大學學生獎懲規範應用研究 -以修復式正義觀點探討

Abstract

本研究旨在探討大學學生獎懲規範應用研究-以修復式正義觀點探討，探討修復式正義理論的原則及實務型態應用於大學學生獎懲規範之實施困難與配合措施，本研究之目的為：一、瞭解研究參與者對於我國大學學生獎懲規範內容及做法之意見。二、瞭解研究參與者對於修復式正義原則應用於大學學生懲處案件的經驗、認為可能遭遇的問題及對應用的看法。三、瞭解研究參與者對於修復式正義實務型態應用於大學學生獎懲規範的意見及認為可能遭遇的問題。四、探討修復式正義應用於大學學生獎懲規範時應有的配合措施。五、對於修復式正義應用於大學綜合研究結果提出建議，俾供規劃大學學生獎懲規範之參考。 本研究採質性研究方法，透過文獻收集、觀察及以立意抽樣方法，選取七位可以提供可行性意見之資訊豐富的大學學生事務人員，透過深度訪談等方式進行資料蒐集與分析。最後彙整研究成果，向相關單位提出適當的建議。本研究發現主要有下列數項： 一、研究參與者認為大學獎懲規範應用存在兩個問題：獎懲規範內容無法在實務中落實、須配合生活教育宣導。 二、研究參與者建議大學獎懲規範做法應加強銷過資訊提供、強化學務人員輔導學生認知兩部分。 三、大學學生事務人員對修復式正義的原則全數認同，惟對於造成二次傷害、缺乏專業人員的情況有所疑慮。 四、大學學生事務人員對修復式正義實務型態應用認為直接可行，但需要更明確的規則與事例參考。 五、修復式正義實務型態分別適用大學生下列類型行為：輕微案件、無二次傷害之虞、無對象或有單一或多人受害者的案件、多人以上的嚴重案件。 六、修復式正義原則應用可能遭遇的問題：學生不易體會補償而非懲罰的解決方案、學生行為不易改變、學務人員處理能力不足、共同時間不易協調、時間冗長難收及時之效、造成擴大傷害及學生不願公開的問題。 七、修復式正義實務型態應用可能遭遇的問題：學生不願參與、家庭背景的影響、缺乏專業學務人員、難以兼顧加/被害者的權利、學生不易體會對其的影響、共識結果恐流於表面的問題。 八、修復式正義原則應用於大學學生獎懲規範應有配合措施：學生事務人員具備專業知能、透過學校週會加以宣導、擴大參與會議的對象並主動邀請相關成員參與會議。 九、修復式正義實務型態應用於大學學生獎懲規範應有配合措施：將實務型態以影響程度區分並明訂於獎懲規範並於高位階法律中明訂條文、讓學生自己決定是否參加修復式正義程序。 十、其他配合措施則包含校方公開宣導以及主管教育機關規畫宣導。 基於上述的研究發現，本文提出以下之建議，提供學校單位及教育主管行政機關參考： 一、學生事務人員訓練方面：學生事務人員參與法律專業訓練與增進引導、輔導的知能、舉辦以修復式正義為主軸的研習。 二、學校方案設計方面：公開宣導修復式正義的理念、培訓專業學生事務人員協助獎懲委員會進行、學校獎懲規範明訂修補傷害的重要性。 三、教育主管機關支持方面：結合法律賦予強制力、提高教師意願、擴大適用對象。

The main purpose of this thesis is to explore the application study on the code of student conduct in university from restorative justice perspective, and the implementation difficulties and cooperation measures that the principles and practice patterns of restorative justice which applied on the regulations of university code of student conduct. The purpose of this study: A. To understand the opinion on university code of student conduct content and practices. B. To understand the experience of participant on the principles of restorative justice which applied on university student rewards and punishment cases. C. To understand the opinion of participant on the practice patterns of restorative justice which applied on university students and the facing problems. D. To explore the supporting measures of restorative justice which applied on university code of student conduct. E. To give results from research in order to give advices and references of planning university code of student conduct. This study adopted in qualitative research methods, through literature collection, observation, and purposive sampling to select seven student affairs staffs who are wealth of information and can provide feasibility opinion. Through depth interview to make data collection and analysis, finally compile research results, and give appropriate recommendations to the relevant units. The study found that there are some results as the followings: A. The participants consider that there are two problems about university code of student conduct: code of student conduct content can not be implemented in practical work, and it must be compatible with life education advocacy. B. The participants suggest university code of student conduct practices should be strengthened to provide eliminate mistakes regulation information and strengthening student affairs staffs basic student counseling. C. Student affairs staffs are totally agreed on the principles of restorative justice, except the concerning for the situation about secondary damage and lack of staffs. D. Student affairs staffs think it works on the practice patterns of restorative justice, but require more explicit specification and examples for reference. E. Practice patterns of restorative justice were applicable to the following types of student behavior: minor case, no concern of secondary injury, no victim or single or multiplayer victims of the case, multiplayer victim more seriously case. F. Principles of restorative justice applications may encounter some problems. The study concludes that principles of restorative justice can be found that it would be difficult for students to understand the compensatory rather than punitive solutions, and not easy to change student behavior. As to student affairs professionals, their handling capacity is insufficient and the common time isn’t easy to reconcile. Moreover, spending too much time is difficult to take effect promptly, then it may cause more damage and students do not want to face the problem in public. G. Practicing models of restorative justice applications may encounter the following problems: students unwillingness to participate, the impact of their family backgrounds, lack of student affairs professionals, difficult to balance perpetrator and victim's rights, not easy for students to realize the impact of the results, and the consensus results may tend to be shallow. H. Principles of restorative justice should be applied to code of student conduct with supporting measures, like student affairs professionals with professional knowledge, more propaganda by school assembly, expanding participation in meetings related to the object and the initiative to invite members to participate in meetings. I. Practicing models of restorative justice should be applied to code of student conduct specification with supporting measures. The practicing models to impact zone are clearly set at code of student conduct in the high-order that express provision in the law to allow students to decide whether to participate in restorative justice programs. J. Other supporting measures would include schools with public propaganda and education administration authority planning advocacy.

Based on the above research findings, we propose the following suggestions to the provision of school units and education administration authority reference: A. For training for student affairs professionals, student affairs professionals participate professional legal training to promote their legal knowledge and counseling knowledge, and holding seminars for Restorative Justice as the main study. B. As to school’s program design, it would advocacy restorative justice concept in public, train student affairs professionals to assist student disciplinary committee conduct, and express the importance of injury repair in the code of student conduct. C. With supporting for education administration authority, it would combine with coercive power conferred by law, improve teachers' willingness, and broaden applicable objects.