1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. Publications
  3. College of Social Science
  4. Theses
  5. Item

Publications-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

題名 公務人員高等考試錄取者人口特性之比較分析
作者 康文聰
貢獻者 施能傑
康文聰
關鍵詞 公務人員考試
代表性官僚
團隊多元化
地位取得
社會流動
civil service examination
representative bureaucracy
team diversity
status attainment
social mobility
日期 2008
上傳時間 19-Sep-2009 13:07:43 (UTC+8)
摘要 　　公務人員受委託行使行政權，享有身分保障和穩定收入，因而被視為社會體系的中上階層。基於此等特性，學者曾經提出代表性官僚理論與多元代表性等理論，希望能夠以此調和民主與效率兩大價值，達成政策執行的實質公平。然過去相關的實證研究，多半屬於「事後檢測」。但是我國公民除了通過公務人員考試之外，幾乎沒有其他擠身常任文官的管道，因此有關代表性或多元性的討論應該包括考試階段。換言之，考試錄取人員的人口特性值得深入的分析。本研究以2003至2007年的高等考試參與者為主要研究對象，輔以司法官三等考試的資料以利比較。接著，引用社會學「地位取得」的分析架構，採取指數比較分析與邏輯迴歸分析，探索性別、年齡、受教育時間、畢業學校特性、出身地域與錄取與否的關係。
　　本研究結果顯示，女性、非傳統公立綜合大學的畢業生、鄉鎮地區出身者以及41歲以上的考生在公務人員考試中處於較為不利的地位，但是與優勢團體之間的差距隨著考試等級和種類有所不同。例如女性在行政類與司法官考試中，與男性的表現平分秋色甚至猶有過之；剛完成高等教育的25歲以下人口在司法官考試裡最具優勢，但高考三級則有利於26至35歲的青年；傳統公立大學的文憑與都市出身的背景，在技術類考試能發揮的正效果比行政類考試為弱。基於上述的研究發現，為消除各種團體在公務人員考試裡的地位差距，本研究對於未來的考選政策提出下列建議：1.加強命題與口試委員的多元化；2.強化試題的研究發展；3.配合政府再造鬆綁人事法規；4.營造一個落實多元平等的大環境。
Civil servants, with administrative power in hand, are commonly regarded as part of upper class. Therefore, researchers, to integrate democracy and efficiency in civil service system and to realize the genuine equality, propose representative bureaucracy and team diversity theory. Senior Civil Service Examination, the main approach, if not only, for citizens in Taiwan to enter the bureaucracy affects the representativeness and diversity of state apparatus substantially. By adopting the research approach of “status attainment” from sociology, this study gives an account of the relation between the examination result and the demographics in terms of gender, education, school characteristic, and region. All the data of this research is based on participators’ personnel information cards collected by the Ministry of Examination from 2003 to 2007.
The result indicates that four types of participators are inferior in the examination, including women, graduates from private untraditional technological colleges, participators from rural areas, and adults above forty-one years old. The differences between superior and inferior groups, however, vary with the level and subject of examination. To prevent demographic differences in Senior Civil Service Examination, the study suggests the following factors be considered: the diversity of the composition of examiners committee should be ensured, the enhancement of development research of test questions, the deregulation of public personnel rules and, last but not least, the construction of a diversity-respecting society.
