教師專業審查會決議定性與救濟之研究;Ａ Study on Characterization and Remedy of the Decision from Teacher Evaluation Committee

NCUIR > College of Hakka Studies > Graduate Institute of Law and Government > Electronic Thesis & Dissertation > Item 987654321/92457

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://ir.lib.ncu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/92457

Title:	教師專業審查會決議定性與救濟之研究;Ａ Study on Characterization and Remedy of the Decision from Teacher Evaluation Committee
Authors:	邱沿仁;Yen-Jen, Chiu
Contributors:	法律與政府研究所
Keywords:	教師專業審查會;專審會;教師權利;判斷餘地
Date:	2023-02-01
Issue Date:	2024-09-19 15:52:53 (UTC+8)
Publisher:	國立中央大學
Abstract:	為保障教師工作權益、提升教師專業地位與維護學生的學習權，我國特定教師法明定各項教師的權利義務。不僅藉此維持教育品質，也提供了教師工作權的保護。然而隨著越來越多對於不適任教師的報導以及後續怠慢或消極的問題處理程序，讓各界開始關注到不適任教師的處理機制需要有所調整。為解決疑慮，我國遂於108年進行教師法的修正，以彌補原先不適任教師汰除程序的不足，其中之一便是妥善並完備有關教師專業審查會（簡稱專審會）在規範上的位階以及運作的模式，以利專審會得以利用其較具專業性的編制專案處理個別不適任教師的問題。在歷經修法過後，專審會的職權獲得相當程度的擴張，使其在不適任教師個案的判斷上更具權源與裁量空間。本文認為，在涉及剝奪教師工作的案件中，法院仍應檢視學校（或專審會）做成判斷的過程與做成決定的原因是否充沛與是否存在瑕疵，以完整保障教師的工作權，並防止裁量恣意的情形。而關於專審會審議主管機關所提交之案件所做成的決議（教師法第26條第2項後段），因其直接涉及影響教師身份的轉變，本文認為，應許當事人得針對此決議進行救濟，較為妥適。惟此決議在定性上目前仍有疑義。本文以條文規範之文義進行解析，認定該決議之性質有行政處分、程序行為與職務命令三種可能。承上，基於上開可能之定性，且為使當事人權益得以即時獲得救濟，教師在依循教師法第26條第2項後段之程序而被解聘、停聘、不續聘之教師得單獨對此專審會決議提起撤銷訴訟，方為妥適。 ;For the purpose of protecting and outlining the working rights, interests, and obligations of teachers, enhancing their professional status, and safeguarding students′ right to study, the Teachers Law is hereby formulated. This Law not only maintains the quality of education, but also protects teachers′ right to work. However, with increasing reports of inappropriate behavior of teachers and subsequent negligence and passivity with regards to handling complaints, amendments to how complaints of inappropriate behavior of teachers are treated is required. To remove ambiguity or doubt, the Teachers Law was amended in 2019 to compensate for the deficiency of the original procedures in eliminating inappropriate behavior of teachers. One such amendment is to improve the rank of the Teacher Evaluation Committee (TEC) in terms of its scope and mode of operation so that the TEC makes use of its professional status to properly handle problems of inappropriate behavior of teachers. After the revision of the Law, the functions and powers of the TEC have been expanded to a considerable extent, giving it more power and discretion when determining inappropriate behavior of teachers. This paper argues that in cases where the teacher is deprived of work, the court should still examine whether the school′s (or TEC′s) process of making a determination and the reasons for decisions are sufficient to fully protect teachers′ right to work and prevent arbitrary situations. As for decisions made by the TEC when considering cases submitted by the competent authorities (Teachers Law, Art. 26, item 2, last paragraph), since they directly involve changes affecting the status of teachers, it is considered appropriate to grant relief to the parties concerned against such decisions. However, the qualitative nature of this decision is still questionable. Based on the analysis of the meaning of the provisions, this paper affirms that the nature of the decision has three possibilities: administrative sanction, procedural act, and duty order. Accordingly, on the basis of the above possibilities, and to obtain immediate relief for the rights and interests of the parties concerned, it shall be appropriate for a teacher who has been dismissed, suspended, or whose contract has not been renewed in accordance with the procedures set out in the last paragraph of item 2 of Article 26 of the Teachers Law to bring an action for rescission of the decision of the TEC.
Appears in Collections:	[Graduate Institute of Law and Government] Electronic Thesis & Dissertation

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
index.html		0Kb	HTML	2	View/Open

社群 sharing

Loading...