試析受教育權(quán)理論發(fā)展綜述中英文翻譯

//.-.試析受教育權(quán)理論發(fā)展綜述中英文翻譯W.k.chemantherighttoeducationtheorydevelopmentinbothEnglishandChinesetranslation論文摘要現(xiàn)行憲法頒布以來(lái)，受教育權(quán)一直是理論研究的熱點(diǎn)，受教育權(quán)的行使涉及到受教育權(quán)的概念、本質(zhì)、法律關(guān)系等一系列問(wèn)題，總結(jié)其理論發(fā)展脈絡(luò)和存在的問(wèn)題，有利于辨析澄清觀點(diǎn)和完善制度規(guī)則，有利于受教育權(quán)糾紛的解決。Papersincethecurrentconstitutionpromulgated,therighttoeducationhasalwaysbeenthehotspotofthetheoryresearch,theexerciseoftherighttoeducationreferstotheconceptoftherighttoeducation,essence,legalrelationshipandaseriesofproblems,summedupthetheoreticaldevelopmentvenationandtheexistingproblems,andisconducivetodifferentiatetoclarifyideasandperfectthesystemofrules,isconducivetothesolutionofthedisputesovertherighttoeducation.論文關(guān)鍵詞受教育權(quán)法律關(guān)系權(quán)利救濟(jì)Paperkeywordseducationallegalrelationshiprightremedy現(xiàn)行憲法頒布以來(lái)，受教育權(quán)一直是理論界研究的熱點(diǎn)，學(xué)者們以科學(xué)、實(shí)用的態(tài)度開(kāi)展了受教育權(quán)的探討，從不同角度闡述受教育權(quán)的概念、本質(zhì)、法律關(guān)系等理論問(wèn)題，學(xué)術(shù)上出現(xiàn)了許多理論創(chuàng)新和有代表性的作品，主要研究成果綜述如下：Sincethecurrentconstitutionpromulgated,therighttoeducationhasbeenthehotspotintheoryresearch,scholarswithscientific,practicalattitudehascarriedoutthediscussionoftherighttoeducation,explainstheconceptoftherighttoeducationfromdifferentangles,essence,legalrelationshiptheoryissuessuchas,thereappearalotoftheoreticalinnovationandacademicrepresentativeworks,themainresearchresultsweresummarizedasfollows:一、受教育權(quán)理論的主要觀點(diǎn)One,themainpointofthetheoryoftherighttoeducation由于現(xiàn)行《憲法》、《教育法》、《未成年人保護(hù)法》、《行政復(fù)議法》等條文中涉及的“受教育權(quán)”內(nèi)涵，沒(méi)有相應(yīng)的解釋和法律上的界定，學(xué)者們對(duì)受教育權(quán)的定義、本質(zhì)、內(nèi)容及相互關(guān)系等問(wèn)題眾說(shuō)紛紜。Duetothecurrentconstitution,theeducationlaw,minorsprotectionlaw,theadministrativereconsiderationlawinvolvedintheprovisionof"educational"connotation,nocorrespondingexplanationandlegaldefinition,scholarsofeducationalproblemssuchasdefinition,essence,contentandtherelationshipbetweentheopinionsvary.（一）受教育權(quán)的定義(a)thedefinitionoftherighttoeducation關(guān)于什么是“受教育權(quán)”，學(xué)者們見(jiàn)仁見(jiàn)智，定義各不相同。有的從受教育的途徑、場(chǎng)所以及學(xué)習(xí)內(nèi)容來(lái)定義，有的從國(guó)家保障義務(wù)來(lái)定義，有的從促進(jìn)人的發(fā)展角度來(lái)定義，有的結(jié)合人的發(fā)展和國(guó)家的保障義務(wù)來(lái)定義，如龔向和認(rèn)為：“所謂受教育權(quán)，是指公民依法享有的要求國(guó)家積極提供均等的受教育條件和機(jī)會(huì)，通過(guò)學(xué)習(xí)來(lái)發(fā)展其個(gè)性、才智和身心能力，以獲得平等的生存和發(fā)展機(jī)會(huì)的基本權(quán)利?！边@些定義大多數(shù)是從憲法的角度，從國(guó)家作為義務(wù)的主要承擔(dān)者的角度去概括，而忽略了公民受教育權(quán)的行使涉及的義務(wù)主體除國(guó)家之外還有教育機(jī)構(gòu)、監(jiān)護(hù)人和其他主體，這是一個(gè)缺陷，需要進(jìn)一步完善。現(xiàn)實(shí)中形形色色的受教育權(quán)糾紛，有許多并非是受教育者和國(guó)家的爭(zhēng)議，而是受教育者與學(xué)校、監(jiān)護(hù)人、其他組織或個(gè)人的爭(zhēng)議，按照我國(guó)學(xué)術(shù)界的主流定義方式，受教育權(quán)是公民向國(guó)家要求學(xué)習(xí)的機(jī)會(huì)和條件，那么這些糾紛就不能稱之為受教育權(quán)糾紛，這顯然難以自圓其說(shuō)。Aboutwhatis"therighttoeducation",scholarshavedifferentopinions,differentdefinition.Someplacefrombythewayofeducation,andtodefinethelearningcontents,fromnationalsecurityobligationisdefined,somedefinedfromtheAngleofpromotingthedevelopmentofpeople,somecombinationofpeople'sdevelopmentandnationalsecurityobligationisdefined,suchasgongtoandthink:"therighttoeducation,referstothecitizensshallhavetherightrequirementsofcountriesactivelyprovideequaleducationconditionsandopportunities,bylearningtodeveloptheirpersonality,intelligenceandphysicalandmentalabilities,inordertoobtainthesurvivalanddevelopmentofanequalchanceoffundamentalrights."MostofthedefinitionsfromtheAngleoftheconstitution,fromtheviewofstateasthemainundertakerofobligationtosumup,whileignoringthecitizens'exerciseoftherighttoreceiveeducationinvolvinginadditiontotheobligationthecountryandeducationinstitutions,theguardianandothermainbody,isthisadefect,needtobefurtherperfected.Foravarietyofdisputesovertherighttoeducation,inrealitytherearealotofisnottheeducateesandcontroversyofthecountry,butbyeducatorsandschool,theguardian,otherorganizationorindividualdisputes,accordingtothedefinitionofthemainstreamofacademiccirclesinourcountry,therighttoeducationisacitizentothestaterequiresthelearningopportunitiesandconditions,thenthedisputescannotbecalledadisputeovertherighttoeducation,itisdifficulttojustify.（二）受教育權(quán)的本質(zhì)(2)thenatureoftherighttoeducation受教育權(quán)的本質(zhì)解決的是受教育權(quán)是一種什么樣的權(quán)利，權(quán)利的實(shí)現(xiàn)對(duì)受教育者有何意義。日本學(xué)者對(duì)受教育權(quán)本質(zhì)的認(rèn)識(shí)經(jīng)歷了從政治權(quán)利的公民權(quán)說(shuō)到生存權(quán)說(shuō)再到學(xué)習(xí)權(quán)說(shuō)三種學(xué)說(shuō)的演變，這三種學(xué)說(shuō)曾被我國(guó)學(xué)者多次援引，例如龔向和從人權(quán)理論的角度來(lái)觀察受教育權(quán)本質(zhì)學(xué)說(shuō)的演變，提出受教育權(quán)本質(zhì)的認(rèn)識(shí)有四種學(xué)說(shuō)：公民權(quán)說(shuō)、生存權(quán)或社會(huì)權(quán)說(shuō)、學(xué)習(xí)權(quán)說(shuō)、發(fā)展權(quán)說(shuō)。Thenatureoftherighttoeducationistosolvetherighttoeducationisakindofwhatkindofright,what'sthemeaningoftherealizationoftherightsofeducatees.Japanesescholarsunderstandingofthenatureoftherighttoeducationhasexperiencedfrompoliticalrightsofcitizenshipwhenitcomestolifeagaintotherighttolearntheevolutionofthetheoryofthree,thethreetheorieshasbeenscholarsquotedmanytimesinourcountry,suchasgongtoandfromtheAngleofhumanrightstheorytoobservetheevolutionofthenatureoftherighttoeducationtheory,putforwardtherighttoeducationoftheessenceofthefourkindsoftheories:civilrights,righttolife,orsocialrightssaid,learningright,therighttodevelopment.