미국 사립대학 이사회의 특성

박부권 한국교육사회학회 2004 교육사회학연구 Vol.14 No.3

This article assumes that the international competitiveness of prestigious American private universities is owing to their unique governing bodies. If the article can make clear their characteristics, therefore, they could be guides for reforming the governing bodies of Korean private universities of which total revision is needed. Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Johns Hopkins, Chicago, and Cornell were selected for the study. Harvard and Yale were provincial colleges controlled by a combination of government, church, and lay people and supported with personal endowments and donations as well as government grants. It was not until Johns Hopkins made a model of Brelin University that Harvard and Yale had changed into modern systems. The board of trustees of the American private universities embodied the theory of laymen control after Calvin's Academy which preserved itself from both a single ruler's tyranny and the mob's anarchy. Some general tendencies identifiable over time are a movement away from control by trustees representing churches, diversification of trustees' backgrounds, delegating board power to other groups including a faculty, and tabooing from trustees' intervening academic affairs. The article concludes that trustees' despotism, unlawfulness, and arbitrary intervention with academic affairs have not been rooted out in Korean private universities because their governing boards have not any self-overseeing system unlike the American private universities. The ruling party's amendment to the private school act, in which laymen trustees elected by faculty, parents, staff, and alumni are provided, might contribute to governing body's embodiment of self-inspecting system. However, the election might be changed into recommendation so that the self-perpetuating of the board of trustee could be preserved. 이 연구는 미국 명문 사립대학의 세계적인 경쟁력은 그것의 독특한 지배구조에 힘입은 바 크다고 가정한다. 따라서 만약 그 지배구조의 특성을 밝힐 수 있다면 그것은 우리나라 사립대학의 지배구조를 개선할 때, 중요한 이정표 구실을 할 수 있을 것이다. 연구대상으로 선정한 사립대학은 하버드, 예일, 존스 홉킨스, 코넬, 시카고, 그리고 스탠포드 대학이다. 하버드와 예일과 같은 초기 사립대학들은 지역공동체의 필요에서 지역정부와 사인이 공동기금으로 설립한 것으로 사립대학도 공립대학도 아닌 지역공동체 대학이었다. 이들 대학들이 오늘날과 같은 대학의 면모를 갖추는 것은 19세기 말 설립된 존스 홉킨스가 독일 베르린 대학을 모델로 한 이후부터이다. 미국 사립대학 이사회는 거의 예외 없이 캘빈 아카데미의 전통을 따라 비전문가인 대학외부 인사로 구성한다. 이사회의 구성과 운영은 시간이 지남에 따라 점점 개방화, 세속화, 다양화하는 한편, 학사개입을 금기로 하는 관행이 확고한 전통으로 자리 잡는다. 이 연구결과에 비추어 보면 우리나라 사립대학의 전횡, 비리, 학사간섭을 근절하기 위해서는 무엇보다도 이사회의 자기 검열 장치가 필요하다. 이러한 맥락에서 정부 여당이 제안하고 있는 개방형 이사제도는 우리나라 사립대학 이사회가 자신의 행동과 판단을 스스로 검열할 수 있는 하나의 방법이 될 수 있을 것이다. 그러나 이 제도의 도입은 이사회의 자기영속성을 침해하지 않는 범위 내에서 이루어져야 할 것이다.

