Review and Optimization of the Dispute Resolution Mechanism for Degree Conferral under the Implementation of the Degree Law
-
摘要: 《学位法》从学位授予单位及学位申请人的权利义务、学位授予单位的学术复核制度、学位授予争议的内外部解决机制等方面对《学位条例》实施以来学位授予争议解决机制存在的局限进行了回应,但仍存在争议解决机制的目标定位不够明晰、内外部争议解决机制不健全等现实困境。为此,《学位法》实施背景下学位授予争议解决机制的完善应当确立正当程序的基础地位,明确学术自治原则的制度边界,并厘清争议解决机制的制度逻辑;进而完善学术复核与学位复核的程序规范,以优化学位授予争议内部复核机制;明确外部救济的实现路径,并加强外部救济的制度衔接,以健全学位授予争议外部救济机制。Abstract: Although the Degree Law has responded to the limitations of the degree conferral dispute resolution mechanism since the implementation of the Degree Regulations in terms of the rights and obligations of degree-conferring units and degree applicants, the academic review system of degree-conferring units, and the internal and external resolution mechanisms for degree conferral disputes, there are still practical dilemmas such as unclear goal orientation of the dispute resolution mechanism and imperfect internal and external dispute resolution mechanisms. Therefore, in the context of the implementation of the Degree Law, the improvement of the degree conferral dispute resolution mechanism should firstly establish the fundamental status of due process, clarify the institutional boundaries of the principle of academic autonomy, and clarify the institutional logic of the dispute resolution mechanism. Furthermore, it is necessary to improve the procedural norms of academic review and degree review to optimize the internal review mechanism for degree conferral disputes. Lastly, it is also necessary to clarify the implementation path of external relief and strengthen the institutional connection of external relief to improve the external relief mechanism of degree conferral disputes.
-
Key words:
- Degree Law /
- degree conferral /
- resolution mechanism /
- internal review /
- external relief
-
[1] 陈瑞华. 程序正义的理论基础——评马修的"尊严价值理论"[J]. 中国法学, 2000(03): 145-153. [2] 郑磊. 论学术自治尊让原则的具体化——基于最高人民法院指导案例39号之展开[J]. 郑州大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2016, 49(03): 39-43. [3] 管华, 陈鹏. 高校学术委员会权力的性质、来源与界限——兼评《高等学校学术委员会规程》[J]. 陕西师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2015(06): 148-154. [4] 张亮. 高校学位授予要件之区分审查论——对指导性案例39号的质疑与反思[J]. 行政法论丛, 2016, 19(00): 216-236. [5] 孙康. 学术自治的司法适用及法治保障——基于裁判文书的考察[J]. 复旦教育论坛, 2023, 21(05): 31-38. [6] 刘宁. 论学术复核制度的体系化建构——以《学位法》第40条为中心[J]. 湖南师范大学教育科学学报, 2025, 24(01): 46-53. [7] 宋汉林. 大学治理中的程序正义[J]. 现代教育管理, 2016(07): 23-28. [8] 姚荣, 王倩. 《学位法》时代学术复核制度的法治逻辑[J]. 高校教育管理, 2024, 18(06): 56-69. [9] 刘东亮. 什么是正当法律程序[J]. 中国法学, 2010(04): 76-88. [10] 顾海波, 李雪. 学位争议的校内申诉解决机制探析[J]. 研究生教育研究, 2022(04): 66-71+79. -
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 6
- HTML全文浏览量: 5
- PDF下载量: 0
- 被引次数: 0
下载: