华东师范大学学报(教育科学版)

华东师范大学学报(教育科学版) ›› 2025, Vol. 43 ›› Issue (6): 116-126.doi: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2025.06.008

• 教育法治 • 上一篇    

公立高校师德失范惩处裁量的行政自我规制

马晶1, 袁文全2   

  1. 1. 西南大学教育立法研究基地，重庆 400715
    2. 重庆大学法学院，重庆 400045
  • 接受日期:2025-02-12 出版日期:2025-06-01 发布日期:2025-05-19

Administrative Self-regulation of Discretion in Punishment of Teacher Ethics Violations in Public Universities

Jing Ma1, Wenquan Yuan2   

  1. 1. Institute for Education Law, Southwest University, Chongqing 400715, China
    2. School of Law, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400045, China
  • Accepted:2025-02-12 Online:2025-06-01 Published:2025-05-19

RichHTML

15

PDF

1168

摘要：

《教育强国建设规划纲要（2024—2035年）》提出“严格落实师德失范‘零容忍’”，师德失范惩处的有效与合规是“严格落实”的题中之义，但当前公立高校师德失范惩处深陷低效与失序困境。行政自我规制能有效防范行政权恣意行使，基于公立高校师德失范惩处权性质，围绕实体规制、程序规制和结果规制三个维度建构公立高校师德失范惩处裁量的行政自我规制机制具有逻辑上的契合性，有利于促进公立高校师德失范惩处有效、合规运行。具体包括，设定以“情节细化+效果格化”对称性技术结构为核心的师德失范惩处裁量基准，围绕“多元利益代表参与避免偏私”“公平听取当事人申辩”“以公开对抗专断”建构师德失范惩处正当程序，基于行政主体的自我纠错机能完善师德失范惩处层级监督及校内申诉制度。

关键词: 师德失范, 公立高校, 行政自我规制, 裁量基准

Abstract:

The Outline for Building a Strong Education Country(2024-2035) proposes a "zero tolerance" policy to teacher ethics violations. The effective and legal punishment for teacher ethics violations is inherent to the “strict enforcement of the policy”. However, the current punishment for teacher ethics violations in public universities is inefficient and disorderly. Administrative self-regulation can effectively prevent the arbitrary exercise of administrative power. Based on the nature of the punishment power for teacher ethics violations of public universities, the construction of an administrative self-regulation mechanism from the three dimensions of entity regulation, procedural regulation, and outcome regulation has logical consistency, which is conducive to promoting the effective and legal operation of punishment for teacher ethics violations in public universities. Specifically, it includes setting the discretionary benchmark with plot refinement + effect standardization as the core, constructing a due process around “multi-stakholder participation to prevent bias”, “impartial hearings for the accused”, and “transparency to counter arbitrariness”, and improving hierarchical supervision and internal appeal system based on the self-correction function of administrative entities.

Key words: teacher ethics violations, public universities, administrative self-regulation, discretionary benchmark