關(guān)于受教育權(quán)的本質(zhì)，公民權(quán)說(shuō)和生存權(quán)說(shuō)遭到的質(zhì)疑比較多，兩種學(xué)說(shuō)過(guò)多地從政治和經(jīng)濟(jì)的角度對(duì)受教育權(quán)加以闡釋，忽視了人的豐富性和人的目的地位。目前較為流行的四種學(xué)說(shuō)中的“發(fā)展權(quán)說(shuō)”，實(shí)際上已被“學(xué)習(xí)權(quán)說(shuō)”所吸收。20世紀(jì)80年代以后，學(xué)習(xí)權(quán)說(shuō)被國(guó)際社會(huì)普遍接受。學(xué)習(xí)權(quán)包含了學(xué)習(xí)自由（主動(dòng)學(xué)習(xí)）與受教育權(quán)（被動(dòng)學(xué)習(xí)）。它強(qiáng)調(diào)了受教育者在教育過(guò)程中的主體地位，強(qiáng)調(diào)了主體在享受受教育權(quán)利時(shí)的主動(dòng)性與自由性，遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超出了“接受教育”的含義，最接近受教育權(quán)的本質(zhì)，但也不能以學(xué)習(xí)權(quán)的概念取代受教育權(quán)，因?yàn)槭芙逃龣?quán)是學(xué)習(xí)權(quán)中的一部分，即經(jīng)他人協(xié)助下的學(xué)習(xí)權(quán)。Aboutthenatureoftherighttoeducation,citizenshipandtherighttolifebythequestionismore,twotheoriestoomuchontherighttoeducationfromtheperspectiveofpoliticalandeconomicinterpretation,ignorethepeople'srichnessandthepurposeoftheposition.Atpresentmorepopularofthefourtheoriesof"therighttodevelopment",infacthasbeenabsorbedby"learningright".Sincethe1980s,thestudysaidrightsisacceptedbytheinternationalcommunity.Learningincludestherightoffreelearning,activelearning,withtherighttoeducation(passivelearning).Itemphasizedtheeducatee'smainbodystatusintheprocessofeducation,emphasizestheinitiativeofsubjectwhileenjoyingtheeducationrightsandfreedom,farbeyondthemeaningof"education",themostclosetothenatureoftherighttoeducation,butalsocan'tinordertostudytheconceptoftherighttoreplacetherighttoeducation,becausetherighttoeducationispartofthelearningright,namely,bythehelpofotherstolearn.（三）受教育權(quán)法律關(guān)系(3)therighttoeducationlegalrelationship我國(guó)現(xiàn)行《憲法》第46條第1款規(guī)定：“中華人民共和國(guó)公民有受教育的權(quán)利和義務(wù)”。對(duì)于現(xiàn)行憲法這種規(guī)定，學(xué)者們?nèi)匀挥兴蓡?wèn)，受教育到底是權(quán)利還是義務(wù)，受教育的這種所謂的權(quán)利與義務(wù)的一致性或雙重性到底是怎樣體現(xiàn)出來(lái)的？權(quán)利主體和義務(wù)主體指向的是什么？權(quán)利主體與義務(wù)主體是否同一？Ourcurrentconstitutionprescribedinparagraph1ofarticle46:"citizensofthePeople'sRepublicofChinatherightsandobligationsofeducation".Forthecurrentconstitution,scholarsstillhavedoubt,whethereducationisarightorobligation,theeducationoftherightsandobligationsoftheso-calledconsistencyordualismreflectedhow?Whatrightsandobligationssubjectto?Thesubjectsofrightsandobligationsarethesame?從受教育權(quán)的構(gòu)成看，權(quán)利主體是具有中國(guó)國(guó)籍的人。義務(wù)主體是誰(shuí)？是否同權(quán)利主體的范圍一致？由于受教育權(quán)是一項(xiàng)權(quán)利構(gòu)造較為復(fù)雜的權(quán)利，在公民受教育的過(guò)程中，除了國(guó)家提供教育機(jī)會(huì)和條件，學(xué)校、教師、父母等主體也會(huì)以不同的身份或形式參與進(jìn)來(lái)，在教育上也享有特定的權(quán)利和義務(wù)。