本文以文獻分析法，彙整兒童「課後照顧」有關之政策與相應法令，從「兼職」與「加班」的觀點，期以檢視國民小學專任教師擔任校內課後照顧班服務人員的適法性。國民小學專任教師擔任校內課後照顧班服務人員，於法令有據，未違「兼職」規定；然該等膺辦之既遂任務，允毋關專任教師之「職務」，渠等於下班時段所支領的鐘點費，即不應逕以「加班費」相待。今日主管機關尚未訂有授課節數總量限制之明文，惟基於確保課照受教品質、《憲法》第165條對於教育工作者的保護誡命，本文建請權責有司應以「本職」是念，比照兼（代）課、超時授課框架性規範，就上班、非上班兩時段，各自設定專任教師提供課照服務的節數上限。

This study tried to use “Document Analysis” and aggregate the policies and regulations concerning “After-School Child Care”, discussed the legality and appropriateness of the task about “After-School Child Care” that elementary school full-time teachers assumed, from the viewpoints of “part-time job” and “overtime”. Full-time teachers at public elementary schools are employed as after-school service personnel and these teaching actions are supported by ordinances. The completed tasks are not related to the “Position” of full-time teachers.The hourly salaries they received after work cannot be treated as “overtime pay”.Today the competent authority has not set a norm for the total teaching number of corresponding course about full-time teachers.Based on ensuring the quality of teaching and Article 165 of the Constitution about safeguarding educators, this study suggested that competent authority should set maximum number of sessions about full-time teachers assumed service personnel in “After- School Child Care” class, referencing teaching extra classes(substitute classes), overtime lectures, focused on the position currently held, according to two periods of work and non-work.