大學多元入學方案已經開辦逾十年，此制度的效果評估也成為研究高等教育重要議題。本文探討不同入學管道之清大學生，在學業以及課外活動的表現是否有差異。並利用官方資料配合上畢業前的問卷資料，分析不同入學管道對於學生自評學習能力以及滿意度之關係。研究方法透過因素分析降低問卷維度，並利用兩階段控制函式(control function)多元回歸的計量模型，來釐清多元入學方案對於學生在大學中種種表現的影響。
研究結果顯示：
(1) 在控制潛在內生性問題，學生初始能力，家庭社經地位以及個人態度等種種因素後，利用推甄申請方式入學的大學生，其學業表現排名比指定考科入學的大學生好上約10個百分等級
(2)相較於指考生，推甄申請生在問卷上顯示較高的滿足度，也自認學到較多的自然領域和人文領域的知識
(3)推薦申請生每週花比較少時間在社團活動以及打工上，但是關於參與交換學生或是國際志工的比率上，和指考生並無差異。

In Taiwan, the educational selection mechanism for entering college has undergone a comprehensive revolution for several decades. This education policy reform aims to improve effectiveness of matching students and colleges.
The main purpose of this paper is to extensively investigate the college students' performance between application-based and exam-based methods, with different outcomes, including academic and non-academic perspectives.
Utilizing three waves (2012--2014) undergraduate students data at National Tsing Hua University, we collect students' official records along with versatile survey items for our empirical analysis. The control function approach is employed to alleviate the potential endogeneity issue on choosing college entrance methods. The main findings are: (1) Students admitted by application-based method have better academic performance in terms of class ranking than that of students by exam-based method, after controlling possible endogenous problem, their socio-economic background, personal background variables and attitude variables. (2) Holding other variables constant, the
students from application-based channel enjoy better satisfaction level and learn more abilities in both scientific and humanity fields. (3) Students admitted by application-based method spend less time in association activities and part-time job, but have no difference on participating foreign exchange program and international volunteer activity compared to those admitted by exam-based method.

Contents
1 Introduction 1
2 College Admission System in Taiwan 3
3 Conceptual Framework 4
4 Literature 5
5 Data and Statistical Method 6
5.1 Data Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5.2 Variables Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.3 Data Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.4 Empirical Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6 Empirical Results 12
6.1 Choosing College Entrance Channels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6.2 Entrance Channels on Academic Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6.3 Entrance Channels on Satisfaction and Acquired Ability . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6.4 Entrance Channels on Non-academic Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
7 Conclusions 15
Reference 17
Appendix 20

[1] Lou, S. & Zhu, H. Z. (2011). “Development and Reform of Higher Education in China.”
published by Chandos Publishing, Elsevier Science.
[2] Chang, D. F. (2005). “The Multiple Entrance Programs for the Universities and Their
Impacts on the Equality of Opportunities.” Educational Policy Forum, 8(2), 1-24.
[3] Chang, D. F. (2006). “University Admissions Opportunities and Pressures.” Taipei,
Taiwan: Wu-Nan Book.
[4] Chang, J. H. (2002). “Ministry of Education Reiterates No Return Old Joint Entrance
Examination.” United Daily News, p. 6 on November 14, 2002.
[5] Rivers, D. & Q. H. Vuong (1988). “Limited Information Estimators And Exogeneity
Tests for Simultaneous Probit Models.” Journal of Econometrics 39, 347-366.
[6] Hsu, M. Z. (2004). “A Study on College Entrance System Reform Programs And Related
Dispute in Last Ten Years. ” An report from National Policy Foundation. http://old.
npf.org.tw/PUBLICATION/EC/093/EC-R-093-002.htm
[7] Hong, T. S. (2005). “Position of Higher Education: A Study on Learning Outcomes
of National Taiwan University Students through the Recommendation and Application
Admission Channel.” Paper presented at the seminar of University and the Institute of
Education Position, Taipei, Taiwan.
[8] Jiang, X. H. (2003). “Ministry of Education Said: Never Return to The Old Joint
Entrance Examination System.” United Daily News, p. 18 on January 29, 2003.
[9] Kuo, Y. C. & Tao, H.L.(2013). “A Study of the Relationship between Entrance Chan-
nels, Family Background and Test Scores Implications for Equality and Efficiency of
Entrance Channels.” Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy, 25(3), 421-456.
[10] Lee, W. Y. (2004). ”Cultural Capital, Multiple Entrance Paths and Student
Academic Performance: A Study of the National Taitung Teacher College.”
NTTU Educational Research Journal, 15(1), 1-32.
[11] Liao, H. C. (2003). “Learning Achievement and Satisfaction for Multiple Enrollment
Program: A Case of Accounting Department in North Taiwan.” Unpublished master
thesis, Tamkang University, Taipei County, Taiwan.
[12] Luoh, M. C. (2002). “Who Are NTU Students? Differences across Ethnic and Gender
Groups and Urban/Rural Discrepancy.” Taiwan Economic Review, 30(1), 113-147.
[13] Luoh, M. C.(2004). “Educational Opportunities And Family Background in Taiwan.”
Taiwan Economic Review, 32(4), 417-445.
[14] Tien, H. H. & Tien, F. F. (2008). “Student Characteristics And Their Choices of College
Entrance Channels.” Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy, 20, 481-511.
[15] Tien, F. F. & Fu, T. T. (2009). “Multi-Channel College Entrance System: Relation-
ship between Family Background, Academic Achievement and Entrance Channels.”
Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 54(1), 209-233.
[16] Ting, M. Y. (2006). “A Study on the Academic Achievement of Students Admitted
through Multiple Admission System: Taking the National Formosa University as an
Example.” Journal of National Formosa University, 25(4), 71-82.
[17] Wang, H. H. & Huang, C. C. (2010). “The Application of Self-Determination Theory on
Students’ Career Choice and Learning Outcomes under the Multiple College Admission
System.” Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 55(2), 1-27.
[18] Wei, S. L., Hou, S. M., & Yang, M. C. (2005). “Academic Performance of Na-
tional Taiwan University Medical Students from Diversified College Entrance Systems.”
Journal of Medical Education, 9(3), 262-271.
[19] Imbens, G. and Wooldridge, J. (2007) “Lecture Notes 6 – Control Function and Related
Methods.” in What’s New in Econometrics? at Summer Institute 2007, National Bureau
of Economic Research.
[20] Yao, H. L. (1995). “Research of Recommendation-And-Selection Entrance Types And
Its Assessment.” Educational Research and Information, 3(3), 16-35.
[21] Yang, L. H. (2004). “A Comparative Study of Learning Achievements of Students from
Diversified-Admission Access to 4-Year Programs at a Technological University.” Un-
published master thesis, National Yunlin University of Science and Technology, Yunlin
County, Taiwan.
[22] Yu, C. F. (2005). “The Correlation between Scholastic Achievement Tests (SAT) and
Actual Scholastic Achievements (ASA).” Unpublished master thesis, Chinese Culture
University, Taipei, Taiwan.
[23] Zhu, P. H. (2007). “A Study on the Factors of Learning Outcomes
for Vocational Students: A Case from One Technological College.”
Journal of National Taipei College of Business, 12, 81-94.