大学人事自治范式演变的实践、争议与因应——基于大陆法系国家的经验考察  

Practice, Controversy, and Response to the Evolution of University Personnel Autonomy Paradigm: Evidence from Continental Law Countries

作　　者：姚荣 YAO Rong(Institute of Higher Education,East China Normal University,Shanghai 200062,China)

机构地区：[1]华东师范大学高等教育研究所,上海200062

出　　处：《苏州大学学报（教育科学版）》2020年第2期116-128,共13页Journal of Soochow University(Educational Science Edition)

基　　金：国家社会科学基金教育学青年课题“高等教育质量保障的法律规制研究”(项目编号:CIA180271)的阶段性研究成果。

摘　　要：大学人事自治权由谁行使、如何行使,构成大陆法系国家公法学界讨论大学人事自治议题的焦点。传统上,大学人事自治被视为大学自治的基本类型,"教授组群"在其中占据主导地位。受新公共管理运动的影响,大学人事自治公法规制的范式开始从"自治"向"治理"转变。通过管理自治机制的强化与竞争机制的引入,旨在打破大学人事法制的僵化与低效困局。然而,大学人事法制的一系列变革举措,不可避免地对教师的职业安全、薪资待遇乃至学术自由构成威胁,进而受到公法学界与实务界的责难与质疑。当前,通过司法审查的"显性制衡"与专业惯例的"隐性约束",国家监督、大学人事自治与教师权利保障之间的关系,正在从"失衡"走向"再平衡"。Who is exercising and how to exercise the personnel autonomy of the university constitutes the focus of the discussion of university personnel autonomy among public law academics in continental law countries.Traditionally, university personnel autonomy is regarded as the basic type of university autonomy, where the "professional group" dominates. Affected by the new public management movement, the public legal regulation paradigm of university personnel autonomy began to change from "autonomy" to "governance." Efforts in strengthening the management autonomy mechanism and introducing the competition mechanism aim to reduce rigidity and low efficiency in the university personnel legal system. However, a series of reforms inevitably pose a threat to teachers ’ professional safety, salary, and even academic freedom, and are thus criticized and questioned by public law academics and practitioners. The current "explicit checks and balances" measure of judicial review and the "recessive restraint" of professional practice is leading the relationship between state supervision, university personnel autonomy, and teacher rights protection to move from "balance lost" to "balance regained."

关 键 词：大学人事自治 大学人事法制 治理 公法规制 教师权利 

分 类 号：G647[文化科学—高等教育学]