大學以推動學術研究為主要目的，惟有尊重學術自由、強調學校自主，依據教師專業能力、成就及績效，規劃設計合理的彈性待遇制度，才能提昇高等教育品質。本研究旨在瞭解我國國立大學教師對待遇制度現況問題的看法，及對教師對彈性待遇改進方向的意見，藉以提出具體建議，作為研議改進國立大學教師待遇制度的參考。 本研究首先對大學教師待遇制度的理論和實務進行文獻探討，再進行深度訪談，依據文獻探討與深度訪談意見，作為建立研究架構與調查問卷之依據，問卷調查的對象為全國48所國立大學專任教師，以分層取樣抽取1,150人，回收有效樣本913人，研究工具為自編之「國立大學教師待遇制度改進之研究」問卷。使用的統計方法包括描述性統計分析及單因子變異數分析等。 綜合文獻探討、深度訪談及問卷調查結果，本研究主要發現如下： 一、大多數國立大學教師對待遇制度相當瞭解且感到滿意。絕大多數教師同意目前的待遇水準足以維持基本生活；但多數教師認為目前的待遇水準無法激發教學研究服務績效。 二、多數國立大學教師認為目前待遇制度之本薪薪級結構、年終工作獎金的支給方式尚稱適當；但大多數教師認為各職級之學術研究費應再予以分級。 三、絕大多數國立大學教師贊同教師待遇制度設計應公教分途。 四、國立大學教師待遇應分為固定待遇和彈性待遇。固定待遇應有一致標準；彈性待遇應依學校、職務、專長領域、績效而有不同標準。 五、國立大學教師彈性待遇具體措施，包括新進教師彈性待遇措施及現職教師彈性待遇措施。 六、規劃教師彈性待遇制度，應與國立大學法人化方向一併考量，並同時改進大學校務基金制度相關配套措施。 七、絕大多數國立大學教師贊同大學應有彈性待遇之自主決定權。而大多數教師亦贊同彈性待遇經費應由校務基金自籌款支應。 八、國立大學教師彈性待遇設計應優先考量教師個人教學研究服務績效因素，其次為環境因素和學校整體績效因素。 九、國立大學教師績效評量應由教育部訂定原則，並授權各校訂定評量指標與權重。教師年度績效評量之作業程序應採三級三審制。 十、為獎優汰劣，國立大學教師彈性待遇制度應有淘汰機制配合。 十一、對教師待遇制度現況的意見，綜合大學教師的同意程度低於其他類型學校教師；運動休閒及人文社會科學領域教師的同意程度高於其他各專長領域教師。不同職級教師對待遇制度現況的同意程度有顯著差異，職級愈高，同意程度則愈低。任教年資愈長的教師，對待遇制度愈瞭解，也愈感到滿意。 十二、對教師彈性待遇設計應考量環境及學校整體績效因素的意見，藝術校院和綜合大學教師的贊同程度高於其他類型學校的教師；人文社會科學領域教師的贊同程度低於其他各專長領域的教師。不同職務教師的贊同程度有顯著差異，職級愈高，贊同程度也愈高。 依據上述研究發現提出下列具體建議： 一、儘速確立公教分途之教師待遇制度發展方向。 二、國立大學教師待遇應分為固定待遇與彈性待遇；彈性待遇制度應分階段推動，賦予大學自主決定，經費由校務基金自籌款支應。 三、規劃設計教師彈性待遇應考量環境、學校及個人因素。 四、建構國立大學教師績效評量機制與淘汰機制。 五、各校應分新進與現職教師彈性待遇措施，並循民主程序研議。 關鍵字：國立大學、教師、教師待遇制度、公教分途、彈性待遇 / The objective of the university is to improve academic research under the respect of academic freedom and school independence on the basis of teacher’s expertise, achievements, and contributions. Designing a reasonable and flexible compensation system is the way of promoting the quality of higher education. The purpose of this study was to investigate teacher’s views on the current compensation system of the national university and on the flexible compensation system. After this study, we will propose some suggestions that could be used for the reference of improving teacher’s compensation system of the national university. The study was conducted through a literature review, detailed personal interview, and questionnaire. The subjects consisted of 1,150 full-time faculty members at 48 universities. The valid subjects were 913. Descriptive statistic analyses and single-factor variable analyses were used in this study. After a careful literature review, a detailed personal interview, and a questionnaire, we found the following facts: 1. Most of the teachers understand and are satisfied with the present compensation system. They believe that their compensation can maintain their basic cost of living, but that it cannot stimulate their contributions on teaching, research, and service. 2. Most of the teachers are satisfied with the current compensation structure and the ways of year-end premium, but they suggest that the academic research grants should be different based on their official ranks. 3. Most of the teachers agree that the compensation system should be different between teachers and public servants. 4. The compensation system should be divided into a regular compensation and a flexible compensation. The regular compensation should have the same requirements; the flexible compensation is based on types of schools, teacher’s duties, specialties, and contributions. 5. The measurement of the flexible compensation should be suitable for junior teachers and senior teachers. 6. The teacher’s flexible compensation system should be considered together with the problems of juridical person of national university and university foundations. 7. Most of the teachers at the national universities agree that the university can decide teachers’ flexible compensation and that the compensation budget must come from university foundations. 8. The design of flexible compensation should first be considered together with teacher’s contributions on teaching, research, and service; and next with environmental factors and school’s contribution factors. 9. The principle of teacher’s evaluation of contributions should be stipulated by the Minister of Education, the evaluation index and the percentage be authorized by the school, and the teacher’s annual evaluation of contributions be adopted the first instance, first appeal, and second appeal. 10. The flexible compensation system should have the elimination through competition. 11. Teachers at general universities are less favorable to the flexible compensation system than those at other types of universities. Teachers of physical education and social science and liberal arts are more favorable than other fields of teachers. The higher ranks the teachers have, the more they agree. The senior teachers more understand and are satisfied with the compensation system than the junior teachers. 12. The teachers at art universities and general universities are more favorable to environmental factors and school’s contribution factors than those at other types of universities. Teachers of social science and liberal arts are less favorable than those of other fields of teachers. The higher ranks the teachers have, the more they agree. According to the study and the findings mentioned above, we proposed the following specific suggestions: 1. Different compensation systems between teachers and public servants should be established as soon as possible. 2. The compensation system should be divided into regular compensation system and flexible compensation system. The flexible compensation system must be pushed step by step and be decided by the university. Its budget should come from the foundations raised by the school itself. 3. The teacher’s flexible compensation should be considered together with environmental, school, and personal factors. 4. The government should establish the evaluation and elimination system on teacher’s contributions. 5. The school should find out a democratic procedure to decide a senior and a junior teacher’s flexible compensation. Key Words: national universities, teachers, teacher’s compensation systems, different ways of teachers and public servants, flexible compensation