The Standard Of Public Power Administration In Public Universities

The management of students by public colleges and universities,which are the administrative acts of public colleges and universities exercising public power,and which are private rights,has not yet formed a unified dividing standard.The existing identification standards fluctuate between the identity of administrative subjects and the particularity of independent education.The actions taken by administrative entities are not entirely administrative,while independent education excessively emphasizes the autonomy of public university management.The management behavior of public universities is not solely the private right behavior of public universities.Public power administration is an administrative act that social organizations use public power to carry out administrative management with the purpose of undertaking public service functions,but has not yet been categorized.To a certain extent,the guidance case brings the public power administration of public universities into the field of administrative litigation,but it is difficult to fully respond to a series of puzzles in the educational administrative trial practice.The management behavior of public universities that affects students’ rights and interests is excluded from the scope of public power administration by the judiciary for various reasons,and the identification standard of public power administration of public universities needs to be established urgently.This article combs the management behavior of public universities caused by different events in administrative litigation,analyzes the judge’s judgment criteria for the nature of the behavior involved in the case,and explores the reasons behind the judge’s different attitudes towards the management behavior of public universities caused by the same event,so as to analyze the reasons for the dispute of the administrative identification standard of public power and the influencing factors of the administrative identification standard of public power.Under the guidance of the theory of administrative legal relationship,the identification standard of public power administration is clarified by borrowing the essential framework required for the establishment of administrative acts,so as to solve the difficulties in the scope and degree of review of administrative litigation in public universities.The article is divided into four parts as a whole:The first part of the article describes the research background and current situation of the administrative identification standard of public power of public universities in China,the research significance and research methods of this paper,and leads to problems.The second part is from the first chapter to the second chapter.First,it combs the management disputes of public colleges and universities in administrative litigation,analyzes the reasons why judges recognize and deny public power administration in public colleges and universities,and expounds the disputes and difficulties existing in the administrative identification standards of public power in practice from the perspectives of theory,norms and practice.The third part is from Chapters 3 to 4,which considers the constituent elements of administrative behavior,the diverse identities of public universities,the relationship between public universities and students,and the special autonomous attributes of public universities.It places the relationship between schools and students from the perspective of public law contractual relationships and recognizes the multiple identity characteristics of public uni versities,In the framework of the analysis of the elements of administrative action,this paper puts forward a composite standard to identify the external form and internal essence of public power administration of public universities.The last chapter is the fifth chapter,which clarifies how to apply the identification criteria to distinguish the public power administration and internal administration of public universities in practice,providing guidance for solving the difficulties in the scope and degree of judicial review.