论高校学位授予标准的司法审查  

On the Judicial Review of the Standards for the Conferment of Degrees in Universities

作　　者：张志奇 

机构地区：[1]华东政法大学法律学院,上海

出　　处：《争议解决》2024年第2期738-747,共10页Dispute Settlement

摘　　要：本案判决二级学院自行制定的学位授予标准无效,同时借鉴了田永案、何小强案和杨永智案的逻辑,出于学术自治对科研量化指标本身不做评价。大学的原始形态是中世纪的教师行会机构,学位授予权的本质是社团自治权,但在我国学位授予权来源于法律授权。科研量化指标的实质不是学术能力评价标准,而是学术资源分配标准;凭借学术自治原则得以正当化的科研量化指标,反过来将严重削弱大学学术自治本身。高校制定的学位授予标准应当只包括学术标准,所有的学位授予要件都必须与学术能力的评价相关。根据英国比较法上的裁量权不当转让理论,学位授予细则中的科研量化指标实际上向第三方机构违法转让了学位授予的裁量权。This case ruled that the degree awarding standards set by the second-level colleges themselves were invalid, and at the same time drew on the logic of the Tian Yong case, He Xiaoqiang case and Yang Yongzhi case, and did not evaluate the quantitative indicators of scientific research itself out of academic autonomy. The original form of the university was a medieval teachers’ guild institution, and the essence of the right to confer degrees was the autonomy of the group, but in China, the right to confer degrees comes from legal authorization. The essence of quantitative indicators of scientific research is not the evaluation standard of academic ability, but the standard of academic resource allocation, and the quantitative indicators of scientific research that are justified by the principle of academic autonomy will in turn seriously weaken the academic autonomy of universities themselves. The standards for awarding degrees formulated by colleges and universities should only include academic standards, and all requirements for awarding degrees must be related to the evaluation of academic ability. According to the theory of improper transfer of discretion in British comparative law, the quantitative indicators of scientific research in the detailed rules for the awarding of degrees actually illegally transfer the discretionary power of degree awarding to a third-party institution.

关 键 词：学位授予 科研量化指标 大学自治 裁量权 

分 类 号：G64[文化科学—高等教育学]