學業退學制度是否合理妥適？實證研究的證據

ARE UNIVERSITIES' ACADEMIC DISMISSAL POLICIES REASONABLE AND APPROPRIATE? EVIDENCE FROM AN EMPIRICAL STUDY

研究目的：本文研究目的在於從實證研究的證據，探討現行大學學業退學制度的設計是否符合釋字第563號「合理妥適」原則的規範。研究設計／方法／取徑：本文首先從釋字第563號對於退學的規範，檢視學業退學的制度內涵，並經由與品行退學的對照，探討學業退學制度在設計思維上是否「合理妥適」。接著以國立政治大學於96-106學年間入學之學士班學生學業成績、學分數、不及格學分數等資料為基礎，證實學業退學制度作為淘汰學生的工具並不符合「合理妥適」的原則。研究發現或結論：在國立政治大學96-106學年間三種逐次放寬的制度之實證研究上，從百分制之成績平均績點（Grade Point Average, GPA）與學分及格率（Credit Pass Rate, CPR）的數項指標上所得到的數據顯示：成績表現相對較佳的學生反遭退學。此實證研究的結果證實了學業退學制度違背釋字第563號「使成績未符一定標準之學生予以退學處分」的要求，與「確保學位之授予具備一定之水準」之目的牴觸；更值得關注是，制度越寬鬆其不合理程度卻越為嚴重。研究原創性／價值：近年學界已有廢除大學學業退學制度的聲浪，但多偏向法律及教育面向的探討，未有從實證數據的角度對此制度進行研究。本文補足此研究空缺，以實證數據說明學業退學制度與釋字第563號的齟齬關係，以及該制度的不合理之處。教育政策建議或實務意涵：從制度的實證數據出發，回顧相關校務研究，說明在學習問題上，身心健康、經濟情形、教學品質、學習環境等都是重要因子，不應完全究責於學生而給予退學的終極處分；進而指出退學制度在教師與學生互動關係的負面效應。建議大學應以積極妥適的預警、輔導與諮商機制取代學業退學制度。

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether Taiwan universities' academic dismissal policies comply with the constitutional requirement of being reasonable and appropriate, specified in Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 563, from the evidence of an empirical study. Design/methodology/approach: This paper first critically examines the content and design of universities' academic dismissal policies from the perspective of Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 563, and then discusses whether such academic dismissal policies are reasonable and appropriate via a comparison with the policies of dismissal due to misconducts. Then, based on the academic achievements, academic scores, and failing grades of the National Chengchi University undergraduate students during the 2007-2017 academic years, this paper explores whether the academic dismissal policies as a tool for dismissing students from universities are reasonable and appropriate. Findings/results: An empirical study of the three different dismissal policies of National Chengchi University during the 2007-2017 academic years proves that, under several indexes of GPA (Grade Point Average) based on numerical grades and CPR (Credit Pass Rate), students with relatively better academic performances have been dismissed. Such policies thus seriously violate the constitutional requirement of Interpretation No. 563, that the punishment of dismissal be applied to 'students whose grades are below a certain standard' and contradict the required goal 'to guarantee that the conferment of a degree upholds a certain standard'. More importantly, the more lenient the policy, the more unfair dismissals there are. Originality/value: Recent voices advocating the abolition of universities' dismissal polices are mostly from the theoretical perspectives of law and education, none based on evidence from empirical findings. The research reported in this paper fills this important research gap. The empirical evidence obtained clearly demonstrates the unreasonable consequences of these academic dismissal policies, and thus their conflict with Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 563. Suggestions/implications: Starting from the empirical evidence regarding the dismissal policies, this paper reviews several studies of university institutional research to illustrate the multiple factors behind a student's academic performance, including the student's physical and mental health, and the student's financial circumstances, the teaching quality, the learning environment, etc; thus, a student alone should not bear all the blame and receive the ultimate punishment. We also demonstrate the negative effects of academic dismissals on the interaction between teachers and students. Universities should replace the academic dismissal policies with active and appropriate mechanisms of early warning and consultation.