|
Abstract Whether educational discipline is a right or an authority of teachers is debated in academia， and also plagues the revision of the Teacher's Act， which needs to be discussed from the etymology of the words themselves in order to clear up their origins. Rights reflect equal relations， point to individual interests， can be disposed of freely， rely on state protection， and bear civil tort liability. Authority， on the other hand， refers to unequal status， reflects public interests， restricts freedom of will， can be realized independently， and bear administrative legal liability and tort liability borne by the institution. It is found that teachers' disciplinary action has distinctive attributes of authority， which are mainly reflected in the following aspects： teachers can become the subjects of authority and have a legitimate power compared with students， but their choice of disciplinary behaviors is restricted by law， and the legitimate disciplinary action is based on educative purposes rather than personal considerations， and they must bear the administrative liability for disciplinary action， while the tort liability is borne by the school. Therefore， the legal system for teachers' discipline should be improved upon the nature of authority， incorporating educational discipline into the clauses of authority for teachers， authorizing teachers in primary and secondary schools and universities to discipline， and clarifying the boundaries of the rule of law， due process and norms of responsibility for teachers' discipline. By embedding the permissive norms and amending the Regulations on the Administration of College Students， the convergence and support with the subordinate legislation can be realized.
|
|
Received: 22 January 2024
|
|
|
|
2024, Vol. 63 