同時(shí)，受教育權(quán)對(duì)應(yīng)的相關(guān)義務(wù)又包括消極的不侵犯公民受教育權(quán)的義務(wù)與積極保障公民受教育權(quán)的義務(wù)，消極義務(wù)與積極義務(wù)的承擔(dān)主體是不一致的、不同一的。消極義務(wù)即不侵犯公民受教育權(quán)的主體具有廣泛性，任何公民、社會(huì)團(tuán)體、企事業(yè)單位、國(guó)家機(jī)關(guān)都不得侵犯公民受教育權(quán)的享有與行使。那么，受教育的積極義務(wù)的承擔(dān)者是誰(shuí)呢？根據(jù)憲法精神，國(guó)家是受教育積極義務(wù)的承擔(dān)者。因此，受教育權(quán)的義務(wù)承擔(dān)者，不僅包括國(guó)家，還包括教育機(jī)構(gòu)、監(jiān)護(hù)人和社會(huì)上的其他組織或個(gè)人。受教育權(quán)的權(quán)利客體，簡(jiǎn)單地說(shuō)，就是教育，包括一切種類和一切級(jí)別的教育。Lookedfromthestructureoftherighttoeducation,therightsubjectisthepersonwhoshallhaveChinesenationality.Compulsorysubjectwhoisit?Whetheragreewiththescopeoftherightsubject?Becausetherighttoeducationisarightstructuremorecomplex,intheprocessofChinesecitizenstoreceiveeducation,exceptforcountriestoprovideeducationopportunitiesandconditions,schools,teachers,parents,etc.Thesubjectwillbeinadifferentformofidentityorinvolved,ontheeducationandenjoycertainrightsandobligations.Correspondingobligationsatthesametime,therighttoeducation,includingnegativenotinfringinguponthecitizenrighttoeducationofobligationandpositiveobligationtoguaranteecitizenstherighttoreceiveeducation,negativeobligationandpositiveobligationtobearthemainbodyisnotconsistent,differentone.Negativeobligationthatisnotthemainbodyofinfringementofcitizens'righttoeducationhasuniversality,anycitizens,socialorganizations,enterprisesandinstitutions,stateorgansarenotallowedtoinfringeuponcitizensenjoyandexercisetherighttoeducation.So,bythepositiveobligationofeducationwhoisconsidering?Accordingtothespiritoftheconstitution,thecountryisundertheobligationofeducationactively.Obligationtohitfromtherighttoeducation,therefore,notonlyincludingcountries,alsoincludingeducationinstitutions,theguardianandotherorganizationsorindividualsinthesociety.Righttoeducationoftherighttoobject,simply,iseducation,includingalltypesandalllevelsofeducation.在受教育權(quán)的法律關(guān)系中爭(zhēng)論最多的是受教育權(quán)的內(nèi)容，由于我國(guó)憲法沒(méi)有明確受教育權(quán)的范圍和界限。有學(xué)者認(rèn)為主要包括三方面的內(nèi)容，第一是學(xué)習(xí)的權(quán)利。第二是義務(wù)教育無(wú)償化。第三是教育機(jī)會(huì)均等。龔向和按照時(shí)間順序，分成開(kāi)始階段的“學(xué)習(xí)機(jī)會(huì)權(quán)”（包括升學(xué)機(jī)會(huì)權(quán)、教育選擇權(quán)、學(xué)生身份權(quán)）、過(guò)程階段的“學(xué)習(xí)條件權(quán)”（包括教育條件建設(shè)請(qǐng)求權(quán)、教育條件利用權(quán)、獲得教育資助權(quán)）、結(jié)束階段的“學(xué)習(xí)成功權(quán)”（包括公正評(píng)價(jià)權(quán)、獲得學(xué)業(yè)、學(xué)位證書(shū)權(quán)），從現(xiàn)有的教育立法來(lái)看，受教育權(quán)主要包括三方面的內(nèi)容，即免費(fèi)義務(wù)教育、教育機(jī)會(huì)平等，以及選擇教育的自由。但選擇教育的自由在義務(wù)教育階段，有選擇私立學(xué)校的自由，不包括在公立學(xué)校之間進(jìn)行選擇的自由，在非義務(wù)教育階段，包括選擇是否接受教育的自由，選擇不同類型教育（如職業(yè)教育或普通教育）的自由，以及選擇哪一所學(xué)校的自由?？傊芙逃龣?quán)的內(nèi)容由各國(guó)法律加以確定，同時(shí)，受?chē)?guó)際人權(quán)法的約束，國(guó)際人權(quán)法規(guī)定的受教育權(quán)最低核心內(nèi)容，需要所有締約國(guó)承擔(dān)并立即實(shí)現(xiàn)。