市，國立臺灣大學經濟學系研究所。