1. China's financial investment in basic education is insufficient.
The country is the biggest beneficiary of education. Because running education well and training professionals at all levels can greatly improve social productive forces, promote national political, economic and cultural prosperity, and improve the country's comprehensive national strength, the state should bear the bulk of investment in education. Generally speaking, the proportion of public education funds to GDP can not only reflect the government's "efforts" in education, but also accurately reflect the strategic position of education in national development. Worldwide, the proportion of public education funds to GNP is 4.9%, which is 5. 1% in developed countries and 4. 1% in underdeveloped countries. The proportion of public education funds in China's GNP is 2.73% in 1992, 2.52% in 1993, 2.62% in 1994, 2.45% in 1995 and 1996. 1%in 1998, 2.79% in 1999, 2.87% in 2000 and 3. 19% in 2006. As can be seen from this set of figures, the proportion of public education funds in China's gross national product hovers between 2% and 3%, far below the world average. At the same time, our government's investment in education is heavily tilted towards higher education, which makes the funds for basic education even more scarce. At present, the basic pattern of investment in basic education in China is: the local burden is the mainstay, and the central and provincial finances only provide a small amount of subsidies. Most county and township governments have weak financial resources, but they bear most of the compulsory education funds. This makes the development of basic education in China closely linked with the level of local economic development, which leads to the imbalance of education development in China. Generally speaking, the development of basic education in cities and economically developed areas is good, but the development situation of basic education in rural areas is becoming more and more difficult. This is mainly manifested in the following aspects:
(1) There is a great pressure on education funds.
From 65438 to 0986, China implemented the method of levying additional education fees, which made a certain contribution to the financing of basic education. In 2000, China implemented the "tax and fee" reform system to reduce the burden on farmers, and cancelled the rural education surcharge and education fund-raising. In this way, the input of rural compulsory education mainly depends on the financial allocation of governments at all levels, except for charging students a small amount of tuition and miscellaneous fees at schools. In economically underdeveloped areas, the contradiction of shortage of rural education funds is particularly prominent.
(2) The difference of investment in basic education is more and more obvious.
After China's entry into WTO, China's agricultural economy will face a huge impact, and the relative weakness of rural basic education will be further aggravated. Driven by interests, society, individuals and foreign groups will focus their investment on cities, which will further widen the gap between urban and rural basic education and make rural basic education fall into a more difficult situation.
(3) The problem of teachers' salary arrears has not been completely solved.
Since 200 1, teachers' salaries have been uniformly distributed by the county, which has curbed the long-term large-scale arrears of teachers' salaries. However, due to the large gap between regions, between urban and rural areas, and between institutions and schools, the phenomenon of local arrears of teachers' wages still exists.
(4) Rural information education is difficult to implement.
Today's society has entered the information age, and information technology education has been included in the new round of basic education curriculum reform in China. However, due to insufficient capital investment, it is difficult for rural primary and secondary schools, especially poor areas, to carry out information construction as planned.
2. Improper investment ratio
China is in the primary stage of socialism, and the requirement for education is to popularize compulsory education first. It stands to reason that basic education should be the focus of state investment, followed by secondary education and higher education. However, the proportion of investment in higher education and basic education in China is not appropriate, and the limited education funds are invested too much in higher education. According to the statistics of education funds in China? According to the statistics of education funds and related indicators in the Ninth Five-Year Plan, less than 35% of China's compulsory education funds should be borne by the state (about 50% in developed countries)-Source: Statistics of China's Education Funds compiled by the Finance Department of the former State Education Commission, rather than higher education and secondary education in the non-compulsory education stage. China's school-age children have a large population base and a small per capita expenditure, which does not meet the requirements of compulsory education.
Compared with developed countries, China has invested too much in universities. Judging from the per capita expenditure of universities, middle school students and primary school students in China, the cost of training 1 college students in China is equivalent to the cost of training 6 middle school students and 66.5 primary school students, that is, the ratio is 1:6:66.5 (the ratio in developed countries is about 1: 1. As a result of this unreasonable investment, some college students who spend a lot of educational resources are idle because of oversupply, which not only wastes educational resources seriously, but also increases the employment pressure and unemployment subsidy of the government. [1] On the other hand, basic education has not been properly invested, resulting in a serious shortage of public funds for education, aging of educational equipment, inability to rebuild and build school buildings in time, and serious dangers in some rural schools.
3. Lack of scientific management and supervision
The efficiency of education investment largely depends on strong investment management and scientific investment methods. For a long time, China's education financial management is relatively weak, lacking a scientific management system, especially the allocation of educational financial funds by means of financial grants without compensation, which has contributed to people's neglect of improving investment efficiency and serious waste of educational funds.
(1) Improper use of education funds
In many poor and backward areas of our country, nine-year compulsory education has not been popularized, and many people have not solved the problem of food and clothing. However, some leaders of administrative departments spend public funds on "graduate school" and "doctoral study" for their own promotion. The expenses for these people to go to school, including tuition, going to and from school, and even "filial piety" gifts for tutors, all come from the state finance and the unit's small treasury. [2] This undoubtedly increases the financial burden. Because China's education finance is not set up separately, but integrated into the general finance, which is a part of the total financial expenditure, it is easy for some administrative leaders to misappropriate education financial funds by taking advantage of their powers, which will inevitably affect the financial allocation of basic education by local governments.