Regulations Governing Accreditation of Teacher Qualifications at Junior Colleges and Institutions of Higher Education Article 39
This English translation was last updated on 2022-08-17, but the Chinese text was amended on 2023-08-30. Later amendments may not be reflected in the translation — please refer to the Chinese text.
In the process of teacher accreditation review, if the teacher evaluation committee or the Ministry finds that there is a doubt in the opinion of the external reviewer, the following provisions shall be followed:1. Misspellings, miscalculations, or other obvious errors in scores or comments: After sending to the original reviewer for clarification, the teacher evaluation committee or the Ministry will confirm.2. Contradictions between scores and comments, research methods and content, or other doubts that may affect the credibility and accuracy of the professional review: After the professional review team has been formed, it will be sent to the original reviewer for clarification and will be validated by the professional review team and the teacher evaluation committee or the Ministry.The professional review team in the second paragraph of the previous paragraph shall be composed of scholars and experts with sufficient professional competence in the field of the work submitted for review.If the first external review meets the following conditions, the teacher evaluation committee or the Ministry shall cite clear and specific reasons for rejecting the opinion and send a sufficient number of academic experts for review according to the number of rejections:1. Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 1, the doubt has been verified by the teacher evaluation committee or the Ministry, and there is indeed a misspelling, miscalculation or other obvious error in the scores or comments.2. After the professional review team and the teacher evaluation committee or the Ministry have determined that there is a specific reason for the professional academic basis for the doubt in Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 2, the credibility and correctness of the professional review is undermined.In the same teacher accreditation review case, the teacher evaluation committee or the Ministry shall, in accordance with the provisions of the second paragraph of the previous paragraph, exclude the opinion of the external examiner, up to once.
中文原文 專科以上學校教師資格審定辦法第39條
教評會或本部於教師資格審查程序中，發現外審意見有疑義者，應依下列規定處理：
一、分數或評語有誤寫、誤算或其他類此之顯然錯誤：送原審查人釐清後，由教評會或本部認定。
二、分數與評語矛盾、涉及研究方法與研究內容，或有其他足以動搖該專業審查可信度與正確性之疑義：組成專業審查小組審查後，送原審查人釐清，並由專業審查小組及教評會或本部認定。
前項第二款專業審查小組，應由送審著作專業領域具有充分專業能力之學者專家組成。
第一項外審意見符合下列規定者，教評會或本部應列舉明確之具體理由後剔除之，並依剔除之份數加送足額之學者專家審查：
一、第一項第一款疑義經教評會或本部認定後，確有分數或評語有誤寫、誤算或其他類此之顯然錯誤之情事。
二、第一項第二款疑義經專業審查小組及教評會或本部認定後，確有專業學術依據之具體理由，動搖該專業審查可信度與正確性之情事。
教評會或本部於同一教師資格審查案件，依前項第二款規定剔除外審意見，以一次為限。
一、分數或評語有誤寫、誤算或其他類此之顯然錯誤：送原審查人釐清後，由教評會或本部認定。
二、分數與評語矛盾、涉及研究方法與研究內容，或有其他足以動搖該專業審查可信度與正確性之疑義：組成專業審查小組審查後，送原審查人釐清，並由專業審查小組及教評會或本部認定。
前項第二款專業審查小組，應由送審著作專業領域具有充分專業能力之學者專家組成。
第一項外審意見符合下列規定者，教評會或本部應列舉明確之具體理由後剔除之，並依剔除之份數加送足額之學者專家審查：
一、第一項第一款疑義經教評會或本部認定後，確有分數或評語有誤寫、誤算或其他類此之顯然錯誤之情事。
二、第一項第二款疑義經專業審查小組及教評會或本部認定後，確有專業學術依據之具體理由，動搖該專業審查可信度與正確性之情事。
教評會或本部於同一教師資格審查案件，依前項第二款規定剔除外審意見，以一次為限。