不同入學管道之大學生的學業表現差異：潛在成長模式分析

Academic Performance Differences Among Undergraduates from Different Admission Programs: Latent Growth Modeling Analyses

經過多年的研擬及試辦，91學年度臺灣全面實施大學多元入學制度，以多種入學管道取代聯合招生，期待大學科系根據多元能力向度招收符合其發展特色的學生，學生進入符合能力及興趣的科系就讀。經過幾次微調，2011年後主要有三種管道：個人申請、繁星推薦、考試分發，搭配其他小型的招生管道，構成各大學的整體招生面貌。根據各招生管道的設計及自我決定理論，本研究推論三類學生入學後的學業表現高低依序為繁星推薦學生、個人申請學生、考試分發學生。現有研究支持繁星推薦學生的表現優於其他兩者，但多數研究並未發現個人申請學生的表現優於考試分發學生。本研究採用一所私立大學的校務資料，以變異數分析及潛在變項模式分析檢驗100～104學年度入學學生共六個學期的學業表現。發現大學前3年每學期，繁星推薦學生的學業表現優於另外兩者，但這3年間成長幅度不明顯。個人申請學生及考試分發學生的學業表現沒有顯著差異，兩者在這3年有顯著的成長，且個人申請學生成長幅度大於考試分發學生，但即使有顯著成長，直到大三下學期繁星推薦學生的學業成績仍優於這兩類學生。本研究討論這些發現的意義並提出未來研究的建議。

After being planned and experimented with for many years, the multiple college admission system replaced the joint university admission system in 2002. It was expected that in the new system college departments would recruit freshmen who were in line with their developmental aims and potential students would enter those departments which fit in with their abilities and interests. After a few moderate revisions, there have been three main channels since 2011. They are the Application Program (AP), the Star Program (SP), and the Placement Program (PP). These programs and other small-scale admission channels constitute the whole college admission system in Taiwan. According to the designs of these programs and the self determination theory, it can be reasoned that in college the SP undergraduates outperformed academically the AP and PP ones, and that the AP ones were better than the PP ones. However, most empirical evidence supported the former inference, not the latter one. This study adopted the data from a private university in southern Taiwan, including the undergraduates admitted from 2011 to 2015. The academic performance from freshmen to junior was analyzed by ANOVA and latent growth modeling. It was found that the SP undergraduates outperformed academically the others in every semester but their growth curve was not significant. The difference in the academic performance of the AP and the PP undergraduates was not significant, but their growth slopes were significant. However, the APs’ slope was greater than that of PPs. The admission year was a predictor of the initial academic performance and the growth slope among the AP and the PP undergraduates. The implications and further studies are discussed.