參考文獻 王濟川、郭志剛（2003）。Logistic迴歸模型：方法及應用。台北：五南。
江大樹（1997）。國家發展與文官政策：台灣經驗分析（1949-1996）。台北：憬藝。
江豐富（1990）。文憑主義在臺灣勞動市場的重要性：以學歷取才還是以人力資本取才。經濟論文，第18卷第2期，頁129-178。
行政院主計處（2005）。94年人力運用調查報告，2008年7月29日取自：http://www.dgbas.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=14676&ctNode=3580
行政院經建會（1991）。國家建設六年計畫。台北：行政院經濟建設委員會。
台灣師範大學教育評鑑與發展研究中心（2006）。九十三學年度大專畢業生畢業後一年問卷調查統計分析結果，2008年11月16日取自：http://www.cher.ed.ntnu.edu.tw/analyze/data/edu93_postgra_ba/pdf/2-1.pdf
考選部（2008）。97年公務人員高等考試一級暨二等考試。97年公務考試統計，2008年12月11日取自：http://wwwc.moex.gov.tw/public/Data/811612361571.pdf
______（2007）。96年公務人員高等考試三等考試。96年公務考試統計，2008年8月1日取自：http://wwwc.moex.gov.tw/public/Data/7101911485371.pdf
呂明和（1987）。我國文官考選制度政治功能的研析。政治大學公共行政研究所碩士論文，未出版。
李以德（2007）。我國國家考試應考資格法定限制之研究。中國文化大學政治學研究所博士論文，未出版。
李弘祺（2006）。中國與東亞的教育傳統。台北：喜馬拉雅基金會。
李秀如、王德睦（2007）。係貧窮的原罪？或係城鄉差距？談影響兒童英語學習機會的因素。教育與社會研究，第12期，頁113-135。
李震洲（2006）。公務人員考試法研修之我見。人事行政，第157期，頁15-19。
______（2005a）。國家考試申論式試題應否公布參考答案之研究。考銓，第42期，頁57-73。
______（2005b）。國家考試英文科目改由國內現有英語能力測驗取代是否可行？。人事行政，第153期，頁3-8。
余致力（2007）。性別差異對公共管理者任用之影響；代表性官僚體系的理論省思。國家菁英，第3卷第4期，頁61-84。
______（2002）。台灣行政學研究的新課題：政黨輪替對文官體系的衝擊與影響。中國行政學會編，張金鑑教授百齡誕辰紀念會曁學術硏討會論文集。台北：中國行政學會。
吳復新（2007）。國家考試口試方法技術檢討與改進之研究。空大行政學報，第18期，頁1-24。
林大森（2002）。高中／高職的公立／私立分流對地位取得之影響。教育與心理研究。第25期，頁35-62。
邱志淳（1997）。考試與人事行政之涵義辨疑：兼論憲改後考試院之地位。世新大學學報，第7期，頁37-59。
周祝瑛（2003）。誰捉弄了台灣教改？。台北：心理。
馬信行（1993）。台灣地區近四十年來教育資源之分配情形。政治大學學報，第51期，頁139-165。
施能傑（2003）。公務人員考選制度的評估。臺灣政治學刊，第7卷第1期，頁157-207。
______（1996）。我國文官考選政策的回顧與檢討。政治大學學報，第73期，頁111-144。
范煥之、李震洲（1984）。宋代考選制度。台北：考選部。
徐有守（2006）。考銓制度（3版）。台北：台灣商務印書館。
______（1999）。考試權的危機：考銓制度的腐蝕與改進。台北：台灣商務印書館。
翁興利、陳文學（2008）。我國原住民文官之研究：消極代表性官僚的測量。國家菁英，第4卷第1期，頁1-18。
高明士（1999）。隋唐貢舉制度。台北：文津。
陳伯熹（2006）。國家考試電腦化測驗相關問題探討。國家菁英，第2卷第2期，頁125-138。
陳金貴（1996）。中華民國文官制度改革的研究。政治學報，第27期，頁123-146。
陳建志（2001）。台灣地區就業市場收入性別差異之探討。教育與社會研究，第2期，頁123-154。
陳新萌（1978）。惡補、聯考、升學主義、文憑主義、人事制度之連鎖關係平議。人事行政，第52期，頁93-98。
章英華、傅仰止編（2006）。台灣地區社會變遷基本調查計畫：第五期第一次調查計畫執行報告。台北：中央研究院社會學研究所。
章英華、薛承泰、黃毅志（1996）。教育分流與社會經濟地位：兼論對技職教育改革的政策意涵。台北：行政院教育改革審議委員會。
許南雄（1988）。從人事行政觀點探討我國憲法考銓機構之體制。法商學報，第22期，頁79-107。
許嘉猷（1986）。社會階層化與社會流動。台北：三民。
許濱松（1992）。中華民國公務人員考試制度。台北：五南。
張福建、劉義周（2002）。代表的理論與實際。政治與社會哲學評論，第1期，頁117-149。
曾天韻（2004）。台灣地區出身背景對大學及研究所入學機會之影響。教育與心理研究，第27卷，第2期，頁255-281。
黃家齊、蔡達人（2003）。團隊多元化與知識分享、知識創造及創新積效。台大管理論叢，第13卷第2期，頁233-280。
黃毅志（2003）。臺灣地區新職業聲望與社經地位量表之建構與評估：社會科學與教育社會學研究本土化。教育研究集刊，第49卷第4期，頁1-31。
＿＿＿（2002）。社會階層、社會網絡與主觀意識：台灣地區不公平的社會階層體系之延續（2版）。台北：巨流。
______（1994）。社經背景與地位取得過程之結構機制：教育、社會資源及文化資本。東海大學社會學研究所博士論文，未出版。
楊戊龍（2007）。公務人員考選變革的小議題與大價值。國家菁英，第3卷第1期，頁105-126。
董保城（2005）。應考試權與實質正當程序之保障：釋字第319號解釋再省思。國家菁英，第1卷第2期，頁143-168。
蓋浙生（2006）。建構我國高等教育「退場機制」之檢視。教育與心理研究。第29卷第1期，頁29-46。
蔡允棟、宋學文（2005）。政府改造與我國中央政府未來人事組織之發展。國家菁英，第1卷第3期，頁13-34。