作為國(guó)際人權(quán)法的締約國(guó)，我國(guó)應(yīng)參照國(guó)際人權(quán)法規(guī)定的受教育權(quán)核心內(nèi)容，在立法中確定我國(guó)受教育權(quán)的范圍和界限。Disputeinthelegalrelationshipofrighttoeducationisthecontentoftherighttoeducation,becauseourcountryconstitutionisnotclearlythescopeandboundariesoftherighttoeducation.Somescholarsthinkthatcontentmainlyincludesthreeaspects,firstistherightoflearning.Thesecondisthecompulsoryeducationforfree.Thethirdistheeducationequalityofopportunity.Gongtoandinaccordancewiththetimeorder,dividedintobeginningphaseofthe"rightoflearningopportunities(includingtherightofentranceopportunity,educationoption,rightofstudent),theprocessstageofright"to"learningconditions(includingeducationconditionsforconstruction,educationrights,gettheeducationfunding),endstageofthe"right"tolearningsuccess(includingtherightoffairevaluation,school,degreecertificate),fromthepointofviewoftheexistingeducationlegislation,thecontentoftherighttoeducationmainlyincludesthreeaspects,namely,freecompulsoryeducation,educationequalityofopportunity,aswellasthefreedomofchoiceofeducation.Butthefreedomofchoiceofeducationatcompulsoryeducationstage,thereisfreedomofchoiceofprivateschools,publicschoolsarenotincludedinbetweenthefreedomofchoice,inthestageofcompulsoryeducation,includingthefreedomtochoosewhetherornottoaccepteducation,choosedifferenttypesofeducation(suchasavocationaleducationorgeneraleducation)offreedom,andfreedomofchoiceofwhatschool.Inshort,thecontentoftherighttoeducationbynationallawtodetermine,atthesametime,boundbyinternationalhumanrightslaw,internationalhumanrightslawoftherighttoeducationminimumcorecontent,requiresallpartiestoundertakeandimplementimmediately.Asaninternationalhumanrightslawofthecontractingstates,ourcountryshouldrefertointernationalhumanrightslawrighttoeducationofthecorecontent,inthelegislationtodeterminethescopeandboundariesoftherighttoeducationinourcountry.（四）受教育權(quán)糾紛涉及的法律關(guān)系(4)therighttoeducationdisputesinvolvinglegalrelationship受教育權(quán)糾紛涉及的參加者包括受教育者、教育行政主體、學(xué)校、監(jiān)護(hù)人以及其他社會(huì)組織和個(gè)人。其中，受教育者與教育行政主體發(fā)生糾紛，其法律關(guān)系屬于較為純粹的行政法律關(guān)系；受教育者與父母或其他監(jiān)護(hù)人因教育問(wèn)題發(fā)生糾紛，屬于民事法律關(guān)系；受教育者與教育機(jī)構(gòu)以外的其他社會(huì)組織或個(gè)人發(fā)生受教育權(quán)糾紛，基本屬于民事主體之間的侵權(quán)糾紛，也可以歸入民事法律關(guān)系。唯有受教育者與學(xué)校或其他教育機(jī)構(gòu)發(fā)生的受教育權(quán)糾紛，其法律關(guān)系的定性可謂眾說(shuō)紛紜。法學(xué)界關(guān)于受教育者與學(xué)校的法律關(guān)系，大致有特別權(quán)力關(guān)系說(shuō)、一般行政法律關(guān)系說(shuō)、教育契約關(guān)系說(shuō)、監(jiān)護(hù)代理關(guān)系說(shuō)和民事與行政關(guān)系兼有說(shuō)五種學(xué)說(shuō)，但前四種學(xué)說(shuō)都無(wú)法涵蓋所有教育層次和教育類型的受教育者，只有民事與行政關(guān)系兼有說(shuō)在實(shí)務(wù)中被普遍采用。