Ministry of Education’s Regulations Governing the Establishment of the Academic Award Article 6
The Ministry shall select the Academic Award recipients in accordance with the following procedure:1. A separate Review Board will be set up for each of five disciplinary categories, based on different academic fields: the Humanities and Arts; Social Sciences; Mathematics and Natural Sciences; Biology, and Medical and Agricultural Science; and Engineering and Applied Science. From nine to eleven prestigious scholars and experts shall be appointed to be the members of each Review Board. The Standing Committee of the Ministry of Education’s Academic Review Committee shall designate the convener of each Review Board.2. Each Review Board shall conduct its first review after undertaking a detailed examination of the academic research and teaching performance of each of the recommended candidates, and fully discussing each.3. Each Review Board shall forward all the material pertaining to each recommended candidate who has passed the first review to three or four scholars or experts for further evaluation, after which it will conduct its second review. Each Review Board will then give its recommendations of candidates for an Academic Award to the Standing Committee.4. The Standing Committee shall review and discuss the results of each evaluation of each of the recommended candidates referred to in the preceding subparagraph, and then draw up and submit a list of candidates for an Academic Award to a meeting of all members of the Academic Review Committee to discuss and deliberate over.5. A meeting that shall be attended by at least half of its members of the Academic Review Committee shall vote on the list of candidates that resulted from the deliberations at the meeting of all members of the Academic Review Committee and the Academic Award recipients are selected based on the number of votes received by each of those candidates in accordance with one of the following provisions:(1)At least two thirds of the members present give their approval; or(2)More than half of the members present give their approval, and at least half of the members in the same disciplinary category as the candidate recommended for a National Chair Professorship are present and at least two thirds of those members give their approval.6. If any Academic Award remains without being conferred on a candidate after the selection procedure, the members present at the meeting of the Academic Review Committee attended by at least half of its members may continue and cast a further ballot if a majority of the members present at the meeting agrees to do so. If the second ballot still fails to result in any candidate receiving the required number of votes stipulated in the preceding subparagraph, the Academic Award in question shall not be conferred that year.This is the same content as Article 6-1, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 1: it has mistakenly been placed here at the end of Article 6 as well.
中文原文 教育部設置學術獎辦法第6條
本部遴選學術獎得獎人之程序如下：
一、依學術領域設置人文及藝術、社會科學、數學及自然科學、生物及醫農科學、工程及應用科學五類科，分別組成審議小組，聘請聲望卓著之學者、專家九人至十一人擔任委員，並由本部學術審議會（以下簡稱學審會）之工作小組指定召集人。
二、審議小組就推薦案件學術研究及教學表現詳細審閱並充分討論後，進行初審。
三、初審通過者由審議小組將每一被推薦人之相關資料，分別送請學者、專家三人或四人評審後，再由審議小組進行複審，並向工作小組推薦學術獎候選人。
四、工作小組應就前款被推薦學術獎候選人各項審查結果審議後，擬具學術獎候選人名單，提請學審會全體委員會議審議。
五、學審會全體委員會議審議結果，應有全體委員二分之一以上之出席及依下列規定之一通過，並依得票數高低遴選學術獎得獎人：
（一）出席委員三分之二以上之同意。
（二）出席委員過半數之同意，且被推薦學術獎候選人所屬類科委員二分之一以上之出席及經該類科出席委員三分之二以上之同意。
六、遴選之學術獎得獎人數未足額時，經學審會全體委員會議二分之一以上之委員出席及出席委員過半數之同意，得繼續進行投票一次；其投票結果仍未達前款所定同意數者，該部分之名額從缺。
一、依學術領域設置人文及藝術、社會科學、數學及自然科學、生物及醫農科學、工程及應用科學五類科，分別組成審議小組，聘請聲望卓著之學者、專家九人至十一人擔任委員，並由本部學術審議會（以下簡稱學審會）之工作小組指定召集人。
二、審議小組就推薦案件學術研究及教學表現詳細審閱並充分討論後，進行初審。
三、初審通過者由審議小組將每一被推薦人之相關資料，分別送請學者、專家三人或四人評審後，再由審議小組進行複審，並向工作小組推薦學術獎候選人。
四、工作小組應就前款被推薦學術獎候選人各項審查結果審議後，擬具學術獎候選人名單，提請學審會全體委員會議審議。
五、學審會全體委員會議審議結果，應有全體委員二分之一以上之出席及依下列規定之一通過，並依得票數高低遴選學術獎得獎人：
（一）出席委員三分之二以上之同意。
（二）出席委員過半數之同意，且被推薦學術獎候選人所屬類科委員二分之一以上之出席及經該類科出席委員三分之二以上之同意。
六、遴選之學術獎得獎人數未足額時，經學審會全體委員會議二分之一以上之委員出席及出席委員過半數之同意，得繼續進行投票一次；其投票結果仍未達前款所定同意數者，該部分之名額從缺。