전선 : 사학분쟁조정위원회의 위헌성과 그 개편방향

임재홍 ( Chae Hong Lim ) 민주주의법학연구회 2011 민주법학 Vol.0 No.46

이 글은 크게 두 부분으로 구성되어 있다. 하나는 현행 사립학교법상 사학분쟁조정위원회의 위헌성을 검토하는 작업이고(2), 다른 하나는 사학분쟁의 조정 특히 임시이사의 임면과 임시이사 파견 사립학교의 정상화 즉 정이사 선임의 권한을 누가 행사할 수 있도록 할 것인지의 문제로서 행정형 시스템과 사법형 시스템을 소개하는 부분이다(3). 현행 사립학교법은 학교법인에 대한 통제방법으로 행정형 방식을 채택하고 있다. 그럼에도 임시이사의 임면과 임시이사 파견 사립학교의 정이사 선임권은 사학분쟁조정위원회라는 별도의 합의제 의결기관에 권한을 부여하고 있다. 그러나 사학분쟁조정위원회는 공법이나 사회법의 논리를 등한시하고 민사법의 논리를 들어 정이사 선임원칙을 정하고 이에 따라 정이사를 선임함으로써 헌법이 예정하고 있는 학교의 공공성원리에 정면으로 반하는 위헌적인 결론을 내고 있다. 따라서 위헌적인 사분위의 결정을 무효화하고 사립학교법 개정을 위한 재논의가 필요하다. 이 글에서는 사법형보다는 관할청인 교육과학기술부가 권한을 갖는 행정형 시스템을 기본 축으로 하되 의결기구인 사분위를 폐지하고, 자문기구로서 학교법인이사선임위원회를 신설할 것을 내용으로 하는 개선안을 제시하고 있다. The revised Private School Act of 2007 introduced the Private School Dispute Resolution Committee(PSDRC). The legal status of the PSDRC appointed by the recommendation of the Parliament, President and the Supreme Court, is an independent administrative committee, a decision making agency. The task of the PSDRC is the nomination of board trustees from a temporary status to a permanent one at private schools. In Korea, if a board trustees of a private school fails to fill a vacancy in the directorate, and therefore, is deemed incapable of running the school properly, the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology can dispatch Government nominated (Temporary) trustees to form a temporary board trustees and run the school. For the normative normalization it is important that the man who is willing to nurture sound citizens and realizes the ideology of hongikingan (meaning "broadly benefiting all-mankind") should become the new director of the school foundation. But the PSDRC set Criteria which gives former trustees the right to run a school regardless of whether a resolution of disputes between parties has been reached or not. In order to justify its stance, the PSDRC wrongly applied and distorted the Sangji University case(2006Da19504, May 17, 2007). The fact that the PSDRC could apply such standards and normalization principle is attributable to a lack of regulations governing private school board trustees` normalization. So the revision of the Private School Act to improve the public character of the private school, is necessary. Persons with high ethical standards and credibility, who are capable of running the school within the spirit of educational laws and school missions, should be nominated as permanent trustees. As such, a normalization of private institutions and the standards thereof, and qualifications of trustees should be legislated into the Private School Act as specifically as possible. Now we must re-start education reform to promote the basic rights of students, the independence of the schools and university autonomy.

일본의 지역문화재단 의사결정에 관한 연구 - 공익재단법인 전환 지역문화재단을 중심으로

조정윤 동북아시아문화학회 2015 동북아 문화연구 Vol.1 No.44

This paper looks into policy decision-making of regional cultural foundations in Japan, by conducting three case studies, Yokohama Arts Foundation, Kawaski City Cultural Foundation, and Sagamihara City Cultural Foundation. The foundations will be analyzed in relations to the influences of stake-holders and correlations of board of directors and a meeting of the board of trustees. Based on the findings, the paper will put forward practical suggestions in terms of local governance, accountability and transparency of board of directors, and roles of fundraising for a meeting of the board of trustees.