但這種理論本身也存在一定缺陷，如學(xué)校根據(jù)“學(xué)校規(guī)章”決定學(xué)生退學(xué)和開(kāi)除等，屬于大學(xué)自治性權(quán)力，由于沒(méi)有國(guó)家法律的授權(quán)，相對(duì)方的權(quán)益就無(wú)法得到有效的救濟(jì)。因此，有必要突破傳統(tǒng)的“授權(quán)性行政主體”理論，引入“自治性行政主體”的概念。Educationaldisputesinvolvingparticipantsincludingtheeducatees,educationadministrativesubject,school,theguardianandothersocialorganizationsandindividuals.Adisputeamongthem,thepedagogueandeducationadministrativesubject,itslegalrelationsarerelativelypureadministrativelegalrelationship;Byeducatorsandparentsorotherguardiansofadisputeduetotheeducationproblem,belongstothecivillegalrelationship;Educatedandofthesocialorganizationsorindividualsotherthaneducationinstitutionsoccurreddisputesovertherighttoeducation,basicbelongstotortdisputesbetweencivilmainbody,canalsobeclassifiedascivillegalrelationship.Onlytheeducateewithschoolsorotherinstitutionsofeducationdisputesovertherighttoeducation,thelegalrelationshipofqualitativeisdebated.Legalscienceofeducateesandthelegalrelationsoftheschool,roughlysaidspecialpowerrelation,generaladministrativelegalrelationship,educationcontractrelationship,theguardianshipagencyrelationshipandcivilandadministrativerelationswithfivekindsoftheories,butthefirstfourtheoriescannotcoverallthelevelofeducationandeducationtypeoftheeducatees,onlysaysbothcivilandadministrativerelationiswidelyusedinpractice.Butthistheoryitselfalsohassomedefects,suchasschooldeterminedaccordingtotherules""schoolstudentsdropoutofschoolandfireandsoon,belongtotheuniversityautonomypower,withouttheauthorizationofnationallaw,ineachother'srightsandinterestscannotgeteffectiverelief.Therefore,itisnecessarytobreakthroughthetraditional"authorizedadministrativesubjecttheory,introducetheconceptof"autonomyofadministrativesubject".對(duì)于學(xué)校與學(xué)生就受教育權(quán)糾紛所涉及的法律關(guān)系，我國(guó)可以借鑒日本和我國(guó)臺(tái)灣地區(qū)的做法，將“特別權(quán)力關(guān)系說(shuō)”發(fā)展為“基礎(chǔ)關(guān)系與管理關(guān)系說(shuō)”。涉及基礎(chǔ)關(guān)系的學(xué)生身份的取得、喪失及降級(jí)等決定，都屬于可訴行政行為。其他如對(duì)學(xué)生的服裝、作息時(shí)間、宿舍管理規(guī)定等都屬于管理關(guān)系，不必遵循法律保留原則，屬于不可訴的行政行為。受處分學(xué)生可以通過(guò)申訴途徑謀求救濟(jì)，如未獲救濟(jì)，可以依法提起行政復(fù)議及行政訴訟。Hastherighttoeducationforschoolsandstudentslegalrelationsinvolvedinthedispute,ourcountrycandrawlessonsfromthepracticeofJapanandTaiwanareainourcountry,the"specialpowerrelation"to"basicrelationshipandmanagement".Involvesthebasicrelationsoftheacquisition,lossanddegradationofstudentdecision,belongtoactionableadministrativeaction.Othersuchasclothing,workandresttimeforstudents,dormitorymanagementregulationsbelongtomanagerelationships,don'tneedtofollowtheprincipleoflawreserve,belongstoadministrativebehaviorisv.Disciplinedstudentsmayseekreliefthroughappealways,suchasdidnotgetarelief,canbringadministrativereconsiderationandadministrativelawsuitinaccordancewiththelaw.