台湾地区《大学法》与大陆《高等教育法》比较研究

发布时间：2018-12-16 01:18

【摘要】：法律在教育实务中发挥着越来越重要的作用,良好的法律规范体系对保障高等教育的稳步发展至关重要。我国大陆和台湾地区的高等教育法律体系的构建经历了长期的发展,由于社会历史的原因而不尽相同。中国台湾地区素来重视教育法制,其教育法律经过不断发展与修正,已逐渐建立较为完整、结构严谨、形式规范的教育法律体系。现行《大学法》是国民政府迁台之后沿用之前国民政府在大陆时期所制定颁行的原《大学法》,然后不断修正而成,最新修正时间为2005年。《中华人民共和国高等教育法》(以下简称《高等教育法》)自颁布以来暂时未作修正。两部法律在两岸各自的高等教育法律体系中都具有“母法”地位。《大学法》自颁布以来经过七次的修正以及多部辅助法令的补充,其法律内容日益完善,尤其在明确大学组织的法律地位、保障大学学术自由、保障高校教师、学生权益,完善法律救济制度等方面值得我们深入学习与探究。因此,本文主要将研究对象定位在《大学法》与《高等教育法》上,从两岸高等教育法律体系的比较入手,主要从两部法律的立法、主要内容以及实施现状这三个维度进行比较,通过对两部法律的比较,找出异同点,为《高等教育法》的修改提供借鉴。在研究方法上,本文主要运用文献研究法、历史研究法以及比较法,通过对《大学法》和《高等教育法》在三个维度的比较,得出一些结论。首先在立法上,大陆高等教育立法工作起步较晚,台湾地区较早并且更注重对《大学法》的及时修订,《大学法》的配套性法律法规较为完善。其次在法律内容方面,两部法律在立法宗旨、高校的法律地位、组织机构、高校教师、学生权利的保障方面均有不同之处。最后在法律实施状况方面,《大学法》在调整法律协调性,强调法律监督、法律救济制度方面较为突出,但依然存在因强行规定组织运行而导致规模大、效率低下等问题。而《高等教育法》在一定程度上促进了高等教育管理体制的改革和完善,确立了高等学校、学生、教师的法律地位,但存在着法律条文规定过于笼统,法律程序性规定不足,法律监督与救济制度缺乏,法律责任的缺位与模糊性,下位法与上位法相抵触等一系列问题亟待解决。总之,通过《大学法》和《高等教育法》的比较,发现《高等教育法》在内容及法律实践方面的一些问题,我们有必要从高等教育现实状况出发,对《高等教育法》进行必要的调整,提出修改建议。第一,立法原则上应突出“以人为本”和“保障学术自由”；第二,完善《高等教育法》配套性法律法规；第三,拓宽教师、学生权利,完善教师、学生救济制度：第四,《高等教育法》法律监督的完善；第五,设立“违法责任”专章。
[Abstract]:Law plays a more and more important role in the practice of education. A good system of legal norms is very important to ensure the steady development of higher education. The construction of higher education legal system in mainland China and Taiwan has undergone a long period of development, which is different from each other due to social and historical reasons. Taiwan has always attached great importance to the educational legal system, and its educational law has gradually established a relatively complete, well-structured and formal legal system through continuous development and revision. The current "University Law" is the original "University Law" enacted by the National Government in the mainland period after the National Government moved to Taiwan, and then it was constantly amended. The latest amendment was in 2005. The higher Education Law of the people's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as the higher Education Law) has not been amended since its promulgation. Both laws have the status of "mother law" in their respective higher education legal systems on both sides of the strait.After promulgation, the "University Law" has been amended seven times and supplemented by several supplementary decrees, and its legal content has become increasingly perfect. Especially in defining the legal status of the university organization, safeguarding the academic freedom of the university, protecting the rights and interests of university teachers and students, perfecting the legal relief system and so on, it is worth our in-depth study and exploration. Therefore, this paper mainly focuses on the university law and the higher education law, starting with the comparison of the legal system of cross-strait higher education, mainly from the legislation of the two laws. The main contents and implementation status of these three dimensions are compared, through the comparison of the two laws, to find out the similarities and differences, for the revision of the higher Education Law to provide reference. In the research method, this paper mainly uses the literature research method, the history research method and the comparative method, through the comparison between the university law and the higher education law in the three dimensions, draws some conclusions. First of all, the legislation of higher education in mainland China started late, and the Taiwan area paid more attention to the timely revision of the "University Law", and the supporting laws and regulations of the "University Law" were relatively perfect. Secondly, in the aspect of legal content, there are differences between the two laws in the legislative purpose, the legal status of the university, the organization, the university teachers and the guarantee of the students' rights. Finally, in the aspect of the implementation of the law, the University Law is more prominent in adjusting the coordination of the law, emphasizing the legal supervision and the legal relief system, but there are still some problems such as large scale and low efficiency caused by the compulsory regulation of the operation of the organization. To a certain extent, the higher Education Law has promoted the reform and perfection of the management system of higher education, and established the legal status of colleges, students and teachers. However, there are some legal provisions which are too general and inadequate. A series of problems need to be solved, such as the lack of legal supervision and relief system, the absence and vagueness of legal responsibility, the conflict between inferior law and superior law, and so on. In a word, through the comparison between the University Law and the higher Education Law, we find some problems in the content and legal practice of the higher Education Law. It is necessary for us to proceed from the reality of higher education. Necessary adjustments are made to the higher Education Law and suggestions for amendment are put forward. First, legislation should emphasize "people-oriented" and "guarantee academic freedom" in principle, second, perfect the supporting laws and regulations of the higher Education Law; Third, broaden teachers, students' rights, perfect teachers' and students' relief system: fourth, improve the legal supervision of the higher Education Law; fifthly, set up a special chapter on "illegal liability".
【学位授予单位】：浙江师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D922.16

【参考文献】