【作者】 李静蓉；

【导师】 别敦荣；

【作者基本信息】 华中科技大学 ， 高等教育学， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 随着我国高等教育改革的不断深入,高等教育法制建设也逐步得到加强。高等教育立法进程加快,高等教育司法趋于活跃,高等教育行政执法的改革进入了攻坚阶段。指导高等教育法制建设的理论很多,教育权与受教育权理论、学术自由理论、法律关系理论等都为高等教育法制建设提供了很好的指导,但它们都缺乏足够的全面性和批判性。而现实的高等教育改革的合理性已经遭遇各方面的质疑,高等教育“有法律无秩序”状态更是集中表明了高等教育法律建设中的价值合法性危机。尽管在自由主义者眼中,秩序是自生自发自动形成的,人们在秩序中感受不到强制和约束,对所有的秩序规则发自内心地拥戴与服从;因此,秩序的形成方式只能是在历史的长期演进中发现,不能有任何的人为约束,否则就会损害自由这个最高价值。但在计划秩序观中,秩序只能经由外界的强制命令和严厉的惩罚使民众服从而达致,秩序就意味着放弃自由,意味着对领导人的服从;因此,秩序的形成是计划和指导的结果,由一个智慧和品德高于一切社会成员的人来对秩序做出计划和安排,其地位也就超越于社会成为主宰者。任何一个社会都不可能只有其中一种秩序,一个合理的秩序是自由秩序和计划秩序的完美结合。尽管法律价值的内容歧义纷呈,但它们可以概括为两个大的方面:一是功用论的法律价值观,以法律对现实社会需要的满足程度来考察法律的价值,而社会的需要在某种程度上又化约为占高位者的需要;二是超越论的法律价值观,以人类的基本理想作为考察法律价值的尺度,要求法律超越具体的和局部的社会功能而对全社会发生影响。一般而言,计划秩序观对法律价值的考量是功用论的,而自发秩序观则强调超越的法律价值论。然而,法律价值并非只属于其中任何一种,它是两者的结合,任何一种偏颇的观点都会导致法律的失灵。本文对建构合理的高等教育秩序的法律做出了应然的构想和实然的反思与剖析。如果坚持高等教育秩序是计划秩序和自发秩序的统一,坚持高等教育的法律价值是功用价值和超越价值的统一,高等教育法律就会既有利于国家对高等教育的管理、又有利于保护公民个人的高等教育权利。因此,高等教育法律应该具有一定的独立性,应该配置均衡的教育权利结构,应该规范各种教育权利行使的程序,使各种教育权都处于安全状态;高等教育法律也应该明确各种教育利益,在高等教育资源的分配、管理机制的配置上以效率为价值取向从而保证高等教育的效率;高等教育法律更应该在正义的前提下平等对待所有高等教育主体,同时通过特殊方式帮助处境不利人群的高等教育权利的实现以保证高等教育的平等。如果高等教育法律关注了这些内在要求,它将带来一个安全、高效和平等的高等教育秩序,即理想中的高等教育秩序。然而在特殊的历史境遇中,我国的高等教育法律并没有这样的秩序价值,现行高等教育法律建构的主要是计划秩序,法律的价值主要是工具价值。高等教育法律文本中的高等教育层次结构模糊、权利义务结构失衡、控制约束机制缺乏权威;而实践中高等教育的立法不科学不民主,司法不普遍,行政执法的透明度和公开度都不高,高等教育的法律秩序还未形成。正是因为对于秩序和法律价值的一元化追求,才导致它对业已多元化的社会控制无力,使整个高等教育处于严重的“无序”之中。高等教育法律价值观的如此定位是建国以后长期实施的计划经济思维和工具主义法律价值观的历史惯性使然,是国家主义教育观的反映,主要为了维护国家的高等教育利益。而要改变纲纪废弛的状况,一个最基本的途径就是通过建立高等教育法律的价值共识而改变法律不被信仰与遵循的局面,使高等教育法律能在全社会得到全面的贯彻与实施。为此,改变高等教育立法的思维范式,拓宽社会交往的公共空间,使高等教育立法的民主化程度提高将是建立法律价值共识的必要条件。更多还原

【Abstract】 As the reform of China’s higher education is in full swing, the construction of higher educational legal system has gradually been intensified as well, in the course of which legislation on higher education speeds up, judicial affairs concerning and among higher education institutions are flourished, and the reform of administration execution and law enforcement in higher education institutions now reaches the most critical phase. Theories are vibrant on directing construction of higher education legal system, such as theories on right of educating and right of being educated, academic freedom theories and legal relationship theories, which have offered good instructions for the construction of higher education legal system. However, all those theories are short of integration and criticism to some extent. In reality, the rationality of higher education reform has been doubted by various issues. The so-called“there is law but still no order”status quo of higher education, highlights the crisis of the value rationality of higher education law construction.In the eyes of those liberalists, order comes into being spontaneously, with which people feel no constraint or restriction, but support and obey all orders heart and soul. Therefore the form of order can only be found in the evolvement of the long history without any contrived restriction, otherwise, the most valuable freedom would be damaged. However, in the view of planned order, order can only be formed by compelling orders and strict punishments, thus people are forced to accept and obey. In this way, order means giving up freedom and submitting to leaders. Therefore, the form of order is the result of plans and instructions. Order is planned and arranged by a person whose intelligence and moral character are above all other social members, hence he could dominate the society. No society has only one order. A reasonable society is the perfect combination of free order and planned order.There are many disagreements about the law value, which can be summed up in two main arguments: one is practical view on law value. In this case, law is reviewed by the degree how it meets the social demand, which to some extent means the demand of those people with high status. The other one is exceeding view on law value, reviewing law based on the basic ideal of human being. It requires that law influence the whole society exceeding the concrete and partial social functions. Generally speaking, planned order view reviews law value based on practical argument, while spontaneous order view emphasizes more on exceeding one. However, law value does not belong to only one of them, but to the combination of them. Any prejudiced argument may lead the malfunction of law.This article makes an ideal design and a practical meditation and analysis on the construction of a reasonable law for higher education order. If we insist that higher education order is the combination of planned order and spontaneous order, and the law value of higher education is the combination of practical value and exceeding value, then higher education law would not only benefit the management of the state to higher education, but protect citizen’s right for higher education. Therefore, all rights of educating would be in safety, higher education law would emphasize more on efficiency about the distribution of higher education resource and collocation of management system, and equal rights for higher education would be protected as well. If higher education law concerns all these internal requirements, it would bring out a safe, efficient and equal higher education order, namely an ideal higher education order. However, we do not have such an order value in our higher education law because of special history. The current higher education law concerns more on a planned order construction, and the value of law represents more implemental value. To pursuit only one side is the very reason why our multiplicities society is out of control of the current order and law value, and the whole higher education is at serious“disorder”. In order to change the current situation, the radical method is to construct the consensus of the value of higher education law, and change the situation that law is not been believed and followed. Therefore higher education law would be implemented completely in the whole society.更多还原