高等教育學生權利之研究

Abstract

第一章緒論中，先闡述本論文之研究動機，並提出十一個問題意識做為探討內容。次針對四項研究目的做分析，界定本文研究範圍與列出三種研究方法。最後，說明並繪出本文研究架構圖，以及進行之研究步驟。 第二章所探討之高等教育法律制度的基本原則，即是從德國(大陸法系)法治國的法治原則中，擷取其中之依法行政原則(法律優位原則與法律保留原則)、法的安定性原則(法律明確性原則與信賴保護原則)、比例原則、平等原則，以及其它關連原則(憲法拘束原則、公益原則、誠信原則、權利救濟原則)，再加上美國(英美法系)之正當法律程序原則，運用在我國高教法制(包括憲法、司法院大法官會議解釋、行政程序法、大學法等高等教育法律規範)的概念與分析，釐清問題並深入探討，期能為我國高教法制建構合適之原則與理念目標。 第三章乃嘗試為受高等教育的大學生做角色定位，首先針對大學的歷史發展做簡述，並對21世紀大學提出五個發展要素，以因應我國大學的現況與展望。其次，論述大學自治與學術自由的實質意涵與關係，並從大學生發展的理念中之兩個認知--結構論，作為促進大學生發展的實際應用。續闡述大學生的學習的概念，而對大學生的學習自由與受教權，以法釋義分別探索其法理上之深層意義。最後，揭櫫以學生為中心的觀念，來定位大學生的校園主體性，並期做為校園民主養成教育的重要一環。 第四章主要是為瞭解高等教育學生權利的理論基礎，首先闡釋大學學生權利的實質意涵，瞭解其乃為憲法上所保障基本權利的主體。其次，在學生權利的理論部分，從傳統的「特別權力關係說」到此說的修正，以及「重要性理論」的建立；加上從「部分社會理論」到「在學契約關係說」的確認，更深化理論基礎。最後，再從學生與大學間的在學關係分析，而提出大學學生應有的基本權利保障。 第五章則對高等教育學生權利的實務分析，從新大學法所落實規範的學生自治確立與參與校務的角色，言論、著作、出版等表現自由與宗教信仰自由的保障，學生性別、原民生及身障生平等保護的體現，校園搜索與隱私權保護的範圍與界限，學生在身為消費者諸多權益的維護，校園性騷擾與性侵害之事件防範，以及其它與學生財務上之獲益與補助、學生健康權、學生參政權有關事項等，均需逐一探討，俾瞭解其詳細現況。 第六章探討高等教育在學生司法事務的實質內容，從學生司法事務的實質意涵著手；分別闡述學生懲戒處分的法理面與實務面，學生退學處分的法理面與實務面，以及學生申訴制度的法理面與實務面，瞭解其對學生權利保障的影響甚鉅；而各大學對於學生不論在懲戒、退學、申訴等學生司法事務之法制規範及實務案例上，其具體展現在高等教育學生權利時，乃為校園主事者不可忽視之一環。 第七章總結，先提出五點主要研究發現(大學普遍存在學生主體性不足的現象/學校校規內容充滿抽象與模糊的規定/學校對於正當法律程序的概念不清楚/學生對自我權益的法律保障認知缺乏/大學生對於弱勢族群的關懷有待增強)，做為本文諸多關鍵問題的再思考；次歸納而獲得五項結論(型塑高教法制的理念原則/釐清大學學生的角色定位/敘明學生權利的理論基礎/探索學生權利的實務運作/規範學生司法的權利保障)，對主要內容有一統合的論述；最後嘗試提出四項具體建議(對教育行政機關的建議/對學校的建議/對學生的建議/對未來研究者的建議)，期能成為日後在高等教育中促進學生權利的作法。In Chapter One of Introduction the author first sets out the research motive and propose eleven conceptual questions as context of discussion. Next, the research scope and three research methods are established by analyzing the four research objectives. Finally, the research structure chart is depicted and the research steps are clearly set out. Chapter Two discusses the application of the fundamental principles of higher education legal system, that is, administration according to law (Vorrang des Gesetzes and Vorbehalt der Gesetzes), security of law (clarity requirement of the law and principle of legitimate expectation), the principle of proportionality, equality of the rule of law of German (Continental Law System or namely Civil Law System) legal principles as well as other relevant principles (constitutional stare decisis, public interest principle, the principle of good faith, the principle of right to relief) together with the due process principle of the US (Anglo-American Legal System or namely Common Law System) and Taiwan’s higher education legal system (including the Constitution; interpretations of Justices of the Constitutional Court, Judicial Yuan; Administrative Procedure Act; and the University Law). The concepts and analyses obtained therefrom are intended to clarify the issues and expected to construct adequate principles and objectives for Taiwan’s higher education legal system. Chapter Three attempts to position the role of university student with receiving higher education. It starts with a brief description of the historical development of universities, and proposes five development elements for the 21st Century to respond to the current situation and prospect of Taiwan’s universities. Next, the chapter discusses the real meaning and relationship between university autonomy and academic freedom. Moreover, the two cognitions of university student development, namely the structural theory, are employed as the practical application to enhance the development of university students. This is followed by the explanation of the concept of learning held by university students. Legal concepts are adopted to discuss the profound legal meaning of university students’ freedom of learning as well as their right to education. Finally, the student-centered concept is employed to position university students’ subjectivity in campus in order for it to become an important element of democracy education in campus. Chapter Four mainly attempts to explore the theoretical foundation of the rights of higher education students. It begins with the explanation of the real context of the rights of university students, which are the subjects of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution. Next, the discussion of the theory of students’ rights ranges form the traditional “special right relationship”, its revision to the establishment of the “theory of importance”. In addition, the affirmation of “partial social theory” and “the theory of relation between in-school contracts” further strengthens the theoretic basis. Lastly, the basic rights entitled by university students are proposed in accordance with the “in-school relationship analysis” between students and universities. Chapter Five focuses on the practical analysis of higher education students’ rights. The discussions, which range from the ascertaining of students’ autonomy and their role of participating in campus affairs, freedom of speech, writing, publication as well as the protection of religiousfreedom, equality of gender, indigenous people and the physically disabled, the scope and limitation of search and protection of privacy inside campus, the protection of students’ rights as consumers, the prevention sexual harassment and assault inside campus, financial assistance and subsidies to students, students’ right to health, students’ right to political participation, are intended for readers to have better understanding of the current situations. Chapter Six discusses the real context of higher education in respect of student judicial affairs by way of the real meaning of student judicial affairs. The chapter explains both legal and practical aspects of discipline and punishment imposed on students, discipline of expulsion as well as students’ appeal system, which have significant impact on students’ rights. The legal framework and universities’ handling of student judicial affairs in practice, such as discipline, expulsion and appeal, are too important to be ignored as far as higher education students’ rights are concerned. Chapter Seven summarizes the research by proposing five major research findings which serve as the bases for further consideration of many critical issues of this research. The five conclusions drawn from induction set out an integrated explanation. Finally, four recommendations are made in view that they will become the measures for enhancing higher education students’ rights in the future.