法律史觀下戰後台灣高中的課程規範之管制

在台灣高中課程規範的訂定過程中，國家長期以來作為主導者，而能管制人民的教育內容。不過近年來，人民權利意識的甦醒，以致於台灣在教育場域開始出現另一股力量，而非國家獨霸。本文以課程規範之訂定與內容為觀測點，觀察在其中國家介入與人民參與的軌跡。本文發現，戰後台灣的國家權力在台灣高中課程規範之訂定中保有強勢地位。從戰後初期國民黨政權對甫結束日本統治的台灣，施行強化版的國語與愛國教育；1950年代為「反共抗俄」而使課程規範成為國家傳達政策之工具；1960年代至1970年代強調所謂「道統」而於課程規範中強化中國民族教育。於2000年後開放了人民參與之程序後，課程規範漸趨從獨尊一元中國文化到涵納多元的價值。然而國家行政權仍有可能凌駕人民參與程序所做出的決定，如2014年版「微調」〈高級中學課程綱要〉即是一例。不過，本文也發現人民的教育權如何從幾乎為國家非常法體制所架空，到其復甦的過程。雖然1947年憲法已經施行、規定人民之受教育權，然而隨著1948年《動員戡亂時期臨時條款》之實施以及1949年戒嚴令之頒布，使得憲法上人民的基本權利形同虛設，受教育僅表現出義務面向。國家長期壟斷課程規範的修訂程序與內容下，人民的教育相關權利幾乎無法施展。1980年代開始，民間社會開始出現批評與主張教育上部分權利的聲音，課程規範的修訂過程隨著民主化，使得人民有參與程序之機會。在2014年版「微調」〈高級中學課程綱要〉爭議發生時，人民透過修訂程序外之管道向國家請求依合法程序修訂課程標準，則解嚴後係長期對教育事務的權利爭取而致。直到2017年版〈十二年國民基本教育課程綱要〉在課程規範修訂程序中明定人民知悉與參與之權利，在審議程序中能確保課程綱要之內容顧及學生的人格發展與自我實現，而使高中學生的自我開展與實現逐步受到保障。

關鍵字

法律史；高級中等教育；課程標準；課程綱要；受教育權

並列摘要

In the process of issuing curriculum standards for high schools in Taiwan, the state has long been the controller of the education content for the people. However, in recent years, the state’s dominance counters the other force emerging in the process due to the awakening of people's awareness of rights. This essay takes both the procedure of issuing curriculum standards and their content as observation points to observe the paths by the intervention of the state and participation of the people. After the World War II, the state power in Taiwan had maintained a strong position in the issuing of high school curriculum standards. From the early post-war period, the KMT regime enforced an enhanced version of Mandarin and patriotic education in Taiwan, where the Japanese colonial rule had just ended. In the 1950s, curriculum standards were “anti-communism and anti-Soviet Union” propaganda exercises for the country. From the 1960s to the 1970s, the “Confucian orthodoxy” was emphasized and the state strengthened Chinese ethnic education in the curriculum standards. Opening people’s participation of procedures of curriculum guidelines revision, the curriculum guidelines gradually shifted from revering only Chinese culture to embracing multiple cultural values. However, the state’s administrative power may still override the decisions made by the people in the procedure, such as the “adjustment” of curriculum guidelines in 2014. However, this essay also discovers how the people’s right to education has “recovered” during the constitutional development. Although the Constitution had already implemented and stipulated the people’s right to education in 1947, the basic rights in the Constitution performed practically no function, and education only showed its obligational side due to the implementation of the Temporary Provisions against the Communist Rebellion in 1948 and the enactment of the Declaration of Martial Law in Taiwan Province in 1949. Under the long-term national monopoly on the revision procedures and content of curriculum standards, people’s educational related rights were almost impossible to exercise. Commencing in the 1980s, civil society criticized and claimed the right to education. The revision procedure of curriculum guidelines has been democratized, giving the people the opportunity to participate. When the dispute of the “adjustment” of curriculum guidelines occurred in 2014, people sued the government and requested the state to revise the curriculum guidelines in accordance with legal procedures. The movement was a result of a long-term struggle for the right to education after the lifting of the martial law. Until the Curriculum Guidelines of 12-Year Basic Education, the people's right to know and participate in the revision process of the curriculum guidelines was clearly stipulated. With deliberation procedure, the content of curriculum guidelines can be ensured to take into account the personality development and self-realization. Thus, self-development of high school students is gradually guaranteed.