논문 : 개정사립학교법의 헌법적 주요쟁점

표시열 ( Si Yeol Pyo ) 대한교육법학회 2006 敎育 法學 硏究 Vol.18 No.1

우수한 인적자원의 양성은 국가경쟁력의 핵심이 된다. 인적자원 양성의 중심 역할을 하는 학교교육이 다른 분야에 비하여 상대적으로 폐쇄적으로 운영되고 국제경쟁력이 가장 낙후된 분야로 지적되고 있다. 상당한 비중을 차지하고 있는 사립학교의 경우 폐쇄성이 심하여 재단이사회의 개방적 운영을 내용으로 하는 사립학교법이 개정되어 2006년 7월부터 시행된다. 본 논문은 사립학교법 개정의 주요 내용을 살펴보고, 이러한 개정 내용 중 위헌시비가 제기된 중요쟁점들을 헌법적 차원에서 분석하였다. 분석된 중요쟁점은 개방형이사와 감사선임, 임원취임의 승인취소사유 확대와 임원의 직무집행정지, 임시이사 선임요건 완화와 정이사 전환, 이사장 겸직금지와 친족의 학교장 임명금지, 학교장의 임기제한, 대학평의원회설치, 시행일규정, 입법과정이다. 이러한 쟁점분석에 직접 관련되는 선결과제가 사립학교의 법적 성격이므로 이에 관한 다양한 견해들도 살펴보았다. 마지막으로 한나라당이 제출한 개정안을 소개하며 재개정시 여야가 타협하여 위헌성을 피하도록 유의사항을 제시하였다. The key to the future of our national strength is dependent upon the excellence of our human resources. The school system, particularly private, cultivating human resources in Korea has been operating in a closed system, resulting in low ranking in terms of international competitive power. The private school law amended recently to operate openly has exposed critical conflicts in Korean society. This article reviewed the amended contents and analyzed critical issues on the unconstitutionality of the amended articles. One of the critical issues is that one quarter of the board of trustee should be recommended from the school governing committee or university faculty meeting. It could be unconstitutional because it may infringe on the legal autonomy of the board of trustees. This article also reviewed diverse opinions on the legal nature of the private school, because it is directly related to the unconstitutionality of the coerced recommendation of one quarter of the trustees. The alternatives suggested by the opposing party also introduced. Compromise between the parties should be made within the constitutionality of the private school law.

사립학교의 자주성과 공공성에 대한 소고

박부권 한국교육사회학회 2008 교육사회학연구 Vol.18 No.1

The purpose of the paper was to clarify independent and public natures of private schools in social, educational, political, and legal contexts and to find a guiding principle for future private school policies. In detail, the paper reviewed social and theoretical origins of independent and public natures of private schools. It also tried to define their meanings in educational and learning contexts. Finally, it examined how interest groups struggled to define the independent and public natures in their own ways and influenced the amendments of the Korean private school law during the Noh's government. The paper argued that the two natures have been inter-pervious. Their mutual infiltration was originated from social, cultural, and economic changes of Korean society. It also argued that the public nature embodied in private schools could be defined as need of a common curriculum and methodological diversity. The paper found two conflicting perspectives to the independent nature of private schools in Sanji university case. The majority of the Supreme court decided that self-perpetuation of board of trustees was the essence of independence, while the minority argued that the essence was a self-government of the school community including teachers, students, parents, and residents. "The open-board of trustee", which was the critical issue in the process of making the amendments of the Korean private school law, reflected the need of general public that the governing bodies of private schools should embody an apparatus for purifying and self-inspection to prevent themselves from corruption, illegality, and despotism. 사학의 자주성과 공공성은 사학의 필요와 가치를 규정하는 두 기둥이다. 그러나 이 두 이념은 사학을 놓고 벌어진 투쟁에서 거의 예외 없이 투쟁의 이유이자 무기로 이용되었을 뿐, 양자가 품고 있는 조화의 가능성을 탐색해 보려는 노력은 찾아보기 어려웠다. 이 논문은 바로 이러한 문제의식에서 자주성과 공공성의 개념을 사회적, 교육적, 법적, 제도적 배경에서 규명하고, 동시에 사회 환경의 변화에 따라 양자가 어떻게 변화해 왔는가를 분석한다. 사학의 자주성과 공공성은 고정된 어떤 특성이 아니다. 양자는 상호침투하고 그 결과는 사학법 개정으로 나타난다. 이 논문은 교육과 학습의 관점에서 공공성을 내용의 공통성과 방법의 적합성으로 규정한다. 그러나 무엇을 공통적인 내용으로 할 것인가 그리고 무엇을 적합한 방법으로 볼 것인가에 대해서는 여전히 사회적 합의가 필요하다. 여기에서 공통성과 적합성은 다양한 내용과 방법의 존재를 전제로 하는데, 사학의 자주성과 특수성의 논리적 필요성은 바로 이 다양성에 있다. 자주성과 공공성의 공방은 사회를 보는 서로 다른 관점에서 비롯한다. 사회는 자유로운 개인의 평등한 계약으로 이루어진다고 믿고 사학법인의 영속적 자기계수를 자주성의 본질로 보는 관점과, 사학의 자주성을 법인 이사회와 함께 교사, 학부모, 학생, 지역인사를 포함하는 구성원의 자치로 보는 관점은 긴 대립의 역사를 갖는 관점으로서 앞으로도 우리의 사학정책에 중심쟁점이 될 것이다. 참여정부 사학법 개정에서 핵심쟁점이 되었던 개방형 이사제도는 사학법인 속에 공공성을 내장하려는 시도로 이해된다. 재개정을 통하여 이제 공은 사학법인으로 넘어갔다. 개방형 이사제도 논의를 영구히 차단하기 위해서는 공공성의 내장, 철저한 자기 검열과 함께 비리, 부패, 탈법을 일삼는 사학들에 대한 사학자체의 자정노력이 필요하다.

