To inform about the starting point for the 3-year period mentioned in Article 7, Paragraph 2, Item 2 of the Regulations Governing Dismissal, Non-Reappointment, Suspension, or Termination of Teachers in Public and Preschool Education, and Article 8, Paragraph 2, Item 2 of the Regulations Governing the Composition and Operation of Professional Review Committees for Teachers in Public and Preschool Education, as issued by the Ministry of Education's National and Preschool Education Administration.

Explanation:
1. In accordance with the letter from the Ministry of Education's National and Preschool Education Administration, dated October 15, 109 (2020), Ref. No. Tai Jiao Guo Shu Ren Zi
No. 1090125107.

2. It is noted that Article 7, Paragraph 2 of the Regulations Governing Dismissal, Non-Reappointment, Suspension, or Termination of Teachers in Public and Preschool Education (hereinafter referred to as the "Dismissal Regulations") and Article 8, Paragraph 2, Item 2 of the Regulations Governing the Composition and Operation of Professional Review Committees for Teachers in Public and Preschool Education (hereinafter referred to as the "Professional Review Committee Regulations") stipulate that a teacher who is found to be ineffective in teaching or unable to perform their duties with concrete evidence, and for whom there is no possibility of improvement through counseling, falls under the following circumstances: 1. ...
2. Re-offending within 3 years after having been counseled by the school or the Professional Review Committee for reasons specified in Article 16, Paragraph 1, Item 1 of the Act, and subsequently deemed to have achieved improvement through counseling, as determined by the school affairs meeting (or Professional Review Committee).
3. Furthermore, Article 14, Paragraph 1, Item 14, first part of the Teachers Act, which was effective on June 18, 103 (2014), stipulated "ineffective in teaching or unable to perform duties with concrete evidence; or a serious breach of contract." This is the same type of conduct as that stipulated in Article 16, Paragraph 1, Item 1 of the Teachers Act, which became effective on June 30, 109 (2020), stating "ineffective in teaching or unable to perform duties with concrete evidence." Additionally, Item 7 of Subparagraph 2 of Point 5 of the "Guidelines for Handling Incompetent Teachers in Public and Preschool Education" (hereinafter referred to as the "Guidelines") states: "The following circumstances are deemed as no improvement after counseling: ... (4) Re-offending within 3 years after having been counseled for the same reason and subsequently deemed to have achieved improvement through counseling."
4. The provision of re-offending within 3 years in the aforementioned regulations is already stipulated in the Guidelines and is not a new addition to the Dismissal Regulations or the Professional Review Committee Regulations. The legal application is a continuation of the Guidelines. Therefore, the calculation of the 3-year period for re-offending in the aforementioned regulations should be cumulative, and the starting date is the day after the当事人 (the person concerned) is notified of the handling (counseling) results after being deemed to have improved through counseling by the school or the Professional Review Committee.
5. Attached is the original letter from the Ministry of Education.

二、因本法第16條第1項第1款之事由，曾經學校或專審會
輔導，認輔導改善有成效後，經校事會議（專審會）認定3
年內再犯。

三、再查103年6月18日施行之教師法第14條第1項第14款前段規
定，教學不力或不能勝任工作有具體事實；或違反聘約情
節重大，與109年6月30日施行之教師法第16條第1項第1款
規定，教學不力或不能勝任工作有具體事實係為同一行為
樣態；且處理高級中等以下學校不適任教師應行注意事項
（以下簡稱注意事項）第5點第2款第7目：「有下列情形之
一者，視同輔導無改進成效：…（4）同一事由曾經輔導期
輔導，並經認定具改進成效後3年內再犯。」。

四、旨揭辦法所稱3年內再犯於注意事項已有規範，並非解聘辦
法或專審會辦法新增設，法令適用係銜接注意事項，爰旨
揭辦法所稱3年內再犯之計算方式應為持續累計，起算日期
係為曾經學校或專審會輔導，認輔導改善有成效後，將處
理（輔導）結果通知當事人之次日起生效。

五、檢附教育部原函1份。