DEA 技法을 活用한 서울市 中等敎育機關의 相對的 效率性 分析 = (A)study on the relative efficiency of secondary schools in Seoul through DEA

국문 초록 (Abstract)

영문초록:The purposes of this study were to evaluate the performance of secondary schools in terms of relative efficiency, measured by the method of Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA), and provide some measures to improve efficiency for inefficient schools. The sample of this study was limited to 195 secondary schools in Seoul. Relative efficiency was defined as the ratio of output variables and input variables. In order to measure relative efficiency, four-year college advancement rate was used as the output variable and class size, teachers' experience, teachers' ratio with Master's degree and above, school size, and expenditure for students were used as input variables. The data used in this study came from by the 2002 Yearbook of Seoul Educational Statistics, Seoul Educational Administration. The statistical method applied for the data analysis was the DEA, which was widely utilized in the analysis of performance assessment for nonprofit organizations such as schools, armies, public hospitals, and so on. By literature review, the CCR model and BCC model in the DEA were selected to measure the relative efficiency of secondary schools. The results of this study were as follows: First, about 69% of schools (134 schools) had an efficiency value higher than 90: they were relatively efficient. Among them, 30 schools held 100 in efficiency value. It implied that these schools were at the efficiency frontier. And 30% of schools showed an efficiency value of 80 - 89. The rest of the schools (4 schools) were very inefficient. Second, private schools were more efficient than public schools in terms of the value of relative efficiency from the CCR model. Average efficiency values of private schools and public schools were 72.39 and 61.25 respectively. This was equal to the comparison of four-year college advancement rates in descriptive statistics. Third, there were no statistical differences of relative efficiency between Gangbuk (the northern part of Seoul) and Gangnam (the southern part of Seoul). Private schools in Gangbuk were relatively efficient. However, public schools in Gangnam showed the lowest efficiency value on average. Fourth, according to the DEA results, the sources of inefficiency were found out and the target levels of efficiency improvement in each source were revealed. For example, School 56 could be a efficient school after a 17.9% increase in output level and a decrease in input levels: 6.3% of teachers' experience, 21.5% of teachers' ratio with Master's degree and above, 0.5% of school size, and 6.3% of expenditure for students. Based on the above results, the conclusions of this study were as follows: First, there were signigicant differences in the performance of secondary schools in Seoul. Regardless of the education policy which has made every secondary school equal in terms of educational services and schooling environment over the past 30 years, the performance of schools turned out to be quite different. It was noted that the policy should be reevaluated or amended based upon the current situation. Second, since private schools were more efficient than public schools, the focus of education policy should be changed to increase support for private schools. This will enable all secondary schools to become more efficient. Third, from the results of this study, there were no regional differences between Gangbuk and Gangnam. But to determine whether there are regional discrepancies in education, more researches and studies will be needed. Fourth, most schools put too much inputs to accomplish the current output level. Therefore, inefficient schools could be guided by a target for each input variable to improve efficiency. The improved efficiency level compared to the previous year's level should be a valuable factor and checkpoint for the school's next evaluation. Based on the above results and conclusions, this study suggests the following: First, school evaluation plays a very vital role in improving educational quality and competitiveness. So, performance assessment for secondary schools should be continued once a year and the outcomes should be open to the public. Second, the DEA can be utilized to evaluate school performance. It also gives specific target levels for a given school to become a more efficient school. Third, the educational policy on private schools should be changed to include more self-autonomy on schooling and less administrative guidance and intervention