高考招生名额区域分配制度的法学研究

发布时间：2018-05-25 04:34

本文选题：高考招生名额区域分配制度 + 高等教育平等权　；参考：《吉林大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：高等教育承载着“中国梦”的伟大理想和美好愿景,但现实状况却不容乐观。作为高等教育的重要前置环节,高考招生名额区域分配制度一直以来都处于舆论关注的风口浪尖,成为探讨“高等教育平等权”问题的最佳切入点,具有重要的现实意义。从法学视角检视这个制度是法学研究者的责任。围绕着与之相关的高考分省自主命题和大学自主招生制度以及平等受教育权问题,前辈学者们已经作出了较为深入的研究,主要从宪法学的角度得出了各自的结论。相比之下,从行政法学角度进行的学术研究目前较少有人涉及,将两种视角结合起来的研究就更为稀缺,正是这种情况促使笔者希望做一次唐突的尝试,以期为深化有关认识奉上一孔之见。本文采取实证研究的方法,结合有关统计数据,从不同角度进行论证,得出结论。通过对高考招生名额区域分配制度现状的梳理,结合我国目前的法律运行状态和法学理论在实践中的应用,笔者认为,在我国,“高等教育平等权”并非法律直接规定的公民基本权利,在宪法和法律条文中都没有明确表述,但其价值追求无疑值得肯定。《中华人民共和国教育法》第九条第二款规定:“公民不分民族、种族、性别、职业、财产状况、宗教信仰等,依法享有平等的受教育机会。”可以视为对这种价值追求的部分回应,然而在法条列举的事项中并不包括“地域”因素,这在立法上成为高考招生名额区域分配制度屡遭诟病的缘起。分析这一制度背后反映出的问题,有利于加深对其在法学上的认识。首先,高考招生名额区域分配的权力主体多元化,由中央政府和地方政府共同主导,其中,中央政府起着决定性作用,高校也有一定参与权,且有部分高校享有有限的自主招生权力。分配制度运行现状持续失衡,主要表现为录取分数线各地高低不一,招生名额向高校属地倾斜。其次,作为分配依据的法律、部门规章和相关规范性文件,虽然并不违宪,但却不利于保护公民充分享有平等接受教育的权利。现行分配制度试图在制度公正与利益博弈、择优录取与地方保护、考试公平与地域公平等几对矛盾中寻求微妙的平衡,结果却并不理想,合理性也值得商榷。最后,现行制度引发的问题与争议也造成了较大的社会影响。典型事例包括“高考移民”现象的兴起、青岛考生状告教育部、江苏高考减招事件等。从中可以看出,政策不当对考生利益造成的侵害。同时还显示出行政行为的可诉性和公民权利司法救济问题以及行政法有关理论在现实中的违和状态。“他山之石,可以攻玉。”尽管现行高考招生名额区域分配制度不尽如人意,但在中国历史传统上和其他国家的当代实践中,有着充分的营养可供汲取,借以改善目前现状。我国科举制度下对“考试公平”与“区域公平”的平衡考量以及美国的“肯定性行动”、德国的《高校框架法》、日本公立高校的“一府县一大学”布局原则都值得吸收、借鉴。当然,解决中国的现实问题不可能简单照搬古代和他国经验,还需要在立法、执法、司法上进行制度完善。立法方面,一是修改有关法律条文,增加“区域”平等的内容,使“高等教育平等权”成为公民的基本权利;二是推进反歧视立法工作,加大保障力度。执法方面,一是将行政法的基本原则落实到位,加强政务公开,扩大社会参与面;二是进一步理顺中央政府与地方政府在高考招生名额区域分配制度上的事权关系,同时,严厉打击利用高等教育牟利的不法行为。司法方面,一是努力创造条件,逐步使抽象行政行为也具有可诉性;二是寻求实现宪法司法化,为公民提供更充分的司法救济,更好维护其宪法权利。
[Abstract]:Higher education carries the great ideal and good vision of the "Chinese dream", but the actual situation is not optimistic. As an important pre - link of higher education, the system of regional distribution of the enrollment quota of college entrance examination has always been at the point of public opinion. It has become the best cut in point to discuss the problem of "higher education equality", and it is of great importance. It is the responsibility of the law researchers to examine the system from the perspective of law. Around the related provincial autonomous propositions, the autonomous enrollment system and the right to equal education, the former scholars have made a more in-depth study, mainly from the perspective of the constitution. The academic research from the perspective of administrative jurisprudence is rarely involved, and the research that combines the two perspectives is more scarce. It is this situation that encourages the author to make a sudden attempt to deepen the understanding of the relevant knowledge. By combing the current status of the regional distribution system of the enrollment quota of the college entrance examination, combining with the current state of law and the application of law theory in practice, the author believes that, in our country, "the equal right of higher education" is not the basic right of the citizens directly stipulated by the law, and there is neither the constitution nor the provisions of the law. It is clearly stated, but the pursuit of its value is undoubtedly worth affirming. The ninth paragraph of the second paragraph of the People's Republic of China Education Law stipulates that "citizens have equal access to education in accordance with the law without distinction of nationality, race, sex, occupation, property status, religious belief, etc.", which can be regarded as a partial response to this value pursuit, however, the items listed in the law It does not include the "regional" factor, which is the origin of the common criticism