미국 대학에서 학외자 관리 체계의 발전과 대학의 자치

金榮喜 ( Kim Young-hee ) 한국외국어대학교 법학연구소 2008 외법논집 Vol.29 No.-

Today, almost all countries in the world try to reform their higher education system. The goal is to have highly competitive universities for the future of the countries. Many countries actually frame a common plan to reach that goal: setting a model after the universities of the U.S. Korea also efforts to reform its higher education system, and sets a scheme after the American universities. Some university-related people in Korea even urge that it is better for the Korean private universities to reform the university government system like the American universities' board system. Thus the author tries to look into the so-called lay government system. Most American universities are ruled by their board of trustees. The boards are regularly composed of "layperson." Some university-related people in Korea think that the layperson can administer the universities socially effectively, and therefore protect the universities from the unnecessary intervention from the various social powers. According to the history of the American universities, however, the lay government system was designed to make it easy to intervene and control the universities by the social powers. Under the system, therefore, it is relatively hard for the universities to keep the self-governance. Notwithstanding the problem, however, people in the U.S. generally believe that the lay government system is not directly against the universities' self-governance. The reason is that, from the experience, the universities and the American society have made a compromise over the academic self-governance. People inside somehow recognize that the universities can be under the influence of the society as a part of social structure. Meanwhile, people outside respect the trait of academy and secure the academic freedom. On the basis of the compromise, the American universities and the American society have continually operated the lay government system. In sum, the lay government system is based on the history and the social consent of the U.S. At present, the author is not sure whether Korea has such a kind of historical background and the social consent to just welcome the lay government system to the Korean universities.

