A Study on Teacher Salary and Teacher Turnover Intention in Rural Primary and Secondary Schools
-
摘要: 为加强乡村教师队伍建设，近年我国政府出台了多项重要政策吸引、保留优秀教师并激励他们努力工作。其中教师工资是一项重要政策工具，而其效果如何有待考察。本文使用2016年辽宁、云南、贵州、重庆和广西五省市（自治区）五个县的问卷调查数据，应用投资模型分析我国农村中小学教师工资与流失意愿之间的关系。研究结果发现：样本农村教师中有17.8%和20.3%的比例有更换学校意愿和退出教师职业的意愿，存在流失隐患；农村中小学教师平均工资低于同期全国、西部地区城镇单位就业人员平均工资，缺乏外部竞争力。教师工资水平是影响教师流失意愿的首要因素，现有农村教师生活津补贴过低，未能起到保留教师的作用；学生群体特征和教师专业发展活动等非货币性因素对教师流失意愿也有显著影响；男性教师和未婚教师更倾向于流失。Abstract: In rural backwards areas teacher recruitment and retention remains a major problem in many countries. In order to improve the overall quality of rural teachers, the Chinese government has issued a number of important policy documents to attract, retain and encourage outstanding teachers in recent years. Among them, teacher's salary is an important policy tool, and its effect remains to be observed. In this paper, we used questionnaire survey data from five counties in Liaoning, Yunnan, Guizhou, Chongqing and Guangxi Provinces in 2016, and using investment model and compensatory wage difference theory to explore the relationship between teachers' salary and their turnover intention in rural primary and secondary schools. The results show that about 20% of the rural teachers tended to leave. The average salary of rural teachers in five counties was lower than that of urban employees in the same period. Teachers' salary level is the primary factor that affects teachers' turnover intention, and existing rural teachers' subsidies (153 yuan monthly) are too low to retain teacher. Non-monetary factors, such as students' group characteristics and teacher professional development activities, also have significant impact on teacher turnover intention. Male and unmarried teachers are more likely to leave. Also, the related policies of retaining rural teachers are discussed.
-
Key words:
- rural teacher /
- teacher salary /
- teacher subsidy /
- teacher turnover intention
-
表 1 样本县基本情况
行政区划面积
(平方公里)户籍人口
(万人)二三产业人口
(万人)地区生产总值
(万元)公共财政收入
(万元)公共财政支出
(万元)普通中学在校生
(人)小学在校生数
(人)A县 2541 43 9.3 515500 24703 162216 12417 24529 B县 4056 120 32.3 4263034 461446 795377 91700 63937 C县 3343 29 6.7 1783341 200600 282489 10740 15683 D县 4004 54 3.3 2458891 130890 311917 30410 43314 E县 2187 101 34.9 2078381 121038 418635 44684 64675 数据来源：《中国县域统计年鉴(县市卷)》(2015)。 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 农村中小学教师工资与流失意愿关系分析变量说明
类别 变量 均值 标准差 因变量 教师流失意愿 县内换校 2.14 0.89 跨县换校 1.91 0.81 更换收入更高的职业 1.95 0.87 更换工作环境更好的职业 1.91 0.87 货币性因素变量 教师月工资(元) 3728 984 农村教师每月津补贴(元) 153 183 工资比较感知 与同级公务员比较 2.88 0.92 与不同学校同资历教师比较 2.59 0.89 与同校相同工作量教师比较 3.09 0.79 与同学历人群比较 2.52 0.87 非货币性因素变量 班级学生群体特征 学习困难学生比例 2.87 1.02 特殊学生比例 2.40 0.88 问题行为学生比例 2.25 0.88 家庭困难学生比例 2.51 0.88 留守儿童比例 2.85 1.17 教师参与专业发展活动 日常备课或公开课研讨 2.843 0.769 课题研讨会 2.220 0.776 去其他学校观摩 1.897 0.646 去相关教育团体或部门观摩 1.676 0.640 参加相关教育培训 2.244 0.709 学校特征变量 学校所在城乡位置 1.78 0.67 是否初中 0.35 0.48 个体特征变量 性别 0.62 0.49 年龄 41.4 8.6 婚姻状况 0.88 0.33
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 五县教师月工资和农村教师生活津补贴(元)
