大法官解釋稱大學自治此一「制度性保障」係為大學之學術自由所設，並進一步指出：「在大學自治的範圍內，教育主管機關對各大學之運作僅屬於適法監督之地位、教育主管機關監督權之行使，應符合學術自由之保障及大學自治之尊重，不得增加法律所未規定限制」。但在實務運作上，「教育主管機關對大學行政監督之界限」卻也衍生以下本文所欲探討的問題：即教育主管機關對大學行政監督之手段為何？教育主管機關對大學行政監督究竟存在那些「過猶不及」的現象？

Freedom of teaching as provided for in Article 11 of the Constitution include “university self-government.” Any important matters related to the freedoms of instruction and study are subject items of university self-government. State supervision over universities shall be specifically authorized by statutes. Any such statutes shall be in conformity with the principle of university self-government. The Ministry of Education is merely in the position of exercising “supervision on legitimacy” over the operation of each university. When exercising such “supervision on legitimacy,” it is certain that the Ministry of Education should comply with the protection of academic freedom and the respect of university self-government and, therefore, should not add restrictions not provided by law. But in the practice, which following this article wants to discuss: Why namely the Ministry of Education to method of the State supervision over universities? The Ministry of Education actually has these to State supervision over universities “to go too far is as bad as not far enough” the phenomenon?