我國中央與地方教育權限劃分之研究—以國民教育為例

A Study on the Separation of Powers between Central and Local Governments in Taiwan

林威志(Lin Wei Chih)

指導教授 ： 謝文全

國立臺灣師範大學/教育學院/教育學系/博士(2006年)

摘要

我國中央與地方教育權限劃分之研究——以國民教育為例
摘 要
本研究之主要目的在於探討我國中央與地方國民教育權限劃分之問題，並透過文獻分析與調查研究，瞭解中央與地方在國民教育權限劃分之現況與問題，最後根據研究結論提出改進建議。
為達成上述目的，本研究採文獻分析及調查研究二種方法：首先，透過文獻分析，探討教育權限劃分功能、中央與地方之角色與關係、權限劃分的類型與方式、權限劃分之考量因素與原則、自治監督與權限衝突處理、主要國家（美、德、法、英、日）國民教育權限劃分情形及我國國民教育權限之現況與問題；其次，依據文獻探討之結果，編製「中央與地方國民教育權限劃分調查問卷」，進行調查研究，藉以瞭解教育權限劃分之重要功能與實際達成程度、中央與地方在國民教育上應扮演之角色及彼此間之理想與實際關係、國民教育之應然與實際屬性與權限劃分方式、國民教育權限劃分考量因素與原則、自治監督與權限劃分爭議情形、國教經費負擔權責、國教立法權限歸屬及其他相關意見，最後，根據研究結論，提出具體建議。
本研究之調查研究對象計有四類：一為中央與地方教育行政機關人員；二為教育團體成員（包括全國或地區家長會、教師會理監事）；三為國民中小學校長；四為專家學者（大學教授、副教授或助理教授）。共發出問卷1,048份，實得有效問卷636份，問卷資料處理採SPSS for Windows 12.0統計套裝軟體進行統計分析。
綜合文獻分析與調查研究發現，獲致以下結論：
一、就現況而言，國民教育性質並單純地方自治事項，其辦理經費係由中央與地方共同負擔，而國教法規大部分係以中央規範為主，地方立法空間有限，且因憲政設計未盡清晰致中央與地方之角色與關係模糊，衍生權限劃分存有爭議等7項問題。
二、中央與地方教育權限劃分之重要功能有釐清財政行政責任等6項，其中以確立分工合作體制等3項，最為重要；惟目前各項功能之達成程度均偏低，其中，又以發揮教育行政效率等3項落差程度較大。
三、中央及地方政府均應扮演「研究者」等10項重要角色。其中，中央政府應優先扮演「制度規劃者」等4項角色；地方政府亦應優先扮演「制度規劃者」等2項角色。
四、理想上，中央與地方之國教權限劃分型態應以「均權制」、「地方分權制」為主，中央集權制為輔，至於相互關係則應兼重「層級隸屬」及「獨立對等」，其中層級隸屬關係之強度略高於獨立對等；但實際上，目前大致屬於「中央集權制」，「均權制」或「地方分權制」程度偏低，且「層級隸屬」關係比理想上強，而「獨立對等」關係較弱，且落差較大。
五、理想上，國民教育屬性應該是「自治事項」及「共辦事項」，實際上，亦大致符合；但其性質，目前像是「中央事項」之程度，比應然程度高，而在「自治事項」的落差程度最大。
六、國民教育權限劃分方式，可於現行之教育基本法等3種法律中詳細明定，亦可以另外訂定「權限劃分法」；其中，又以國民教育法規定之同意程度最高。
七、劃分國教權限時，應考量因素包括學生權益保障等10項，其中以學生權益保障等4項因素，最為重要。
八、劃分國教權限時，應秉持之原則包括均權等10項原則，其中以「均權原則」等2項，最為重要，目前10項原則雖已大致做到，但在相輔相成原則等3項上落差較大；另權限劃分原則應與時俱進、彈性調整，務使劃分結果能達成「地方有權有能，中央亦有責有權」之雙贏局面。
九、目前國民教育權限劃分，存有嚴重爭議；而造成爭議之原因，包括「法令規定不明」等8項，其中又以政治因素考量等3項影響程度較大，而教育基本法所規定之中央教育權限內涵均屬明確。
十、自治監督應遵守「合法性」等6項重要原則，其中又以「教育本質原則」等3項最為重要；各項原則雖大致已做到，但以教育本質原則等3項落差較大。
十一、國民教育經費之負擔權責，因經費支出之種類與金額大小而異。原則上經費支出愈大之人事費及資本門經費，以中央負擔為原則；至於經費支出較小之經常門經費，則以地方負擔為原則。
十二、國教立法權限歸屬，宜以地方訂定為原則，但除「學生服裝儀容規定」1項可由地方全權訂定、「教師待遇標準」由中央訂定外，其餘「家長會設置標準」等43項於地方訂定後，均應報中央「備查」或「核定」；必要時，其中，教師申訴等26項，得由中央訂定。
十三、不同背景填答者對於教育權限劃分功能、中央與地方角色與關係、國教屬性與劃分方式、國教權限劃分考量因素與原則、自治監督與權限爭議、國民教育經費負擔權責等6個層面問題，共識程度較高；但在國教立法權限歸屬問題上，仍存有較多意見差異。