二、實(shí)踐中和立法上需要進(jìn)一步明確的問(wèn)題Second,theproblemsneedtobefurtherdefinedonthepracticeandlegislation（一）“就近”“免試入學(xué)”的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)(a)"near"and"anexemptionentrance"standards義務(wù)教育階段的就學(xué)糾紛，在現(xiàn)實(shí)中主要表現(xiàn)為適齡兒童就近入學(xué)、免試入學(xué)、監(jiān)護(hù)人拒不送被監(jiān)護(hù)人入學(xué)等方面的爭(zhēng)議。Compulsoryeducationphaseoftheschooldispute,mainshowisinrealityschool-agechildrenentrance,anexemptiontothenearestentrance,refusedtosendguardianreadhiswardalectureonadmission,etc.根據(jù)《義務(wù)教育法》的精神，使兒童、少年就近入學(xué)，是地方各級(jí)人民政府的法定職責(zé)。但實(shí)際上，各縣市政府編制的義務(wù)教育學(xué)校設(shè)置規(guī)劃中，并沒(méi)有中小學(xué)合理布局的具體標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，有時(shí)政府劃分學(xué)區(qū)沒(méi)有考慮居民實(shí)際居住狀況，而過(guò)多的考慮行政區(qū)域的劃分或?qū)W生戶籍所在地等其他因素，出現(xiàn)了只隔一堵墻卻不在一個(gè)學(xué)區(qū)不能就近入學(xué)的情況。還有一些偏遠(yuǎn)地區(qū)適齡兒童上學(xué)要翻山越嶺，因太遠(yuǎn)太累孩子不愿上學(xué)還要責(zé)罰其父母的情況。要解決現(xiàn)實(shí)中存在的問(wèn)題，除了制定學(xué)校設(shè)置和學(xué)區(qū)劃分的具體標(biāo)準(zhǔn)外，還要轉(zhuǎn)變觀念，使政府在義務(wù)教育上履行職責(zé)。有一些地方就根據(jù)本地實(shí)際，制定了當(dāng)?shù)剞k學(xué)條件標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，如《河南省農(nóng)村義務(wù)教育階段學(xué)校辦學(xué)條件基本標(biāo)準(zhǔn)（試行）》規(guī)定：“根據(jù)人口分布和人口出生率等綜合因素，人口比較密集的平原地區(qū)，原則上每0.5萬(wàn)人左右設(shè)一所完全小學(xué)，每2-3萬(wàn)人設(shè)一所初中?！薄氨局徒雽W(xué)的原則，平原地區(qū)小學(xué)服務(wù)半徑一般不超過(guò)2公里（不含寄宿制學(xué)校）。”總之，只有制定就近入學(xué)的具體標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，人們才能判斷政府設(shè)置學(xué)校是否合理，同時(shí)，也會(huì)減少由此產(chǎn)生的糾紛以及輟學(xué)現(xiàn)象的發(fā)生。Accordingtothespiritofthecompulsoryeducationlaw,childrenandadolescentsneighborhoodschool,isthelegalresponsibilityofthelocalpeople'sgovernmentsatvariouslevels.Butinfact,variouscountiescitycompulsoryeducationschoolsetupplan,nospecificstandard,thereasonablelayoutofprimaryandsecondaryschoolsaresometimesdividedgovernmentdistrictresidentsdidnottakeintoaccounttheactuallivingconditions,buttoomuchconsideringthedivisionofadministrativeregions,orotherfactorssuchasstudentcensusregisterseat,aseparatedonlyawall,butnotadistrictcan'tgotoschool.School-agechildrengotoschoolandsomeremoteareastonuristan,becausefartootiredchildrendon'twanttogotoschooltovisithisparents.Tosolvetheproblemsthatexistinthereality,inadditiontothespecificstandardsforschoolSettingsandschooldistrictdivision,butalsochangingideas,makethegovernmentperformtheirdutiesinthecompulsoryeducation.Someplaceaccordingtolocalactual,makethelocalstandardoperatingconditions,suchasthebasicstandardofhenanruralcompulso