透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.145.59.187
  • 學位論文

中小學不適任教師之處理及救濟制度── 以憲法正當程序原則為中心

The Institution of the Treatment and Recovery for incompetent Teachers of the Elementary and High Schools’Teachers -- Focus on the Principle of the Constitutional Due Process of Law.

指導教授 : 廖元豪 博士
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


本研究首先從我國現行法律規範中,檢討「不適任教師」處理及救濟問題,以憲法正當程序原則作為基準,希望對於現行規範有所建議。從現實面觀之,在現行規範架構下,雖然政府機關已逐漸建立相關機制,推動不適任教師處理流程法制化,但檢討目前所適用的法律規範,尚未健全完整,不明確的規範恐有剝奪教師本身憲法上工作權的可能性,因此更不容草率的實體及程序規定恣意行使。 在檢討中小學不適任教師之處理及救濟制度時,討論方向如下:第一章緒論;第二章不適任教師之概念及其爭議;第三章不適任教師處理之救濟程序;第四章不適任教師處理及救濟中之正當法律程序的理論依據;第五章美國不適任教師處理及救濟制度;第六章我國的不適任教師處理及救濟制度改進之建議。 研究者研究此問題之主要核心著眼於「不適任教師法律定義不明確」及「不適任教師處理及救濟程序在規範上未臻健全」因而與憲法正當程序原則相牴觸的相關探討,期從人權保障及程序正義上著墨,並參考美國的處理方式與程序,希望提供些許思惟觀點,作為今後處理相關問題之參考。 本研究在檢討目前的不適任教師處理相關問題後,所給予的建議為:(1)就「懲處」要件必須明確(2)「懲處」規範及其執行應該符合正當法律程序(3)應設立關於「懲處」處分的專門機關(4)教師申訴法令必須加以修訂使其完備(5)檢討目前申訴制度的適用方式。

並列摘要


This study is to examine the appealing procedure, based on the constitutional due process of law, for teachers who are deemed incompetent. Although the procedural and appealing mechanism for incompetent teachers has gradually been set up, the appealing procedure for incompetent teachers has not yet been stated clearly in the current laws and regulations. As a result, the incompetent teachers’ constitutional rights may not be protected. The structure of this study is as follows: Chapter 1, Introduction; Chapter 2, Definition of incompetent teacher and issues; Chapter 3, The appealing procedure for incompetent teachers; Chapter 4, Due process of law for incompetent teachers who wish to make an appeal; Chapter 5, The US practice; Chapter 6 Recommendations. This study focus on the possible breach of “due process of law” which is caused by the unclear legal definition of “incompetent teacher” as well as the vague legislation procedural wise and on appealing. This study stresses on human right protections and procedural justice. It also refers to the US practice which provides some different view points in dealing with the similar issues. On completion of reviewing the issues regarding incompetent teacher, this study has made the following recommendations: (1) Clear legislation on the elements of punishment, (2) “Due process of law” to be applied on the legislation and its enforcement (3) To establish an organization in charge of such punishment (4) Review the current legislation on appealing (5) Review the current procedure on appealing.

參考文獻


焦興鎧(2007),〈我國校園性騷擾防治機制之建構──性別平等教育法相關條文之剖析〉,《臺北大學法學論叢》,第62期,6月,頁15以下。
王奕晟(2010),〈教師性侵害作為當然解聘事由之立法評析〉,《國民教育月刊》,第51卷第2期,12月,頁71-82。
劉鑫楨(2005),《論裁量處分與不確定法律概念》,臺北:五南, 11月增訂2版第一刷,頁89。
林三欽(2007),〈信賴保護原則與法令不溯及既往〉,《政大法學評論》,第100期,12月,頁91以下。
吳志光教授2009年11月24日於人本教育基金會舉辯座談會之發言,網址:http://mag.udn.com/mag/campus/storypage.jsp?f_MAIN_ID=13&f_SUB_ID=104&f_ART_ID=223275 線上檢索日期:2010/12/28。

被引用紀錄


謝憲愷(2017)。教師解聘、停聘、不續聘事由之研究-以性侵害、性騷擾、性霸凌為中心〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU201700645
王靖夫(2016)。解聘、停聘、不續聘大學教師制度之研究─以教師法第14條第1項第14款為中心〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU201610419
李建和(2015)。公立中學教師解聘與不續聘法律爭議之研究〔碩士論文,國立中正大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0033-2110201614041041

延伸閱讀