從中小學教師專業自主論課程推動網絡之法律權限

Public Authority of the Curriculum Network and Professional Autonomy of Teachers

曾大千(Dah-Chian Tseng)

《教師專業研究期刊》 3期 (2012/06) Pp. 71-89

https://doi.org/10.7054/JPT.201206.0071

摘要

就我國中小學現行法制而論，《國民教育法》、《高級中學法》及《職業學校法》均授權由教育部訂定課程綱要；因此，若教育部據以訂定具有法規命令位階之課程綱要，並藉課綱明文設置相關推動網絡，於法並無不合。然而，若同時參照憲法及《教育基本法》有關教師專業自主與實現教育目的之協助地位，教育部則宜就此予以適度尊重。本文認為，中小學教師專業自主的憲法依據雖不同於大學教師，惟基於實現教育目的與因材施教之必要，國家仍應盡最大可能保留其教學上的自由幅度；而透過課程推動網絡所進行的專業監督，若涉及課程轉化之個別教學面向，亦有充分尊重教師專業自主的必要。然而，除傳統上較無公權力色彩的教學輔助作用外，國家課程推動網絡因具有公務機關難以兼具的教學專業屬性，故未來亦可考慮透過法制規範之強化，使其肩負類似中小學教師評鑑等具公權力作用的專業權限。

關鍵字

教學自由 ； 教學視導 ； 課程權限

並列摘要

The law currently implemented in the elementary and middle schools, e.g., the Compulsory Education Law, the Senior High School Act and the Vocational School Law, authorizes the Ministry of Education to set up curriculum guidelines. Therefore, based on its status of legal order, it is appropriate for the Ministry of Education to promote the curriculum network. Yet, teachers' professional autonomy and their assisting status to realize educational goals as stated in the Constitution and Educational Fundamental Act should be respected. Although the professional autonomy of the elementary and middle school teachers is not the same with that of university instructors, their freedom of teaching should be shielded in order to cater to specific nature of each individual student. In other words, if it does not involve transformation of individual instruction, professional supervision that is implemented through the curriculum network should help maintain teachers' professional autonomy. In addition to provide counseling for teaching, the national curriculum network is characterized by its professionalism in teaching. Hence, through legal order, it can be endowed with responsibilities such as teacher evaluation that requires more public authority.

並列關鍵字

The freedom of teaching ； Instructional supervision ； Curriculum jurisdiction