誰是「兼任教師」！？－併論「兼課」之釋義與辨析

Who Are ＂Part-Time Teachers＂ !? - Interpretation and Clarification of ＂Teaching Extra Courses＂

10.6423/HHHC.202101_(131).0005

汪耀文(Yao-Wen Uang)

兼任教師 ； 兼課 ； 超時授課 ； Part-Time Teachers ； Teaching Extra Courses ； Teaching Overtime

學校行政

131期（2021 / 01 / 16）

90 - 105

繁體中文

本文主要採用文件分析法，彙整與各級學校兼任教師有關的法規範，從文義解釋、員額編制與待遇的觀點，探討兼任教師的定義及其相應鐘點費支給實務等議題。今日各級學校專任教師於原校超時授課、赴校外以兼課，二者有別，不可混淆；編制內專任教師、編制外兼任教師，兩者復有異，其定位允應明辨。主管教育行政機關訂定法規，遣詞、用字務須審慎與精準，免生歧異與扞格。再者，關於教育現場相同課務屬性、相同對待給付的支給方式，衡諸同工同酬、同值同酬原則，外聘兼任教師之兼課與編制內專任教師超時授課的支給結果應同，不可區別對待。此外，或因特定考量，主事者偶以兼課、兼任兩語詞，不當地取替今日該當的超時授課一詞，實有全面打包修改之必要，以維法秩序之一貫與完整性。

This study tried to use ＂Documentary Research＂ and aggregate relevant laws and regulations about part-time teachers at all levels of school in Taiwan, discussed the noun definition and the hourly pay about part-time teachers from the viewpoint of grammatical interpretation, teacher establishment and remuneration. As for full-time teachers at all levels of school today, both ＂ Teaching Overtime＂ on campus and ＂Teaching Extra Courses＂ outside school are different and should not be confused .Both ＂ full-time teachers ＂ within organization system and ＂ part-time teachers＂ beyond organization system are also different and their positioning should be clearly identified. The education administration department formulated rules and regulations, and should use relevant terms carefully so as to avoid the ambiguity and conflict accurately. Regarding both same course attributes and same treat payment, the hourly pay giving methods of both ＂Teaching Overtime＂ and ＂Teaching Extra Courses＂ should be the same, there must be no differences, considering the principles of ＂equal pay for equal work＂ and ＂equal pay for equal value＂. Due to specific considerations, competent authorities sometimes use the term ＂Teaching Extra Courses＂ instead of the term ＂Teaching Overtime＂ inappropriately. A comprehensive ＂package＂ of changes is needed to maintain the coherence and integrity of the legal order.

1. 吳啟新(2015)。勞動部104年度委託研究計畫勞動部104年度委託研究計畫,勞動部。
2. 汪耀文(2017)。全時教師鐘點費管理不公平事件之法制性分析。臺灣教育評論月刊，6(1)，190-196。
3. 汪耀文(2016)。臺北市，國立臺北大學公共行政暨政策學系。
4. 汪耀文(2014)。我國國民中小學教師兼課鐘點費支給相關問題之探討。教育政策論壇，17(4)，135-158。
5. 東吳大學法學院（編）(2011).英美法常用名詞解析（第二冊）.臺北:新學林.
6. 法治斌,董保城(2005).憲法新論.臺北:元照.
7. 藍麗雪(1998)。國民小學教師應否發給兼課鐘點費之研究。蘭女學報，6，91-106。
8. 嚴祥鸞(1999)。她們的真正平等工作權－同工同酬到同值同酬的意義。律師雜誌，242，61-75。

1. 陳芙萱(2022)。《專科以上兼任教師聘任辦法》之分析。中華行政學報，30，113-122。
2. (2022)。通識英文兼任教師之微觀政治策略與利益。教育研究學報，56(1)，51-82。