뉴질랜드 교육개혁의 추진과정과 한국 교육개혁에 주는 시사점

박의수(Park Eui-Soo) 고려대학교 교육문제연구소 2006 敎育問題硏究 Vol.0 No.25

  뉴질랜드는 1989년 이른바“내일의 학교(Tomorrow"s Schools)”라는 이름의 획기적이고 “대담한”교육개혁을 단행했다. 영국식 교육제도를 근간으로 하여 120여 년 동안 비교적 안정된 체제를 유지해 오던 뉴질랜드의 교육개혁은 국제적으로도 많은 관심을 불러일으켰다.<BR>  이 논문은 뉴질랜드 교육개혁의 기본 방향과 뉴질랜드 교육개혁 과정을 고찰하고 개혁의 과정에서 나타난 다양한 문제점과 그 문제들을 어떻게 대응하고 극복했는가를 연구하고, 한국 교육개혁에 주는 몇 가지 시사점을 제시하였다.<BR>  연구 결과에 의하면 뉴질랜드 교육개혁은 강력한 중앙집권적 행정 체제를 학교 단위의 자치기구인 학교운영위원회를 중심으로 개편함으로써 학교와 지역사회가 주체가 되는 경쟁체제를 도입하는 것이었다. 뉴질랜드의 경험이 우리에게 주는 교훈은 개혁 추진 과정에서 발생되는 다양한 문제들을 민주적 절차와 일관성 있는 정책추진을 통하여 극복했다는 것이다. 또한 그 이면에는 투명성을 바탕으로 하는 사회적 신뢰가 뒷받침 되었다는 점도 간과할 수 없다.   The purpose of this article is to study the process of educational reform named “Tomorrow"s Schools” in New Zealand and to get lessons from New Zealand"s experiences. For the purpose to be fulfilled, it was the first to research the social and cultural background and the basic principles of the educational reforms of New Zealand. Next it was studied how to solve the problems in the process of Tomorrow"s Schools reforms in New Zealand and presented some lessons from New Zealand"s experiences.<BR>  New Zealand adopted a school reform that overnight transferred operating responsibility from the central government, the Department of Education, to each school"s newly elected governing board of trustees. And New Zealand gave parents the right to choose which school their child would attend, and encouraged the development of a competitive culture in the state education system. The reason why New Zealand overcame many difficult problems in the course of educational reform is to keep the consistency of principles of reform policies though the ruling party was changed. Another reason not to be overlooked is the transparency of the whole society of New Zealand. So it could be said that the main points of lessons New Zealand gives to Korea are the consistency of policy and the transparency of society.

뉴질랜드 교육자치제도에 관한 연구

박의수(Park Eui-Soo) 고려대학교 교육문제연구소 2007 敎育問題硏究 Vol.0 No.27

  뉴질랜드는 1989년 “내일의 학교”개혁을 통하여 종래의 중앙집권적 행정체제를 학교운영위원회를 중심으로 하는 분권적이고 자율적인 운영체제로 바꾸었다. 뉴질랜드의 교육개혁은 매우 대담하고 추진 과정이 신속하게 이루어졌을 뿐 아니라 10여년에 걸쳐 꾸준히 일관된 방향으로 추진되어 성공적으로 정착하게 되었다는 점에서 세계의 주목을 받고 있다.<BR>  본 연구는 학교운영위원회를 중심으로 뉴질랜드 교육자치제의 원리를 고찰하고 그 성공 요인이 어디 있는가를 탐구하고자 하였다. 먼저 뉴질랜드의 사회 문화적 배경 특히 교육문화에 역점을 두어 살펴보고, 이어서 뉴질랜드 교육자치의 핵심 기구인 학교운영위원회, 교육감사원, 뉴질랜드 자격관리청, 그리고 교육부의 조직과 기능에 대하여 구체적으로 고찰하였다.<BR>  그 결과 정부는 인사와 재정운영을 비롯한 학교 운영의 모든 권한을 학교와 지역사회 대표들로 구성된 학교운영위원회에 이양하였고, 교육부는 재정지원과 교육과정 지침을 학교에 제공하고 교육감사원과 자격관리청을 통하여 그에 대한 감사와 교육의 질 관리를 하도록 함으로써 각각의 기구들이 세방향에서 권한과 책임을 나누어 가지고 견제와 균형을 이루도록 하고 있다. 또한 정직하고 투명한 사회 풍토, 중앙집권 체제의 과거 교육부를 해체하고, 비전문가 집단이라고 할 수 있는 학교운영위원회에 대한 지속적인 교육과 훈련 등을 중요한 성공요인으로 꼽을 수 있을 것이다.   In 1989 New Zealand established the new national education system by the“Tomorrow"s Schools” Reform. It was a self-governing system that the central  government Department of Education was replaced with a much smaller Ministry of Education charged with making policy recommendations rather than running schools. The reform of New Zealand education became a global concerns because of it"s rapid and bold carrying out.<BR>  The purpose of this article is to study the principle of the Self-Governing System of New Zealand Education in order to know the significant reason of the success. So the organizations and roles of the School Boards of Trustees(BOT), Ministry of Education(MOE), Education Review Office(ERO), and New Zealand Qualifications Authority(NZQA) had been investigated.<BR>  The BOT which is composed of the representatives of local school and community takes charge of all school managements including the appointment of principal and staffs and using the school fund. The MOE gives schools the national curriculum statements and the bulk fund. ERO carries out reviews of education institutions and services, and national evaluations of education issues. And the NZQA"s primary function is to coordinate the administration and quality assurance of national qualifications in New Zealand. Each organization plays it"s original roles and checks and balances each other.<BR>  It will be supposed that the main successful reasons of self-governing system of New Zealand education are ①the honest and transparent society of New Zealand and ②the Department of Education was replaced with the Ministry of Education and ③various programs for training the members of Boards of Trustees.

