國立大學實施行政程序法之執行評估

The Evacuation for Implementation of Administrative Procedure Law in National University

陳詩凡(SHIN FAN CHEN)

指導教授 ： 張四明

國立臺北大學/公共事務學院/公共行政暨政策學系/碩士(2008年)

摘要

我國行政程序法施行迄今，已逾7年。該法規的推動，被視為是法學領域及行政領域的共同盛事，也為我國行政法制的建設，樹立了重要的里程碑。

由於現代國立大學兼具高等教育機關與一般行政機關的責任及角色，本研究乃以政策評估的角度，針對行政程序法在國立大學之推動概況，進行研究。又因國立大學業務所涉廣泛，而有關權益事項，則最受師生所關注。故本研究遂以教師升等及學生退學兩項業務，作為評估的主要對象。

本研究方法採文獻分析、深度訪談法。故除回顧相關學說理論，司法案例外，也就行政程序法的推動概況，有所論述。

又為利研究之進行，本研究以「法規認知與傳遞」、「正當程序之踐行」、「立法目的達成度」、「人員認同與回應」四者為評估指標。藉由國立大學顧客的看法，一方面瞭解大學師生對行政程序法的認知和評價，一方面則探究該法在國立大學「如何執行」，以及「執行得如何」。

本研究經依據前述評估指標擬訂關切議題，並分別洽十三位國立大學師生深度訪談，嗣綜合受訪者的看法，獲致如下發現：
一、政策傳遞的效果，取決於適當的宣導途徑。
二、正當程序的理念，在國立大學已獲踐行。
三、「依法行政」、「促進參與」雖已奉行，保障權益猶未完備。
四、教師升等爭議之關鍵，多數在於教評會的運作。
五、退學爭議之重點，多數出於成績評定未臻公平。
六、依法行政已被視為基本要求，服務態度更受顧客關注
七、平衡民主與效率的關鍵，在於兼顧公共參與及專業考量
八、強化監督機制，可以彌補法律之不足。

針對前述研究發現，本研究謹研擬政策建議如下，並亦詳述其具體作法，期能對學校行政的提升，有所助益：
一、資訊化的傳遞，亦應兼顧品質與效率。
二、面對教師升等的疑慮，評審機制應再修正。
三、面對學生退學之不平，學校應建立合理規範。
四、面對高等教育的競爭，學校應積極提升行政效能。
五、因應學校的特殊需求，宜由教育部成立法規諮詢小組。

關鍵字

行政程序法；政策評估；大學行政；大學顧客

並列摘要

It has been 7 years since the enforcement of administrative procedure law in our country. The promotion of said law was considered a great event to both law and administration fields, which also established an important milestone for our administrative system.

Since modern national universities undertake the duties and roles of both higher education and general administration institutions, this study therefore proceeded the research aiming at the implementation of administrative law in national universities from policy evaluation perspective. Moreover, there are extensive scopes of business involved in national universities, among which, teachers and students concern the rights and interests matters most. Therefore, this study used teacher promotion and expels of students such two businesses as the main subject of evaluation.

This study adopts literature analysis and in-depth interview methods. In addition to review of related theories and juridical cases, there is also summary for implementation of administrative procedure law.

In order to facilitate the process, this study used “regulations perception and promulgation”, “implementation of justice procedure”, “identification and response of staff” such four items as evaluation indicators. Through the view of national universities to understand the perception and evaluation of teacher and students in universities toward administrative procedure law, meanwhile exploring national universities “how to implement” and “what’s the result of implementation”.

There are following findings upon comprehensive view of participants after in-depth interviews with 13 teachers and students in national universities separately in respect of issues in question based on preceding evaluation indicators:
1.The effect of policy promulgation relies upon proper way of promotion.
2.National universities have fulfilled the concept of just procedures.
3.Although “administrations in accordance with laws” and “encouragement of participation” are followed, the protection of rights is still insufficient.
4.The key of disputes on teacher promotion is mostly at the operation of Teachers’ Evaluation Committee.
5.Most expel arguments are aiming at the unfairness of grade determination.
6.Administration in accordance with laws is considered a basic requirement, while the service attitude is more important issue to customers.
7.The key point of balance between democracy and efficiency is to consider both public participation and expertise.
8.Reinforcement of supervision may remedy the insufficiency of laws.

Aiming at the finding aforesaid, this study proposes recommendations and its practical ways of doing in details as follows to the expectation of enhancing school administration:
1.The information delivery shall consider both quality and efficiency.
2.In respect of doubt of teacher promotion, the evaluation system shall be modified.
3.Regarding the injustice of expel of students, schools shall establish reasonable standards.
4.Facing to the competition of higher education, schools shall actively enhance administrative efficiency.
5.Ministry of Education shall form regulations consulting team to correspond with special requirements of schools.

並列關鍵字

administrative procedure law； policy evaluation；university administration； university customers

參考文獻

李建良（1999），＜公務人員對行政程序法應有的認識與作法＞，《公務員月刊》，第41期，頁2-4。

林明鏘（2000），＜論行政程序法中「對公務員所為人事行政行為」之意義＞，《國立臺灣大學法學論叢》，第29卷第4期，頁1-14。

許春鎮（2006），＜大學自治與學生法律地位＞，《台灣海洋法學報》，第6卷第1期，頁165-208。

陳艷秋（2002），＜行政程序法對學校行政影響與問題探討＞，《學校行政雙月刊》，第22期，頁22-30。

黃耀南（2003），＜大學自治、退學處分與法律保留原則、比例原則之探討- --最高行政法院九十一年判字第三四四號、四六七號判決為中心並兼評司法院大法官會議釋字第五六三號解釋＞，《社會科教育研究》，第8期，頁195-222。