校外培训机构的法律地位及其规范意义

• 作者： 张 奇 ¹ 湛中乐 ²
• 作者单位：
  1.  武汉理工大学马克思主义学院

  2.  北京大学法学院
• 提交时间：2024-09-03

摘要: 基于民办教育立法的沿革，校外培训机构被定位为《民办教育促进法》中的民办学校。然而，作为校外教育的一种，校外培训在国民教育体系中是对学校教育的补充，其目的是促进人的个性化发展。将校外培训机构定位为民办学校，因未能观照校外培训的特殊性而消解了其补充作用。校外培训机构不同于民办学校。在此基础上，校外培训机构的法律地位既包括在民事关系中的法人地位，也包括在行政关系中的法律地位。关于前者，不能简单地认为，校外培训机构是公司法人；关于后者，校外培训机构应被定位为《教育法》中的其他教育机构。校外培训机构的其他教育机构身份是教育立法对其予以特别规范的正当性基础。以上法律地位的明确，其规范意义主要有两点：一是应将校外培训机构从《民办教育促进法》的调整范围中剥离出来，由其他立法特别规范之。其他立法在理论上可以是校外教育立法或者社会教育立法，但于我国而言，终身教育立法是更为现实的选择。二是其他立法对校外培训机构的规范应不同于对商事主体、民办学校的规范，前者所受之规范强度应介于后二者所受规范强度之间。至于具体规范强度的选择，则取决于校外培训教育公益性之确保与补充作用之最大限度发挥。

Abstract: Based on the evolution of the Private Education Promotion Law, tutoring institutions have been positioned as private schools. However, as a kind of off-campus education, tutoring is a supplement to school education in the national education system, which promotes personalized development of individuals. The positioning of tutoring institutions as private schools has diminished their complementary role due to the failure to take into account the particularity of tutoring institutions. Tutoring institutions are different from private schools. On this basis, the legal status of tutoring institutions includes not only the legal person status in civil relations, but also the legal status in administrative relations. Regarding the former, it cannot be simply assumed that tutoring institutions are corporate entities; regarding the latter, tutoring institutions should be positioned as other educational institutions under the Education Law. The identity of other educational institutions of tutoring institutions is the legitimate basis for the special regulation of tutoring institutions. The clarity of the above legal status has two main normative meanings: first, tutoring institutions should be separated from the adjustment scope of the Private Education Promotion Law and specially regulated by other legislation. In theory, other legislation can be off-campus education legislation or social education legislation, but in China, lifelong education legislation is a more realistic choice; the second is that the regulation of tutoring institutions by other legislations should be different from that of commercial subjects and private schools, and the normative strength of the former should be between the normative strength of the latter two. As for the choice of specific normative strength, it depends on the guarantee of the public welfare of education and the maximum utilization of supplementary role of tutoring.

• 分类： 教育学 >> 基础教育
• 说明： “教育法治”专栏
• 稿件状态： 已在期刊出版
期刊名称： 《华东师范大学学报（教育科学版）》 2024年 第9期 “教育法治”专栏
• 引用： PSSXiv:202409.01362 (或此版本 PSSXiv:202409.01362V1)
  DOI:10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2024.09.009
  CSTR:32012.36.PSSXiv202409.01362
• 推荐引用方式： 张 奇,湛中乐.校外培训机构的法律地位及其规范意义.华东师范大学学报（教育科学版）,2024(9).[DOI:10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2024.09.009] (点此复制)