教师月工资 农村教师生活津补贴 全样本 农村样本 A县 3165 3186 114 B县 4297 4336 87 C县 3653 3662 14 D县 4361 4326 361 E县 3422 3456 284 总平均值 3728 3788 153
下载: 导出CSV
4-1 五县教师流动意愿情况(%)
类别 更换学校意愿 退出教职意愿 类别 更换学校意愿 退出教职意愿 整体 17.8 20.3 村屯 26.9 14.2 男性 24.8 22.5 乡镇 21.3 19.4 女性 17.5 14.9 县城 17.7 17 已婚 19.3 16.2 小学 19.9 14.8 未婚 27.3 27.4 初中 21.1 23.8
下载: 导出CSV
4-2 教师流失意愿在关键变量上的均值比较
变量 换校意愿 退教意愿 无 有 t值 无 有 t值 教师工资 3792 3610 3.583*** 3799 3478 6.131*** 农村津补贴 98 113 -1.791* 106 104 0.26 工资比较感知 -0.089 0.261 -6.709*** -0.085 0.31 -7.462*** 学生群体特征 -0.084 0.234 -6.146*** -0.092 0.4 -9.342*** 教师专业发展频率 -0.031 0.039 -1.346 0.013 -0.046 1.096 年龄 41.9 41.2 1.375 41.8 39.7 4.488*** 注:***p < 0.001; **p < 0.01; *p < 0.1
下载: 导出CSV
表 5 教师流失意愿多元线性回归分析结果
自变量 教师流失意愿 换校意愿 退教意愿 ln(月工资) -0.218*** -0.279*** (0.051) (0.052) ln(农村教师生活津补贴) 0.014* 0.003 (0.006) (0.006) 工资比较感知 0.118*** 0.123*** (0.015) (0.015) 学生群体特征 0.061*** 0.075*** (0.016) (0.016) 教师专业发展 0.027* -0.010 (0.015) (0.015) 初中 -0.004 0.068* (0.035) (0.036) 乡镇学校 0.063* 0.056 (0.033) (0.034) 村屯学校 0.124* -0.075 (0.056) (0.058) 女性 -0.123*** -0.172*** (0.032) (0.033) 年龄 -0.003 -0.005* (0.002) (0.002) 已婚 -0.133** -0.180*** (0.046) (0.047) 常数 4.037*** 4.621*** (0.404) (0.412) N 2, 643 2, 643 调整的R方 0.061 0.080 F statistic (df = 11; 2631) 16.668*** 21.767*** 注:***p < 0.001; **p < 0.01;*p < 0.1
下载: 导出CSV
表 6 教师流失意愿分层线性模型分析结果(零模型)
固定效应 换校意愿 退教意愿 系数 标准误 T检验 系数 标准误 T检验 截距 2.052*** 0.024 86.540 1.917*** 0.027 70.669 随机效应 方差成分 χ2 方差成分 χ2 截距 0.020*** 165.470 0.031*** 216.736 Level-1 0.571 0.595 注：层一包含2643位教师，层二包含77所学校。*P < 0.1, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001。固定效应为稳健标准误估计。
下载: 导出CSV
表 7 教师流失意愿分层线性模型分析结果(全模型)
固定效应 换校意愿 退教意愿 系数 标准误 T检验 系数 标准误 T检验 截距 农村津补贴 0.030** 0.008 3.611 -0.003 0.009 -0.287 教师专业发展 -0.099* 0.052 -1.902 -0.125* 0.075 -1.676 农村学校 0.041 0.041 1.007 -0.023 0.049 -0.466 斜率 月工资 -0.200** 0.057 -3.494 -0.200*** 0.049 -4.099 学生群体特征 0.059** 0.019 3.044 0.079*** 0.017 4.725 性别 -0.138*** 0.037 -3.714 -0.191*** 0.035 -5.487 年龄 -0.003 0.002 -1.167 -0.005* 0.002 -2.149 婚姻状况 -0.117** 0.040 -2.898 -0.175** 0.053 -3.321 随机效应 方差成分 χ2 方差成分 χ2 截距 1.98319 80.08166 0.019*** 150.597 ln(月工资) 0.028 79.795 — — 学生群体特征 0.005* 90.343 — — Level-1 0.555 0.578 注：层一包含2643位教师，层二包含77所学校。*P < 0.1, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001。固定效应为稳健标准误估计。
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 安雪慧. (2014).我国中小学教师工资水平变化及差异特征研究.教育研究, (12), 44-53. http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=663321538 [2] 曾新, 付卫东. (2014).内生发展视域下农村小规模学校教师队伍建设.教育发展研究, (06), 73-79. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SHGJ201406016.htm [3] 杜屏, 朱菲菲, & 杜育红. (2013).幼儿教师的流动、流失与工资关系的研究.教育与经济, (06), 59-65. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/jyyjj201306009 [4] 范国锋, 王浩文, & 蓝雷宇. (2015).中小学教师流动意愿及其影响因素研究——基于湖北、江西、河南3省12县的调查.教育与经济, (02), 62-66. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-4870.2015.02.010 [5] 国家统计局.(2017).中国统计年鉴(2017).取自: http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjsj/zxfb/201705/t20170527_1498372.html. [6] 姜金秋. (2017).教师的吸引保留与激励——义务教育教师工资体系研究.北京:首都经济贸易大学出版社. [7] 马红梅. (2012).