研究者根據文獻探討及調查研究結果以及個人之看法，提出以下建議：
一、中央政府應研議修憲，明定中央與地方在國民教育之角色與關係。
二、中央政府應研議修法或另定新法，確立國民教育屬性與經費負擔權責。
三、中央政府應優先扮演補助者、資源分配者之角色，以承擔部分國教財政責任，均衡各地區發展。
四、中央政府應優先扮演研究者、制度規劃者之角色，創設或落實「共治事項」（共管事項、共辦事項）之法律概念，俾中央得以有充分權限執行國教政策。
五、中央政府應依據均權制憲政精神，促進中央與地方之對等合作關係。
六、中央政府可以單一專業法律或多種法律中，詳細訂定中央與地方之國教權限，其中單一專業法律中，又以國民教育法為最優先考量。
七、中央政府應致力於促進教育行政民主化，避免過度干預地方教育事務。　
八、中央政府應落實住民自治理念，促使地方本其權限與需要，建立法制規範及發展多元教育特色。
九、中央政府應依國民教育立法權限之性質而採取不同的歸屬方式，但原則上各權限均得優先歸屬地方，並受中央之監督。
十、中央政府應加強與地方之溝通協調，以減少爭權卸責並發揮教育行政效率。
十一、地方政府應正確認知其角色地位，並與中央共同合作規劃辦理國民教育。
十二、地方政府應依據法令規定，優先扮演地方國民教育「制度規劃者」角色。
十三、地方政府應依據法令規定，建立地方教育法制規範。
十四、地方政府應回歸教育本質思考，確實依法行政，以減少權限爭議。
十五、教育團體應主動關心及參與中央與地方所辦理國教權責劃分相關會議。
十六、教育團體應慎思中央集權制之權限劃分型態，餘留地方自主決定之空間。
十七、各級教育行政機關人員、教育團體成員、校長，應有以下觀念：
（一）國教立法權限歸屬方式，應與時俱進、權變調整，追求「較好的」而非「最佳的」權限歸屬原則。
（二）國教立法權限歸屬方式，應與國教經費負擔權責相符，達成「地方有權有能，中央亦有責有權」之雙贏局面。

關鍵詞：權限、權限劃分、國民教育、權責、府際關係

關鍵字

權限 ； 權限劃分 ； 國民教育 ； 權責 ； 府際關係

並列摘要

The objective of this study is to investigate the issues of power separation between central and local governments with regard to the compulsory education in Taiwan. Through literature analysis and survey research, the current status and difficulties regarding compulsory education power separation between central and local governments were revealed. Finally, suggestions for improvement were proposed based on the study results.