of the regional distribution system of the enrollment quota in the college entrance examination. The analysis of the problems reflected in this system helps to deepen its understanding of the law. First, the power owners of the regional distribution of the enrollment quota in the college entrance examination are pluralistic, and the central government and the local government share the same. Leading, the central government plays a decisive role, and the universities also have the right to participate, and some colleges and universities enjoy the limited power of autonomous enrolment. The current situation of the distribution system continues to be unbalanced. The main performance is that the enrollment scores are different from each other, the enrollment quota is inclined to the colleges and universities. Secondly, as the law of distribution basis, department rules and regulations and Although the relevant normative documents are not unconstitutional, they are not conducive to the protection of citizens' right to equal access to education. The current distribution system tries to find a subtle balance between the game of institutional justice and interest, the choice of the best admission and local protection, the fairness of the examination and regional fairness, but the result is not ideal, and the rationality is worth it. Finally, the problems and disputes caused by the current system have also caused great social impact. The typical examples include the rise of the "immigration of college entrance examination", the Qingdao examinee suing the Ministry of education, the incident of reducing the enrollment in the college entrance examination in Jiangsu, etc.. The judicial relief of civil rights and the violation of the relevant theories of administrative law in reality. "Another mountain of stones, can attack jade." although the current enrollment quota system in the college entrance examination is not satisfactory, in the Chinese historical tradition and the contemporary practice of other countries, there are sufficient nutrition to be absorbed to improve the present situation. The balance of "fair test" and "regional equity" in China's imperial examination system, as well as the "affirmative action" in the United States, the framework law of the University in Germany, and the principle of "one county and one university" in Japanese public colleges and universities are worth absorbing and drawing lessons from. Of course, it is impossible to simply copy the ancient and his national classics to solve the practical problems of China. It also needs to be perfected in legislation, law enforcement and judicature. On the legislative aspect, the first is to amend the relevant provisions of the law, increase the content of "regional" equality, make "the equal right of higher education" the basic right of citizens; two, promote the legislative work of anti discrimination and increase the strength of the protection. In place, strengthening public affairs and expanding social participation; two is to further straighten out the relationship between the central government and the local government on the regional distribution system of the enrollment quota in the college entrance examination, and at the same time, to crack down on the wrongful acts of making profit by the higher education. Two, we should seek to achieve constitutional judicature, provide more adequate judicial relief for citizens, and better safeguard their constitutional rights.
【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D922.16

【相似文献】