Prioritizing Factors Affecting School Financing in Kurdistan Province

Document Type : Quantitative Research Paper


1 عضو هیات علمی گروه حسابداری دانشگاه کردستان، سنندج، ایران.

2 کارشناسی ارشد حسابداری دانشگاه کردستان، سنندج، ایران.


The education system has always been closely linked to the development of societies, and in most countries, paying attention to the knowledge-based economy is a priority. Today, due to the increasing demand for education through rapid population growth, families tend to provide their children with a relatively higher education and income than those who are educated than other members of society, as well as enjoying increased social rights and growth. Information and communication technology and its use in everyday life, and most importantly the financial constraints and structural budget deficits in education systems, discuss how to finance education as one of the most serious educational crises worldwide. However, today schools are increasingly turning to funding to address the problem of budget shortages and pressures from the community to provide quality services. As a result, schools are employing different ways and mechanisms to offset this scarcity of financial resources and developing a wide range of innovative and innovative approaches. However, the application of these mechanisms to finance in terms of the quantitative and qualitative status of the educational system, educational levels, economic and social status and many other components can be similarities and differences. In our country, especially in the elementary and secondary levels of government, it is considered to be the most important provider of financial resources. But over the last few years, given the high demand for education, the share of non-governmental resources in this sector has gradually increased, and now a significant share of educational spending is directed at individuals and their families. Since education is one of the most important issues in the lives of many individuals and families, how to finance education is one of the major challenges for applicants (individuals and families). And suppliers (public and non-governmental institutions). Therefore, education needs specific tools and solutions to develop and respond to problems and challenges. Since it has used many solutions in the field of education throughout the history, but the solutions adopted do not have the required efficiency and effectiveness, therefore, solutions should be sought to solve this problem. It was an alternative. Therefore, identifying and resolving school problems in order to achieve educational goals should be addressed by the authorities and researchers, one of which is the lack of financial resources that make them difficult to carry out activities and achieve their desired goals. It has. Since the government funding is not responsive to educational needs and costs and the need to improve the quality of educational services provided by schools has increased, the importance of resolving this problem has doubled. Attracting funds from their schools causes some issues such as parental dissatisfaction, lack of transparency in the use of funds received, as well as the difficulty of deciding on a suitable way to attract funds among other ways, which in turn increases the burden. It is the responsibility of school administrators to increase the likelihood of abuse by some. However, attracting funds from their own schools is one way to supplement the government's funding to provide better quality education for schools. Schools have serious responsibilities in education. They play an important role in the overall development of the country's human capital. Therefore, solving the problems of schools, especially in the field of financing, is one of the goals that should be considered by the authorities and researchers. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to prioritize the factors affecting the financing of schools in Kurdistan province. This research is applied in terms of purpose and is a survey based on the research method. The required data for this study were collected by questionnaire and Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.85. In order to achieve the purpose of this study, 30 variables related to school financing are considered and divided into 3 components. The statistical population of this study consisted of principals and deputy heads of schools in Kurdistan province. The sampling method was random. SPSS software was used for statistical analysis of the data. And by using factor analysis method the research questions have been tested. The results of the research findings show that in the privatization of schools variable use of serious supervision and legal regulation with 0.791 factor loadings had the most impact and the variable of private school management performance with 0.497 factor loadings had the least impact. On school funding. Also, in the discussion of the budget allocated to schools by the government, the amount of privatization proceeds with a factor of 0.817 had the greatest impact on school financing and the variable of the country's trade surplus with a factor of 0.621 had the least effect. It finances the schools. Also in the discussion of parent financial participation, the variable of parental satisfaction with school performance with a factor of 0.763 had the highest impact on school financing and involving families in managing financial problems with a factor of 0.155 had the least effect on school Finance has schools. Consequently, according to the findings of the study, it can be generally stated that the privatization variable of the schools with total variance of 50/183 has the greatest impact on the financing of the schools, then the variable of the budget allocation to the schools by the variance. The total 3636/07 has an impact on school funding, as well as the parents' financial participation with 18/453 has the least impact on school funding. As a result, it is suggested that the Ministry of Education and relevant institutions should prioritize among the factors influencing financing of school privatization to facilitate and improve the school financing process. Future researchers are also suggested to consider these and other factors affecting school financing in other provinces of the country and compare the results with the results of this study. Also, as every research has its limitations, this research has limitations like other researches, including its limitations to the inaccessibility of all schools in Kurdistan province. Lack of receiving all questionnaires indicated that this was a limitation because the results of the survey could not be generalized to all schools in Kurdistan province. Finally, it can be stated that since the statistical population of this study was the only one in the schools in Kurdistan province, the results cannot be generalized to schools in the whole country.