개정 사립학교법의 위헌성

김호정 ( Kim Ho-jeong ) 한국외국어대학교 법학연구소 2007 외법논집 Vol.25 No.-

Various legal regulations on the exercise of management right of an educational foundation can be justified only in the context of public aspect of private educational foundation's role in public education. The prime examples of such government regulations which the revised Private Schools Act prescribes include open trustee system, alleviated legal requirements to revoke the appointment of school directors, additional circumstances to appoint a provisional director, grant of deliberation powers to the university boards of trustees, and mandatory installation of such boards in universities. Therefore, the question of unconstitutionality of such clauses depends upon the bounds of government regulations on private educational foundations. The question of the extent or legality of government regulations or interventions on private educational foundations should be discussed in the context of their autonomous rights, which are awarded to each private school so that it shall exercise its own right in the standing of a legal person. The incorporation of private schools is designed to maintain each private school's purpose of foundation. These objects are to be attained by the directors appointed by each school founder and the appointed directors thereafter, to maintain the consistency of policies. This is the essence of board system of a foundation and core of its management structure. Therefore, the government regulations on each educational foundation can only be justified as long as the regulation serves to help pursuit the purpose of each educational foundation. The government has had financial problems in managing public education. On this fiscal grounds, the government has encouraged to establish incorporated educational institutions and led each school founder to contribute his private property to found his own schools. In examining this process, it should be noted that there are constitutional agreements between the government and school founders that guarantees the educational foundations to enjoy the freedom of private school which, in pursuing the purpose of foundation, enables them to operate schools independently. Therefore, the government regulations and interventions on incorporated educational institutions can only be justified when they fall within certain constitutional boundary, and such government supervision should serve to promote each institute to pursuit its own purpose of foundation and to aid each school not to deviate from its original object of foundation. In no circumstances, the government should not infringe upon the essential part of freedom of each school to manage its own educational property and not harm its standing as a legal person. In conclusion, several provisions of the revised Private School Acts should be regarded as unconstitutional for the following reasons : First, the revised articles enforcing each educational institute to appoint open trustees from the list of people recommended by the university board of trustees are in violation of the essential part of property right and the freedom of school, in that such articles force the school founders and the board of directors to replace or fill up the trustees irrespective of their own judgement or will notwithstanding that there are other less restrictive measures to prevent the corruption of private school system and to promote the transparency of school management. For the same reason, the clauses alleviating legal requirements to revoke the appointment of school directors and pluralizing additional circumstances to appoint a provisional director are considered to be violating the property rights prescribed in the article 23 of Constitutional Law. Third, the provisions which grant the deliberation powers to the university boards of trustees that are comprised of faculty members, students and parents and enforce the installation of such boards in universities may be construed as unconstitutional in the aspect that such provisions excessively harm the essential part of each educational foundation's property rights and the autonomous rights of universities by allowing the faculty members, students and parents to share the powers of the boards of directors and the principals.

비영리 학교법인 이사회에 대한 적응적 리더십 교육

이원일(LEE Wonil) 장로회신학대학교 기독교사상과 문화연구원 2016 장신논단 Vol.48 No.2