| Summary: | 碩士 === 南台科技大學 === 財經法律研究所 === 100 === Traditionally, the relationship between teachers and students were defined as “special relationship” in point of law in Taiwan’s society. In June 23 1995, Grand Justices interpretation No. 382 was released which was an amendment to this relationship and it guided the students to legal manners when their interests of education were aggrieved. Furthermore, an amendment of Education Basic Law was passed by Legislative Yuan in December 2006 which is a basis of “zero corporal-punishment” on campus. However, there is no clear definition between managing, disciplining students and corporal punishment. In this context, the teachers are facing a dilemma. On the one hand, teachers might violate the law when applying punishment to misbehaviors; on the other hand, teachers might discipline the class in a passive way which would violate the interests of well-behaved students. The tense between teachers and students are consequently increased. The purpose of the study is to define whether teachers are empowered to discipline students in a proper way and the limitation of the right. In order to obtain the legal basis of teachers’ professional autonomy (TPA), the researcher will first discuss whether the right to educate students belongs to the nation or to the citizens. According to Education Basic Law and Teacher Law, teachers’ professional autonomy is assured. In order to meet the need of individual students, teachers based on their profession are able to decide the most appropriate manner to treat their students and the time and place of the implementation. The researcher believes the right to discipline students should be viewed as an important part of TPA. However, the existing education laws fail to regulate the provisions for teachers to discipline students. From the notes of counseling and disciplining students established by each school, where the authority defines the meaning of punishment, but there are not further indications that punishment is equivalent to discipline. Therefore, this paper attempts to clarify the definitions of the following three terms — managing, disciplining students and applying corporal punishment. Moreover, the researcher will analyze whether the teachers have rights to apply reasonable discipline among students and then propose amendments to the present regulations for primary and secondary school teachers in Taiwan. Last but not the least, teachers have the obligation to guarantee the means of discipline are to achieve the aims of education and subject to the laws. To students breaking school disciplines, teachers should be authorized to discipline them properly and chasten their behaviors without violating the interests of rebellious students and their classmates. Meanwhile, teachers are liable to the manners they choose while the manners exceed the scope of discipline and endanger the interests of students. Hence, it is recommended that the authority should amend the relevant regulations expeditiously to consist with the tenor of the constitution which is to guarantee the rights of the people.
|
|---|
