高校查处学术不端行为的双重困境与制度选择  

On Investigation of Academic Misconducts at a University: Its Dual Predicaments and Right System to Choose

作　　者：谢小瑶[1] 叶继元[2] 

机构地区：[1]宁波大学法学院,浙江宁波315211 [2]南京大学信息管理学院,南京210023

出　　处：《南京大学学报（哲学．人文科学．社会科学）》2016年第4期70-83,159,共14页Journal of Nanjing University(Philosophy,Humanities and Social Sciences)

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学研究专项任务项目"科研诚信和学风建设"重大课题(11JDXF001);浙江省"之江青年社科学者行动计划";浙江省高校人文社会科学重点研究基地"法学"及宁波大学人文社会科学后期资助项目(XH1X1202)

摘　　要：因为对学术不端行为存在认知上的偏差,人们常将学术失范、科研伦理失范、学术腐败等概念混为一谈。高校在查处学术不端行为过程中,由于缺乏正当程序以及统一的学术不端行为判定标准,往往陷入外在和内在的双重困境:前者呈现出学术不端行为查处的调查权、判断权及行政权之间的"叠权式权力结构";后者则体现为判定标准上的多重模式。这既不利于有效规范学术不端行为查处权力,亦无法维护当事人合法权益。欲化解这些难题,应以正当程序的规范性要求改造"叠权式权力结构",防控查处中可能滋生的恣意;通过学术共同体制定判定标准,导引人们对学术不端行为的认知。Due to the disagreement in people's knowledge of what is an academic misconduct,there is quite a confusion in defining academic misconduct, academic ethic anomie and academic corruption. In investigating and punishing these misconducts,a university may find itself in both the external and internal predicaments,for lack of a right system and a commonly accepted criterion for making a conviction of guilt in dealing with academic scandals. While there is an authoritative structure overlapped with authorities for investigation,conviction and administration in the procedure,there are existing contradicting criteria for conviction making. The predicaments,on the one hand,are not conducive to an effective control of the power exercised in investigating academic misconducts; On the other hand,they may not help to protect the legitimate interests of the party involved.To find a way out,we must set up what can replace the 'overlapping power structure'with normative requirements of a due system,which will keep away potential arbitrariness in investigation. The criteria accepted and enacted by academic community will help academic community to have a keen awareness of academic misbehaviours.

关 键 词：学术不端 高校 叠权式权力结构 正当程序 学术共同体 

分 类 号：G644[文化科学—高等教育学]