蔡良文（2005a）。論政府改造中考試院職能調整之研析。考銓，第41期，頁35-61。
______（2005b）。考選制度與政策的變革與發展。考銓，第44期，頁101-124。
蔡宏明譯（J. Pfeffer and R. I. Sutton原著）（2007）。真相、傳言與胡扯。台北，梅霖。
蔡淑鈴（1988）。社會地位取得：山地、閩客及外省之比較。楊國樞、瞿海源主編，變遷中的台灣社會。台北：中央研究院民族學研究所。
蔡瑞明（1985）。台灣高山族社會流動之研究。台灣大學社會學研究所碩士論文，未出版。
蔡銘宗（2001）。公務人員考試法修正重點介紹。人事行政，第138期，頁25-29。
駱明慶（2002）。誰是台大學生？性別、省籍和城鄉差異。經濟論文叢刊，第30卷第1期，頁113-147。
______（2001）。教育成就的省籍與性別差異。經濟論文叢刊，第29卷第2期，頁117-152。
謝偉姝、林政忠（2006）。政院推優退，公務員將掀退休潮。經濟日報，2006.10.20，版A9。
劉正、陳建州（2007）臺灣大專科系的性別區隔與變遷：1972-2003。教育與心理研究，第30卷第4期，頁1-25。
劉昊洲（1996）。公務人員考試法修正案詳析。人事行政，第116期，頁15-21。
劉慧珍、吳志功、朱旭東譯（R. Collins原著）（1998）。文憑社會：教育與階層化的歷史社會學。台北：桂冠。
Althusser, L. (1971). Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays. New York: Monthly Review Press.
Agresti, A. (1996). An Introduction to Categorical Data Analysis. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Blau, P. M. and O. D. Duncan (1967). The American Occupational Structure. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Bowles, S. and H. Gintis (1976). Schooling in Capitalist America: Educational Reform and the Contradictions of Economic Life. New York: Basic Books.
Colclough, G. S. and P. M. Horan (1983). “The Status Attainment Paradigm: An Application of a Kuhnian Perspective.” The Sociological Quarterly, 24(1), 25-42.
Coser, L. A. (1975). “Presidential Address: Two Methods in Search of a Substance.” American Sociological Review, 40(6), 691-700.
Cox, T. H. (1997). Developing Competency to Manage Diversity: Reading, Cases and Activities. San Francisco, C.A.: Berrett-Koehler.
Cox, T. H., S. A. Lobel, and P. L. McLeod (1991). “Effects of Ethnic Group Cultural Differences on Cooperative and Competitive Behavior on a Group Task.” The Academy of Management Journal, 34(4), 827-847.
Dolan, J. and D. H. Rosenbloom eds. (2003). Representative Bureaucracy: Classical Readings and Continuing Controversies. Armonk, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe.
Dresang, D. L. (1991). Public Personnel Management and Public Policy. (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.
________ (1974). “Ethnics Politics, Representative Bureaucracy, and Development Administration.” American Political Science Review, 68(4), 1605-1617.
Duncan, O. D., D. L. Featherman, and B. Duncan (1972). Socioeconomic Background and Achievement. New York: Seminar Press.
Ehrman, M. and R. Oxford (1989). “Effects of Sex Differences, Career Choice, and Psychological Type on Adult Language Learning Strategies.” Modern Language Journal, 73, 1-13.
Ely, R. J. and D. A. Thomas (2001). “Cultural Diversity at Work: The Effects of Diversity Perspectives on Work Group Processes and Outcomes.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(2), 229-273.
