English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 74010/74010 (100%)
Visitors : 24005876      Online Users : 292
RC Version 7.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version

    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://ir.lib.ncu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/68382

    Title: 大學教師升等權利救濟途徑選擇之研究─以教育部授權自行審查學校為核心
    Authors: 楊顯龍;Yang,Hsien-Lung
    Contributors: 法律與政府研究所
    Keywords: 教師升等;申訴;再申訴;訴願;行政訴訟;授權自審;救濟途徑;faculty promotion;appeal;re-appeal;administrative appeal;administrative litigation;delegate to conduct the evaluation process fully;roadmap for remedy
    Date: 2015-07-30
    Issue Date: 2015-09-23 11:30:57 (UTC+8)
    Publisher: 國立中央大學
    Abstract: 目前專科以上學校教師資格可分為四個等級,分別為講師、助理教
    提申訴,再視情況,選擇再申訴或訴願途徑。;There are four ranks for the faculty within Taiwan higher education institutions: Lecturer, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Full Professor. Promotion from one to the next involves a formal evaluation process of the applicant′s body of work. Disputes related to the evaluation process are not rare. Nonetheless the Ministry of Education announced that all higher education institutions will be fully delegated to conduct the evaluation process from September 2016 onwards. Pursuant to article 33 of Teachers’ Act, if the applicant believes having been wronged by the evaluation process, he has the options to lodge an appeal, a re-appeal, an administrative appeal or an administrative litigation. Based on the cases related to the evaluation process, the main purposes of this research are to analyze advantages and disadvantages of different route of remedies, make inferences from the commission’s and the court’s reasoning and recommend a roadmap for the remedies.

    A chart of summary of arguments presented by the applicants and the reasoning of the Teachers′ Appeal Review Committee, the Administrative Appeal Review Committee and the administrative court is offered in the concluding chapter. According to this research, the author recommends the following roadmap for remedy. First, if the applicant chooses to wait for the reshuffle of a more friendly Teachers’ Review Committee or has financial concern, he might tread the longest remedial route:first going through an appeal, a re-appeal, an administrative appeal, and then resorting to an administrative litigation. Second, if the applicant wants to end the controversy as soon as possible, he could lodge an administrative appeal and then commence an administrative litigation. Finally, if the prospect of different routes is uncertain, he could choose to lodge an appeal, and then file a re-appeal or an administrative appeal depending on the surrounding circumstances.
    Appears in Collections:[法律與政府研究所] 博碩士論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat

    All items in NCUIR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

    社群 sharing

    ::: Copyright National Central University. | 國立中央大學圖書館版權所有 | 收藏本站 | 設為首頁 | 最佳瀏覽畫面: 1024*768 | 建站日期:8-24-2009 :::
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback  - 隱私權政策聲明