兩岸高等學校教師聘任制度之比較研究 中文摘要 兩岸因為歷史因素造成隔閡，依照環境系統理論的說法，兩岸自然會形成不同的社會文化與制度。高等學校教師的聘任制度是兩個社會中相當具代表性的社會文化制度，因此，針對兩岸之間高等學校教師聘任制度的異同或特色加以探討，是一件很有意義的事情。 本研究在透過環境系統理論的闡述，分析兩個不同社會因素造成的不同環境是如何影響到兩岸高等學校教師的聘任制度。過程中特別強調兩岸高等學校教師聘任制度與其社會文化間、與其公務人員間的關連性，並說明兩岸教師各自對其聘任制度的回應以及是否享有較高的社會地位等問題，加以比較分析。 本研究所採取的研究方法，包括觀察法、比較法、歷史法、歸納法、演繹法及制度法等，並且在兩岸處於嚴重急性呼吸道症候群的不利情境下，透過管道完成問卷調查，該結果並納為研究分析的憑證。又研究過程中大量引用兩岸政府現行的相關法規，透過分析比較，說明其異同、特色與優缺點，最後再綜合提出研究的結論與建議，目的在對有關方面能夠有所貢獻。茲摘錄本研究的相關結論如下： 一、 兩岸高等學校教師的聘任制度均已完成法制化的工作 二、 兩岸的教師聘任制度因不同的環境產出不同的特色 三、 兩岸教師均享有很高的社會地位，而且與聘任制度有關 四、 兩岸教師資格的要求著重點不同，教師證書的取得亦有事前制與事後制之分，且取得教師資格之途徑有別 五、 兩岸教師的聘任程序都有學術性的委員會參與，但享有的權限不一致 六、 兩岸教師的聘任限制，其本質與提供的作用相同；但產生的法律效果不完全一致 七、 兩岸教師的升等途徑類似，但升等的難易存有差距 八、 兩岸教師的評審機制其性質與作用雖大致相同，但組成的成分不同 根據以上的研究結論，本研究最後向三個方面提出了建議。第一是兩岸的主管機關、第二是兩岸的高等學校、第三是台灣地區有志從事大陸相關研究的人士。茲分別說明如下： 一、 對兩岸主管機關的建議： （一）、兩岸政府應抱持「截長補短」的心胸，相互觀摩學習，藉由刺激追求進步 （二）、聘任法制的建構仍須加速進行 （三）、加速國際接軌工程，減低國內不利因素的影響 （四）、尊重學術，避免人情或政治外力的干預 二、 對兩岸高等學校的建議 （一）、兩岸制度固有不同特色，然各學校為提升學術水準，允應持續積極建立各校特色，以競逐人才 （二）、要以專業自主的學術導向為上，不宜偏重政治性的要求 （三）、應強化聘任程序中學術性委員會的功能 （四）、教師升等應該嚴予把關，不容放水 三、 對國內有志從事大陸研究人士的建議 （一）、研究方法上可能受到限制 （二）、資料蒐集的質量問題應先確認 （三）、建立人際網絡，廣結大陸善緣 關鍵詞：高等學校、聘任制度、環境系統理論 / A Comparative Study of Hiring Practices of Postsecondary Education Faculty between the Two Sides of the Taiwan Straits Abstract The two sides of the Taiwan Straits (hereinafter known as the two sides or China and Taiwan) have been separate due to historical issues. According to the system theory, the two sides naturally generate unique cultural and social systems. Faculty hiring at postsecondary education institutions is a fair representation of their social systems. It is therefore very meaningful to analyze the similarities, differences and characteristics of the two sides’ postsecondary education faculty hiring practices. This study aimed to analyze how different social systems influenced the formation of the two sides’ postsecondary education faculty hiring practices. The relationships between faculty hiring and the social system, and between faculty hiring and government civil servants were emphasized. Faculty satisfaction of hiring practices and perception of their social status on the two sides were also respectively explored. Research methods such as observation, comparative approach, historical approach, induction, deduction, and systemic approach were utilized. Questionnaire surveys were completed even during the recent outbreak of SARS across the Taiwan Straits. The findings of the surveys were included in the analysis. Many current faculty hiring rules and regulations of the two sides were compared and contrasted in the process of research in order to understand their similarities and differences, and strengths and weaknesses. Research conclusions were then presented, followed by some suggestions. The research conclusions are summarized as follows: 1. Faculty hiring practices of postsecondary education institutions of the two sides were legitimized. 2. Faculty hiring practices of the two sides have their own characteristics due to different environments. 3. Faculty at postsecondary education institutions of the two sides enjoy high social status, and this relates to their hiring policies. 4. On the two sides, faculty qualifications have different requirements; faculty certification is processed either before or after hiring; faculty certification has different approaches. 5. Faculty hiring processes on the two sides have academic committee involvement but in this regard, the powers of academic committees are not entirely equal. 6. The nature and function of faculty hiring limits of the two sides are similar. However the legal effects they generate are not completely the same. 7. Approaches for faculty promotion on the two sides are similar, but the degrees of difficulty in getting promoted are different. 8. Although the nature and function of faculty evaluation schemes on the two sides are almost the same, their practices are different. Based upon the above research conclusions, this study offers some suggestions to the authorities that govern faculty hiring and postsecondary education institutions on the two sides of the Taiwan Straits, and to fellow citizens in Taiwan who plan to do research on China issues. The suggestions proposed in this study are listed respectively: 1. For China and Taiwan government authorities: 1.1 China and Taiwan governments should be open-minded and learn from each other in order to pursue progress. 1.2 Legitimization of faculty hiring practices still has to continue. 1.3 Keeping up with the international community and minimization of the impact of unfavorable domestic factors. 1.4 Respect for academics, and avoidance of public and political interference. 2. For postsecondary education institutions in China and Taiwan: 2.1 Despite different faculty hiring characteristics, individual institutions need to continue to pursue their own characteristics and recruit quality faculties for the purpose of promoting academic excellence. 2.2 Faculty hiring should be academically orientated not politically orientated. 2.3 Enhancement of the academic committee function in the hiring process. 2.4 Faculty promotion should be based upon strict review. 3. For fellow citizens in Taiwan who plan to do research on China issues: 3.1 Research methods may have limitations. 3.2 Quality and quantity when collecting data should be confirmed. 3.3 Interpersonal relationship networks should be built up and enhanced. Key words: postsecondary institution, faculty hiring practices, system theory