Ahmadi, R., Zareizavaraki, E., Nooruzi, D., Delavar, A., &  Dartaj, F. (2016). Examine the status of technological competencies of student teachers according to UNESCO standards. Journal of Research in Educational Systems, 10(32), spiring 2016, 1-22. [in Persian].
Body, A.(2017). Fundraising for primary schools in England—Moving beyond the school gates. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 22(4), e1582.
Body, A., & Breeze, B. (2016). What are ‘unpopular causes’ and how can they achieve fundraising success?. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 21(1), 57-70.
Ebrahimi Moghaddam, N., & Khosh Chehre, M. (2017). A Comparative Study of the Education of Developed and Developing Countries. Strategy Development, fall 2017, number 51. [in Persian].
Entezari,Y.(2011). Providing a model for financing public universities. Ministry of Science Quarterly, summer 2011, 17-36. [in Persian].
Entezari, Y., & Mahjub, H. (2013). Choosing the right mechanism and method for allocating public resources to higher education. Journal of Research and Planning in Higher Education, 19(2), summer 2013, 49-68. [in Persian].
Gerrard, J., Savage, G. C., & O’Connor, K. (2017). Searching for the public: School funding and shifting meanings of ‘the public’in Australian education. Journal of Education Policy, 32(4), 503-519.
Guo, H., & Johnson, D. R. (2017). Unfair advantage? School fundraising capabilities and student results.
Haj Karimi, A., Rezaeian, A., Hedizadeh, A., & Bonydai Naeini, A. (2011). Designing a Model for Competencies of Public Sector HR Managers in Iran. The Perspective of Public Administration, . 8: 43 23. [in Persian].
Jalili, Z., & Taheri, M. (2018). Fundraising Innovation: Reflecting on the Financial Challenges of Public School Principals. Journal of Scientific Research Innovation and Creativity in the Humanities, 8(1), summer 2018, 83-108. [in Persian].
Khanazizi, M., & Aminbidokhti, A. A. (2016). Funding mechanisms for education. Institute of Higher Education, 9(34), Summer 2016, 121-148. [in Persian].
Mestry,R.(2016). The management of user fees and other fundraising initiatives in self-managing public schools. South African Journal of Education, 36(2).
Nafisi,A.H.(2001). Encyclopedia of Education Economics (Volume I). authored by Abdolhossein Nafisi. Tehran Institute of Education. [in Persian].
Nategh Golestan, A., & Zarei Hossein Abad, M. (2016). Prioritizing the attitude of school principals of North Khorasan regarding education financing using AHP hierarchical process. New research in the humanities, October 2016, Year 3 - Number 8 (32 Pages - From 75 To 106). [in Persian].
Posey-Maddox,L.(2016). Beyond the consumer: Parents, privatization, and fundraising in US urban public schooling. Journal of Education Policy, 31(2), 178-197.
Pourqaz, A., Kazemi, Y., & Mohammadi, A. (2011). Investigating the Relationship between Thinking Styles and Entrepreneurial Personality Characteristics of School Principals - A Case Study of Birjand Three-Level Schools. Entrepreneurship Development »Spring 2011 - ISC Number 11 (20 pages - from 67 to 86).
Winton,S.(2018). Challenging fundraising, challenging inequity: Contextual constraints on advocacy groups’ policy influence. Critical Studies in Education, 59(1), 54-73.
Winton, S., & Milani, M. (2017). Policy advocacy, inequity, and school fees and fundraising in Ontario, Canada. education policy analysis archives, 25, 40.