台灣教育體系的發展在傳統倫理觀念、集體管理主義、升學與粗廉主義等歷史因素交相影響下，始終無法脫離僵化的惡性循環，校園中充滿大量的管制規範與獎懲制度，不僅有礙於人權教育的推展，更為管制文化的生根提供茁壯的土壤。 本研究從校園制度層面著手，結合校規演變與人權教育進行探討，首先透過歷史溯源，探詢相關校園規範之教育法令與校規的演變，探析演變的因素與過程，以及在演變的過程中，學校教育、教師圖像與學生主體的關係呈現何種變化？期望藉此研究重新反省教育人員的定位，並企圖探索教育人員能否從中檢討自身所處社會的、文化的與實際的環境，並能批判並澄清其在合法化政治、經濟、社會、利益上的角色。 其次，透過文件分析與比較分析，探析城鄉兩所不同學校校園規範與校園生態之實際情形，探究在相同的歷史發展脈絡下，兩校所呈現出的校園規範與校園文化是否有所不同。研究結果發現，面對校園民主化的到來，兩校於制度層面均能順應社會期待，但在心態上，是否有所積極與消極做為則觀乎其對於學校教育、教師專業倫理與學生本質之不同預設而有不同。 整體而言，我國校園規範之發展，係由國家教育權與義務本位觀，逐漸朝向國民為教育權之主體以及權利義務觀的方向發展。校園的民主化與整體教育法制及文化政治相互影響，校園規範的演變促動了校園文化的改變，在民主化的進程中，受到人權思潮的影響，顯現出「人」的自覺與反省與大環境的相互辯證關係。 校園規範牽涉到權威、正義、隱私、責任等相關人權教育的價值，因此，民主的開放性不僅給于學校有自主的可能，同時也是希望教師有創造、轉化的可能，在體會到「人民為教育權之主體」後，學校方才能轉化其教育環境，改變其教育心態與行動，彰顯其目的性與任務性。 / The development of the education system in Taiwan could not break away from the rigid vicious circle under the influence factor between the traditional ethics idea, collective managerialism, proportion of students entering schools of a higher grade and thick inexpensive principle. There are lots of obstruct the implementation of human rights education but also offer a field for the growing of culture of control. The argument in this study combine the development of school regulations and human rights education that probe into the legal system of education. First, the research start analyzing through history background of the development of the school regulations and the education in campus the probe into the legal system. During the process of developing, what kind of change of the relation happened between school education, teacher’s picture, student’s subject appear？ Expect through this study to introspect educator’s location and examine educational environment. Attempt to explore whether a teacher can criticize one’s own role in legalizing the politics, economy, society and interests. Secondly, through text analysis and comparative analysis, analyze the school regulation and reality of two different schools in urban and rural area. Discuss the difference between the school regulation and culture of the two schools in the same historical background. The result of the study discovered two schools can both comply with the society’s expect on the system aspect facing the arrival of democratization. But on the change of mindset, it’s should depend on the school education, teacher professional ethics and student essence. Treating the wholeness as single conclusion, the development of the school regulations in our country in the beginning are dominated by nationalism, then gradually democratized. In fact, democratization of campus and the legal system of education are influence each other. The development of school regulations promote the change on campus culture. In the process of democratization, influenced by human rights, display people’s conscientious and introspection with the dialectical relation of the environment. The school regulations of education value involves authority, justice, privacy, responsibility and human rights, etc. Therefore, The openness of democracy not merely gives independent possibility for the school, But make the teacher possible to create and transform at the same time. When school realize ‘people are the main body of education’. It same will be able to change the education environment, Education attitude and action, and then reflect its purpose and task.

本研究以教育權為基本概念導向，除循此脈絡描述學校與學生間的法律關係外，並針對學生法制的一般法理內涵與校園實踐課題進行探討，除融合學校教育功能與學生學習主體之理念內涵外，並由此導引出適用於中小學教育場域的學生法制運作模式。經由文獻分析與實徵調查過程，乃歸納出下列八項研究結果： 一、教育權即人民之教育權利，其係以受教育權為其核心概念；復因教育權係以學習權為其本質，故若使用學習權取代受教育權或教育權之用語，將更能顯現以人民為教育主體的積極意涵。 二、「人民為教育權主體」所稱之「人民」，乃係專指受教育者而言，除此而外的其他人民，則僅具有教育輔助者之地位；因此，教育基本權的功能開展，理應藉由學生對於組織程序之參與，積極促進教育效果之實現。 三、現代社會中的任何生活領域，均不可能自外於國家法律之拘束，故學生與學校間的在學關係應被視為一般法律關係，而無須另覓他說；此外，學生法制除應具備保障學生學習權的功能外，更須同時兼顧教育目的與效果之實現。 四、在現代民主法治的概念基礎上，法律本具有保障人民權利暨促進社會正義的意涵，故將校規的法律性質視為法規範，不但能嚴格保障學生之基本權利，透過組織程序之參與，亦能同時確保學習者的教育主體地位。 五、學生法制本屬整體社會法制之一環，故自須實踐以民主法治精神為依歸的基本法理原則，然基於教育專業之特質與需求，相關法理原則的規範密度，亦得因事務性質之不同，而容有嚴密或寬鬆之區別。 六、基於現代法制維護人性尊嚴與彰顯自然正義之普遍立場，除須藉由法制設計，強化中小學學生參與學校組織程序之領域空間，在實際運作的校規層面上，亦應於修訂、執行、與救濟等相關程序中，適度賦予學生參與之機會。 七、依據教育措施作成名義之不同，總結性成績評定與學校懲處處分，不但要求較高之法律保留密度，並須依其嚴重程度踐行相對正當程序，而受處分之學生亦得依法提起校內申訴以謀求救濟；至若歸屬教學自主之形成性成績評定與教師管教措施，雖無具備嚴格法律保留與正當程序要求之必要，然基於權利救濟原則與實現教育目的之雙重考量，法制或學校亦應就此主動建構合宜的校內陳情管道。 八、就當前的中小學學校環境而言，與其強調學生參與校務之形式設計，不如切實賦予實質討論之參與機制；此外，現階段雖或無成立「學生獎懲委員會」的迫切需求，但為整合中小學校規運作上之實體效果暨程序正義，校內申訴制度卻有切實運作的必要。 近年來，隨著相關教育法制的愈趨健全，教育目的之實現與學生權益之保障，將愈有相得益彰的平衡發展傾向；為落實現代法治國的學生法制理念，本研究建議單獨制定「學生法」，以同時針對各類級學校學生法制事項，進一步予以原則性暨程序性的規範。但無論法制形式如何，當相關法律不斷與時俱進之際，各級教育行政主管機關亦須配合上位法令之變遷，積極增訂、修正、或廢止相關業管法令，以避免因過分延宕而架空法治國基本原則。 此外，當各縣市對教育事務擁有更多自主權限的同時，各級教育行政主管機關除應以「合法性監督」取代事必躬親之心態外，地方教育行政主管機關亦應將此等法令上的「分配利益」，適切轉化為學校或教師的專業裁量空間，以進一步確保教育多元發展、學校本位經營、與學生學習權的充分保障。 最後，無論是法令已為規範、未予規範、或規範不足之處，學校均應啟動其內部專業組織，以進行專業判斷、採行專業措施，並妥適強化校規制定、獎懲作成、與申訴救濟之程序，除藉此展現校規所具有的學校特色外，更能據此發揮校規因地制宜與適應學生個別差異之教育內在需求。 / This study is based on the basic concept of the rights of education. Apart from the description of the relation of law between students and schools, this study emphasizes on the system of law for students to explore the general connotation of law and the school law implementation on campus. Besides the concept of the function of education and the students, this study intends to develop an operation model of system of law for the primary and secondary education arena. This study derives the conclusion through the analysis of literature and the field study. 1. Rights of education are the rights of the people based on the core concept of being educated, and the nature of education rights is from the rights of learning, so we use the term of rights of learning instead of using rights of being educated or the rights of education to emphasize on the active connotations that people are the main body of education. 2. In the “people are the main body of education”, “people” here refer to those who are being educated and the others only have the assistants status of education, so the development of the function of basic education rights should be participated by students to make school procedures to have better education effect. 3. In modern society, any aspects of live can not avoid the restrictions of law, so the relation between students and school should be regarded as the relation of the general law and there is no need to find any other explanations. Besides, the system of law for students is not only to protect the function of the rights of learning but also to achieve the goal and effect of education. 4. Based on the concept of modern democracy and law, law itself has the connotation of protecting the rights of people and of improving the social justice, so we take school regulations as the norm of law so that it can strictly protect students’ basic rights and through the participation of making school procedures, students can ensure their status of being the main body of education. 5. Students’ system of law is a part of the system of law of the society; it should be implemented based on the spirit of the basic principles of democracy. However, based on the need of the educational expertise, the related principle of law and regulations can be loose or strict according to different situations. 6. The concept of modern regulations and laws is to protect human dignity and natural justice, so when designing the regulations and laws, students’ participation in making school procedures should be strengthened and they should involve in actual operation of school regulations especially to take part in the process of revising regulations, implementing school laws, and remedy. Students should have more opportunities for participation of school affairs. 7. According to the education measures, the summative test and the school measures of punishment are not only required higher law criteria, but used relative procedures of justice to implement school laws, and the students who are punished can pledge based on the school laws to seek remedy. As for the autonomy of school in the measures of teaching and the ways of formative test are not required due process and strict laws, but under the consideration of principle of remedy of rights and the goal of education, school should provide ways for students to pledge to seek remedy. 8. In the present primary and secondary school environment, it is better to let students to have actual discuss and participate the school affairs and not to emphasize on the students’ participation in designing the school affairs. Although there is no urgent need to form a “committee of awards and punishment for students” for the time being, it is necessary to form a mechanism for students to have ways to pledge in order to ensure the effect of school regulations and the justice of procedures. Along with the better development of the related regulations and laws of education, the purpose of education and the protection of students’ rights will be achieved. In order to ensure the concept of school regulations and laws, this study suggests to make a unique “student law” and in the meantime, to develop a norm of school regulations and general procedures for all level of schools. However, no matter what the form of school regulations and laws are, when the related laws change constantly, all levels of administrative organizations should have the regulations and school laws amended, revised, or abolished in order to cope with principle of the law. Besides, as the local government has the autonomy in education affairs, all levels of the administrative organizations should use “lawful supervision” instead of “reasonable supervision” to enforce the law. The “distribution of benefit” should be transferred to schools and teachers properly, so that the law can protect the diversity development of school, the school autonomy, and the students’ rights of learning thoroughly. Finally, no matter the restrictions are regulated, not regulated, or insufficiently regulated by law, schools should make decisions according to expertise and take steps to strengthen the school regulations, to make the mechanism of awards and punishment, and procedures of pledge to reveal the characteristics of the school to cope with the need of education for different kind of students.