In order to fulfill the above-mentioned objectives, literature analysis and survey research were adopted in this study. Through literature analysis, the functionality of education power separation, the relationship between central and local governments, the power separation type and method, the power separation factors and principle, the autonomous supervision and handling upon power conflict, the status of compulsory education power separation in major countries (USA, Germany, France, England, Japan), and the current status and difficulties regarding compulsory education power separation in Taiwan were first investigated. Based on the literature analysis results, the “Questionnaire regarding Compulsory Education Power Separation between Central and Local Governments” was then designed to carry out the survey research. The purpose of conducting survey research is to understand the importance and the actual progress of education power separation, the roles of played by the central and the local governments in the aspect of compulsory education as well as the ideal and actual relationship between central and local governments, the attributes and power separation method of compulsory education, the factors and principle of compulsory education power separation, the autonomous supervision and power separation conflict, the responsibility of compulsory education budget, the jurisdiction of legislative competence for compulsory education, and other related suggestions. Finally, specific recommendations were proposed based on the study results.

The research subjects in this study can be classified into 4 categories: (1) the staffs of central and local administrative organizations, (2) the members of educational groups (including national or district parents associations, and directors and supervisors of teachers’ associations), (3) the principals of elementary and junior high schools, and (4) the experts or scholars (including university professors, associate professors, or assistant professors). A total of 1,048 questionnaires were sent out and 636 effective questionnaires were returned. The data of questionnaires returned were analyzed by 12.0 SPSS statistical software for Windows.

By summarizing the results from literature analysis and survey research, the following conclusions were drawn.

1. In terms of current situation, the nature of compulsory education is not purely local autonomous matters. The operation budgets are supported by both central and local governments. The rules and regulations of compulsory education are mainly based on central criteria; as the result, chances for the involvement of local legislation are limited. Furthermore, due to the obscurity of the constitution design as well as the roles played by the central and the local government, 7 problems such as conflicts in power separation were derived.

2. There are 6 major functionalities for the separation of education powers between central and local governments including clarification of financial administrative responsibilities. Among these functionalities, 3 items regarding the confirmation of work-division system are the most important. Nevertheless, the degree of accomplishment for each functionality up to now is still low, especially for those 3 items in connection with realizing the efficiency of educational administration.

3. Central and local governments should play the roles of “researchers” (comprising 10 important roles). For instance, the central government should consider playing the roles of “system planners” (including 4 roles) first. Similarly, the local government should also consider playing the roles of “system planners” (including 2 roles).

4. Ideally, the type of power separation for compulsory education between central and local governments should be based primarily on the system of “equalization” and “decentralization”, and complemented by the system centralization. The relationships between central and local governments should be regarded as "hierarchy subordination” and “independent equilibrium”, in which the weighing of hierarchical relationship is slightly greater than that of the independent equilibrium. In fact, the extent of power separation based on “centralization”, “equalization”, and "decentralization” is still low. Moreover, the “hierarchical relationship” is much stronger than expected, whereas the relationship of “independent equilibrium" is much weaker and deviated from expectation.

5. Ideally, compulsory education should belong to “autonomous matters” and “joint matters”. In fact, it is in agreement with the expectation. Nevertheless, in terms of the characteristics, the weighing of “central matters” is greater than that of intrinsic matters and “autonomous matters” is significantly deviated from expectation.

6. The method of power separation for compulsory education is defined in detail by the current Fundamental Law of Education or can be defined by the additionally established “Power Separation Law”. Among these Laws, the method is most consistent with the Compulsory Education Law.

7. In the separation of powers for compulsory education, the factors such as insuring students’ benefits should be considered (including 10 items). 4 items in relation with the protection of students’ benefits are the most important.

8. In the separation of powers for compulsory education, principles such as equalization (including 10 principles) must be held. Among these principles, 2 items based on “equalization” are most important. In general, all 10 principles have been adopted. Nevertheless, 3 principles based on complementary are significantly deviated from expectation. Furthermore, the principles should be flexibly adjusted with time, so that the win-win situation of “having power and capability locally, having responsibility and power centrally” can be achieved.

9. Serious conflicts exist in the separation of powers for compulsory education. The reasons causing these conflicts include 8 items in connection with “ambiguous rules and regulations”. Among which 3 items in relation with political reasons are most influential. The connotations of central educational competence governed by the Fundamental Law of Education are clearly stated.

10. Autonomous supervision should comply with the principles of “legitimacy” (including 6 important principles). Among these principles, 3 items based on “intrinsic education” are the most important. In general, all principles have been adopted. Nevertheless, 3 principles based on “intrinsic education” are significantly deviated from expectation.

