本文主要採用內容分析法，彙整國內中小學外聘非專任教師之任用、鐘點費支給相關法規，從《憲法》平等原則的觀點，探討不同身分別之中小學兼任教師兼課鐘點費與中小學代課鐘點費核計基準殊異之適法性。專任教師一學期兼課「按週發給」規定所致之實領鐘點恆大於（或等於）實授鐘點、部分工時之兼任教師（外聘教師）「依實際節數發給」規定之實領鐘點恆等於實授鐘點的區別對待，恐違平等原則。同一教育人員悉以教學支援工作人員身分在國民中學、國民小學授課，其鐘點費的核計基準相同；同一教育人員倘以兼（代）課教師身分在國民中學、國民小學授課，其鐘點費的核計基準卻又不同。在衡平兼顧中學與小學、專任與部分工時教師鐘點費支給之適法、強化教師工作權利保障之前提下，建議適度調整我國現行教師鐘點費支給制度，厥為本文關切的核心課題。

This paper tried to use content analysis to collect relevant laws and regulations about non- full-time teachers’ employment and compensation and to discuss the legality of different specification between fulltime teachers and non- full-time teachers about hourly pay of teaching extra classes from the perspective of the constitutional principle of equality. Full-time teachers recevied hourly pay of teaching extra classes by “Week” and part-time teachers got their salary by “Class”. This regulation could violate principle of equality. The standard of approving hourly pay about teaching support staffs in both elementary school and junior high school is same , but the standard of approving hourly pay about substitute teachers in both elementary school and junior high school isn’t same. It is important to balance high and elementary schools’ right, fulltime and part-time teachers’ right and to strengthen the protection of the rights of teachers’ teaching. To adjust appropriately our current hourly pay supply system is the core issues of concern in this paper.