Featherman, D. L. and R. M. Hauser (1976). “Sexual Inequalities Socioeconomic Achievement in the U.S., 1962-1973.” American Sociological Review, 41(3), 462-483.
Featherman, D. L. and R. M. Hauser (1978). Opportunity and Change. New York: Academic Press.
Fernandez, J. P. (1993). The Diversity Advantage: How American Business Can Out-Perform Japanese and European Companies in the Global Marketplace. New York: Lexington Books.
Frederickson, H. G. (1997). The Spirit of Public Administration. San Francisco: C.A.: Jossey-Bass.
Golembiewski, R. T. (1995). Managing Diversity in Organizations. Tuscaloosa, A.L.: The University of Alabama Press.
Grusky, D. B. ed. (2001). Social Stratification: Class, Race, and Gender in Sociological Perspective. (2nd ed.). Boulder, C.O.: Westview Press.
Harris, D. K. (2007). The Sociology of Aging. Lanham, M.D.: Rowman & Littlefield.
Harris, K. (1982). Teachers and Classes: A Marxist Analysis. Boston, M.A.: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Hauser, R. M. and D. L. Featherman (1977). The Process of Stratification: Trend and Analysis. New York: Academic Press.
Hindera, J. J. (1993). “Representative Bureaucracy: Further Evidence of Active Representation in the EEOC District Offices.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 3(4), 415-429.
Ho, P. T. (1962). The Ladder of Success in Imperial China. New York: Columbia University Press.
Hochbaum, G., J. Darley, E. Monachesi, and C. Bird (1955). “Socioeconomic Variables in a Large City.” American Journal of Sociology, 61(1), 31-38.
Horan, P. M. (1978). “Is Status Attainment Research Atheoretical?” American Sociological Review, 43(4), 534-541.
Jackson, S. (1992). “Team Composition in Organizations.” In S. Worchel, W. Wood, and J. Simpson (eds.), Group Process and Productivity. Newbury Park, C.A.: Sage Publications.
Jain, H. C., P. J. Sloane, and F. M. Horwitz (2003). Employment Equity and Affirmative Action: An International Comparison. Armonk, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe.
Jencks, C., S. Bartlett, M. Corcoran, J. Crouse, D. Eaglesfield, G. Jackson, K. McClelland, P. Mueser, M. Olneck, J. Schwartz, S. Ward, and J Williams (1979). Who Gets Ahead? The Determinants of Economic Success in America. New York: Basic Books.
Keiser, L. R., V. M. Wilkins, K. J. Meier, and C. A. Holland (2002). “Lipstick and Logarithms: Gender, Institutional Context, and Representative Bureaucracy.” American Political Science Review, 96(3), 553-564.
Knottnerus, J. D. (1987). “Status Attainment Research and its Image of Society.” American Sociological Review, 52(1), 113-121.
Kranz, H. (1978). The Participatory Bureaucracy. Lexington, M.A.: Lexington Books
Krislov, S. (1974). Representative Bureaucracy. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Krislov, S. and D. H. Rosenbloom (1981). Representative Bureaucracy and the American Political System. New York: Praeger.
Lewis, W. G. (1989). “Toward Representative Bureaucracy: Blacks in City Police Organizations, 1976-1985.” Public Administration Review, 49(3), 257-268.
Lin, N., W. M. Ensel, and J. C. Vaughn (1981). “Social Resources and Strength of Ties: Structural Factors in Occupational Status Attainment.” American Sociological Review, 46(4), 393-405.
Liu, J. and A. Sakamoto (2002). “The Role of Schooling in Taiwan`s Labor Market: Human Capital, Screening, or Credentialism?” Taiwanese Journal of Sociology, 29, 1-56.
Maccoby, E. E. and C. N. Jacklin (1974). The Psychology of Sex Differences. Stanford, C.A.: Stanford University Press.
Matras, J. (1984). Social Inequality, Stratification, and Mobility. (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Mee, J. F. (1955). Personnel Handbook. New York: Ronald Press.
Meier, K. J. (1975). “Representative Bureaucracy: An Empirical Analysis.” American Political Science Review, 69, 526-542.
Meier, K. J. and J. Steward (1992). “The Impact of Representative Bureaucracies: Educational Systems and Public Policies.” American Review of Public Administration, 22(3), 157-171.