11. The responsibility of compulsory education budgets depends on the budget type and budget amount. Basically, large spending, such as personnel expenditures and capital account budgets are responsible by the central government, whereas small spending, such as current account budgets are responsible by the local government.

12. The jurisdiction of compulsory education legislative competence is own by the local government. Except “the rules and regulation governing students' uniform and appearance” which is determined entirely by the local government, or the “standard wage for teachers” which is determined by the central government, the rest of the items (43 in total) in “standards set up by parents’ association” are established by the local governments and should be reported to the central government for approval. If necessary, 26 items in relation with teacher appeal are established by the central government.

13. All the subjects of different backgrounds have reached high consensus in 6 areas such as the functionality of education power separation, the relationship between central and local governments, the compulsory education attributes and separation method, the factors and principles considered for compulsory education power separation, the autonomous supervision and competence conflict, and the responsibility of compulsory education budgets. However, different opinions have been raised on the issue of compulsory education legislative competence jurisdiction.

Based on the results of literature review and survey research, as well as personal opinion, the following suggestions have been proposed by the author.

1. Central government should consider performing constitutional amendment to state clearly the roles of/the relationship between central and local governments.

2. Central government should consider performing law amendment/establishment to confirm compulsory education attributes and budget responsibility.

3. Central government should voluntarily play the role of financial sponsor and resource distributor to undertake part of the financial responsibility of compulsory education and balance regional development.

4. Central government should voluntarily play the role of researcher and system planner to create or carry out the legal concept of “joint matters” (joint management maters, joint performing matters). This way, the central government will have more competence to perform compulsory education policies.

5. Central government should follow the equalization system in the spirit of constitutionalism to promote reciprocal collaboration between central and local governments.

6. Central government can establish in detail the local and central compulsory education competence based on single or multiple laws. In the case of single law, compulsory education law is most preferred.

7. Central government should endeavor to promote the democratization of educational administration in order to avoid over-intervening in local educational matters.

8. Central government should realize the idea of autonomy so that local government can set its own rules and regulations depending on the competence and needs to develop more diversified education.

9. Central government should adopt different jurisdictional method depending on the legislative competence of compulsory education. However, in principle, competence under the jurisdiction of the local government is preferred, and should be supervised by the central government.

10. Central government should improve the communication between local government to prevent power or responsibility battling and bring educational administration into full play.

11. Local government should acknowledge its own position and collaborate with central government in carrying out the compulsory education.

12. Local government should voluntarily play the role of "system planner” for local compulsory education according to the laws and regulations.

13. Local government should establish local educational criteria according to the laws and regulations.

14. Local government should think about education intrinsically and administrate according to laws to reduce competence conflict.

15. Educational groups should actively involve in the power-separation-related meetings held by the central and local governments.

16. Educational groups should think carefully about the type of power separation in centralization, and leave rooms for self-determination.

17. All the educational administrative staffs, educational group members, and principals should keep in mind the following philosophies.

(1) The jurisdictional method of legislative competence for compulsory education should be flexibly adjusted with time and based on the principle of pursuing for the “better" but not the “best”.

(2) The jurisdictional method of legislative competence for compulsory education should be selected in accordance with the budget responsibility, so that the win-win situation of “having power and capability locally, having responsibility and power centrally” can be achieved.

Keywords: Competence, Separation of Power, delegation of power,Compulsory Education, authority and responsibility,intergovernmental relations,IGR

並列關鍵字

competence ； separation of power ； compulsory education ； authority and responsibility ； intergovernmental relations

參考文獻

王家通（2004）。十年教改爭議癥結之探討。國立高雄師範大學教育學系教育學刊，22，1-17。

台灣中華書局編輯部（1969）。辭海（上冊）（十九版）。台北市：台灣中華書局。

吳清山（1999）。教育基本法的基本精神與重要內涵。學校行政雙月刊，28，28-41。

李建良（2004）。中央與地方的權限劃分與財政負擔——全民健保費分擔問題暨

李惠宗、張壯熙（1997）。中央與地方權限劃分之研究。內政部委託專案研究報