教师收入增长机制刍议:基于甘肃农村的实证研究.清华大学教育研究, (04), 103-109. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-4519.2012.04.016 [8] 曲恒昌, 曾晓东(2011).OECD国家中小学教师工资制度的逻辑基础.比较教育研究, (02), 22-26. http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=NSSD201403250000427775 [9] 任琳琳, & 邬志辉. (2013).国外实施"艰苦边远地区教师津补贴政策"状况分析.比较教育研究, (03), 99-104. http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=NSSD201403250000548006 [10] 容中逵. (2014).农村教师薪酬问题研究——来自浙江、河北、四川三省的调研报告.教育研究, (03), 144-150. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JYYJ201403021.htm [11] 王艳玲, 李慧勤. (2017).乡村教师流动及流失意愿的实证分析——基于云南省的调查.华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), (03), 134-141+173. http://xbjk.ecnu.edu.cn/CN/abstract/abstract9042.shtml [12] 邬志辉. (2017).中国农村教育发展报告2017.中国教师报, 2017-12-27, (011). [13] 薛海平, & 唐一鹏. (2017).理想与现实:我国中小学教师工资水平和结构研究.北京大学教育评论, (02), 17-38+186-187. http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/gwcsgh200203009 [14] 杨东平. (2017).中国教育发展报告(2017).北京:社会科学文献出版. [15] 由由. (2013).教师流动的微观影响因素——经济理论与美国实证研究.教育与经济, (04), 65-72. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-4870.2013.04.011 [16] 于兰兰, 吴志华. (2011).农村义务教育阶段教师流失的现状调查与原因分析——基于辽宁省两县的调查.教育测量与评价(理论版), (06), 22-25. http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=jyclypj-ll201106008 [17] 赵忠平, 秦玉友. (2016).谁更想离开?——机会成本与义务教育教师流动意向的实证研究.教育与经济, (01), 53-62. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-4870.2016.01.008 [18] An, Xuehui. (2018). Teacher Salaries and the Shortage of High-Quality Teachers in China's Rural Primary and Secondary Schools. Chinese Education & Society, 51(2), 103-116. http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=10.1177/002248715600700406 [19] Bright, L. (2008). Does Public Service Motivation Really Make a Difference on the Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intentions of Public Employees?. American Review of Public Administration, 38(2), 149-166. doi: 10.1177-0275074008317248/ [20] Chambers, J. (2010).Compensating Differentials in Teacher Labor Markets. In P. Peterson, E. Baker, & B. McGaw (Eds.). International Encyclopedia of Education (Third Edition) (pp. 465-472). Oxford: Elsevier. [21] Clotfelter, C., Glennie, E., Ladd, H., & Vigdor, J. (2008). Would Higher Salaries Keep Teachers in High-Poverty Schools? Evidence from a Policy Intervention in North Carolina. Journal of Public Economics, 92(5), 1352-1370. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272707001065 [22] DeJaeghere, J. G., Chapman, D. W., & Mulkeen, A. (2006). Increasing the Supply of Secondary Teachers in Sub-Saharan Africa:A Stakeholder Assessment of Policy Options in Six Countries. Journal of Education Policy, 21(5), 515-533. doi: 10.1080/02680930600866116 [23] Dolton, P., & Klaauw, W. van der. (1999). The Turnover of Teachers:A Competing Risks Explanation. Review of Economics and Statistics, 81(3), 543-550. doi: 10.1162/003465399558292 [24] Dolton, P., & Klaauw, W. von der. (1995). Leaving Teaching in the UK:A Duration Analysis. Economic Journal, 105(March), 431-444. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2235502 [25] Falch, T. (2011). Teacher Mobility Responses to Wage Changes:Evidence from a Quasi-Natural Experiment. American Economic Review, 101(3), 460-465. doi: 10.1257/aer.101.3.460 [26] Goldhaber, D., Destler, K., & Player, D. (2010). Teacher Labor Markets and the Perils of Using Hedonics to Estimate Compensating Differentials in the Public Sector. Economics of Education Review, 29(1), 1-17. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272775709001046 [27] Grissom, J. A., Viano, S. L., & Selin, J. L. (2016). Understanding Employee Turnover in the Public Sector:Insights from Research on Teacher Mobility. Public Administration Review, 76(2), 241-251. doi: 10.1111/puar.12435 [28] Hanushek, E. A., & Rivkin, S. G. (2006). Teacher Quality. In E. Hanushek & F. Welch (Eds.). Handbook of the Economics of Education (Vol. 2, pp. 1051-1078). St. Louis: Elsevier. [29] Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., & Rivkin, S. G. (2004). Why Public Schools Lose Teachers. Journal of Human Resources, 39(2), 326-354. doi: 10.2307/3559017 [30] Jung, C. S. (2012). Why Are Goals Important in the Public Sector?Exploring the Benefits of Goal Clarity for Reducing Turnover Intention. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(1), 209-234. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277518056_Why_Are_Goals_Important_in_the_Public_Sector_Exploring_the_Benefits_of_Goal_Clarity_for_Reducing_Turnover_Intention [31] Lee, G., & Jimenez, B. S. (2011). Does Performance Management Affect Job Turnover Intention in the Federal Government?. American Review of Public Administration, 41(2), 168-184. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249697328_Does_Performance_Management_Affect_Job_Turnover_Intention_in_the_Federal_Government [32] Monk, D. H. (2007). Recruiting and Retaining High-Quality Teachers in Rural Areas. The Future of Children, 17(1), 155-174. doi: 10.1353/foc.2007.0009 [33] Murnane, R. J., & Olsen, R. J. (1989). The Effect of Salaries and Opportunity Costs on Duration in Teaching:Evidence from Michigan. Review of Economics and Statistics, 71(2), 347-352. doi: 10.2307/1926983 [34] Murnane, R. J., & Olsen, R. J. (1990). The Effects of Salaries and Opportunity Costs on Length of Stay in Teaching:Evidence from North Carolina. Journal of Human Resources, 25(1), 106-124. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/46552398_The_Effects_of_Salaries_and_Opportunity_Costs_on_Length_of_Stay_in_Teaching_Evidence_from_North_Carolina [35] OECD. (2016). Education at a Glance 2016. Paris:OECD Publishing. [36] OECD.(2005).Teachers Matter:Attracting, Developing and Retaining Effective Teachers. Paris:The Secretary-General of the OECD. [37] Sjaastad, L. A. (1962). The Costs and Returns of Human Migration. Journal of Political Economy, 70(5), 80-93. doi: 10.1086/258726 [38] Stinebrickner, T. R. (1998). An Empirical Investigation of Teacher Attrition. Economics of Education Review, 17(2), 127-136. doi: 10.1016/S0272-7757(97)00023-X -