Meier, K. J., R. D. Wrinkle, and J. L. Polinard (1999). “Representative Bureaucracy and Distributional Equity: Addressing the Hard Question.” The Journal of Politics, 61(4), 1025-1039.
Milliken, F. J. and L. L. Martins (1996). “Searching for Common Threads: Understanding the Multiple Effects of Diversity in Organizational Groups. ” The Academy of Management Review, 21(2), 402-433.
Mosher, F. C. (1968). Democracy and the Public Service. New York, Oxford University Press.
Noe, R. A., J. R. Hollenbeck, B. Grehart, and P. M. Wright (2000). Human Resource Management. (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
O’Reilly, C. A., D. F. Caldwell, and W. Barnett (1989). “Work Group Demography, Social Integration, and Turnover.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 34, 21-37.
Pateman, C. (1989). The Disorder of Women: Democracy, Feminism and Political Theory. Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Press.
Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, C.A.: Sage Publications.
Pelled, L. H., K. M. Eisenhardt, and K. R. Xin (1999). “Exploring the Black Box: An Analysis of Work Group Diversity, Conflict, and Performance.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 1-28.
Pitts, D. W. (2005). “Diversity, Representation, and Performance: Evidence about Race and Ethnicity in Public Organizations.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(4), 615-631.
Rainey, H. G. (2003). Understanding and Managing Public Organizations. San Francisco, C.A.: Jossey-Bass.
Riccucci, N. M. and J. R. Saidel (1997) “The Representativeness of State-Level Bureaucratic Leaders: A Missing Piece of the Representative Bureaucracy Puzzle.” Public Administration Review, 57(5), 423-430.
Ridgeway, C. L. (1997). “Interaction and the Conservation of Gender Inequality: Considering Employment.” American Sociological Review, 62(2), 218-235.
Richard, O. C. (2000). “Racial Diversity, Business Strategy, and Firm Performance: A Resource-Based View.” The Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 164-177.
Robinson, R. and J. Kelley (1979). “Class as Conceived by Marx and Dahrendorf: Effects on Income Inequality and Politics in the United States and Great Britain.” American Sociological Review, 44(1), 35-58.
Rosenbloom, D. H. (1998). Public Administration: Understanding Management, Politics, and Law in the Public Sector. (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Schultz, D. A. and R. Moranto (1998). The Politics and Civil Service Reform. New York: Peter Lang.
Selden, S. C. (1997). The Promise of Representative Bureaucracy: Diversity and Responsiveness in a Government Agency. Armonk, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe.
Sewell, W. H. and R. M. Hauser (1975). Education, Occupation, and Earnings. New York: Academic Press.
Sewell, W. H., R. M. Hauser, and G. W. Olendorf (1970). “The Eduational and Early Occupational Attainment Process: Replication and Revision.” American Sociological Review, 35(6), 1014-1027.
Sewell, W. H., R. M. Hauser, and W. C. Wolf, (1980). “Sex, Schooling and Occupational Status.” American Journal of Sociology, 86(3), 551-583.
Smith, K. G., K. A. Smith, J. D. Olian, H. P. Sims, D. P. O’ Bannon, and J. A. Scully (1994). “Top Management Team Demography and Process: The Role of Social Integration and Communication.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(3), 412-438.
Sowell, T. (2004). Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One. New York: Basic Books.
Subramaniam, V. (1967). “Representative Bureaucracy: A Reassessment.” The American Political Science Review, 61(4), 1010-1019.
Sweezy, P. M. (1964). The Theory of Capitalist Development: Principles of Marxian Political Economy. New York: Monthly Review Press.
Terry, L. D. (1998). “Administrative Leadership, Neo-Managerialism, and the Public Management Movement.” Public Administration Review, 58(3), 194-200.
Treiman, D. J. and K. Terrell (1975). “Sex and the Process of Status Attainment.” American Sociological Review, 40(2), 174-200.
Watson, W. E., K. Kumar, and L. K. Michaelsen (1993). “Cultural Diversity`s Impact on Interaction Process and Performance: Comparing Homogeneous and Diverse Task Groups.” The Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 590-602.
Wright, D. W. (1984). Secondary Research. Beverly Hills C.A.: Sage Publications.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
公共行政研究所
95256001
97
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0095256001
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 施能傑zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 康文聰zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) 康文聰zh_TW
dc.date (日期) 2008en_US
dc.date.accessioned 19-Sep-2009 13:07:43 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 19-Sep-2009 13:07:43 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 19-Sep-2009 13:07:43 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0095256001en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/37308-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 公共行政研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 95256001zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 97zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 　　公務人員受委託行使行政權，享有身分保障和穩定收入，因而被視為社會體系的中上階層。基於此等特性，學者曾經提出代表性官僚理論與多元代表性等理論，希望能夠以此調和民主與效率兩大價值，達成政策執行的實質公平。然過去相關的實證研究，多半屬於「事後檢測」。但是我國公民除了通過公務人員考試之外，幾乎沒有其他擠身常任文官的管道，因此有關代表性或多元性的討論應該包括考試階段。換言之，考試錄取人員的人口特性值得深入的分析。本研究以2003至2007年的高等考試參與者為主要研究對象，輔以司法官三等考試的資料以利比較。接著，引用社會學「地位取得」的分析架構，採取指數比較分析與邏輯迴歸分析，探索性別、年齡、受教育時間、畢業學校特性、出身地域與錄取與否的關係。
　　本研究結果顯示，女性、非傳統公立綜合大學的畢業生、鄉鎮地區出身者以及41歲以上的考生在公務人員考試中處於較為不利的地位，但是與優勢團體之間的差距隨著考試等級和種類有所不同。例如女性在行政類與司法官考試中，與男性的表現平分秋色甚至猶有過之；剛完成高等教育的25歲以下人口在司法官考試裡最具優勢，但高考三級則有利於26至35歲的青年；傳統公立大學的文憑與都市出身的背景，在技術類考試能發揮的正效果比行政類考試為弱。基於上述的研究發現，為消除各種團體在公務人員考試裡的地位差距，本研究對於未來的考選政策提出下列建議：1.加強命題與口試委員的多元化；2.強化試題的研究發展；3.配合政府再造鬆綁人事法規；4.營造一個落實多元平等的大環境。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) Civil servants, with administrative power in hand, are commonly regarded as part of upper class. Therefore, researchers, to integrate democracy and efficiency in civil service system and to realize the genuine equality, propose representative bureaucracy and team diversity theory. Senior Civil Service Examination, the main approach, if not only, for citizens in Taiwan to enter the bureaucracy affects the representativeness and diversity of state apparatus substantially. By adopting the research approach of “status attainment” from sociology, this study gives an account of the relation between the examination result and the demographics in terms of gender, education, school characteristic, and region. All the data of this research is based on participators’ personnel information cards collected by the Ministry of Examination from 2003 to 2007.
The result indicates that four types of participators are inferior in the examination, including women, graduates from private untraditional technological colleges, participators from rural areas, and adults above forty-one years old. The differences between superior and inferior groups, however, vary with the level and subject of examination. To prevent demographic differences in Senior Civil Service Examination, the study suggests the following factors be considered: the diversity of the composition of examiners committee should be ensured, the enhancement of development research of test questions, the deregulation of public personnel rules and, last but not least, the construction of a diversity-respecting society.		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 目錄
第一章　緒論 1
第一節　研究背景與動機 1
第二節　研究問題 5
第三節　研究方法與流程 6
第二章　理論基礎與文獻探討 9
第一節　人口特性與官僚體系 9
第二節　地位取得的研究 15
第三節　影響地位取得的人口特性 20
第四節　研究架構 29
第三章　研究設計 32
第一節　資料來源 32
第二節　變數設定 33
第三節　資料分析方法 34
第四節　考試參與者的人口特性 38
第四章　人口特性對考試結果的影響 56
第一節　人口特性對高考三級的影響 56
第二節　人口特性對高考二級的影響 68
第三節　人口特性對司法官三等特考的影響 72
第五章　結論與建議 78
第一節　研究發現 78
第二節　研究建議 82
參考文獻 87
附錄一：台灣社會變遷基本調查行政區類型 96
附錄二：職組暨職系名稱一覽表 97		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 97370 bytes-
dc.format.extent 162517 bytes-
dc.format.extent 150314 bytes-
dc.format.extent 340316 bytes-
dc.format.extent 398043 bytes-
dc.format.extent 455553 bytes-
dc.format.extent 517255 bytes-
dc.format.extent 660846 bytes-
dc.format.extent 390068 bytes-
dc.format.extent 344407 bytes-
dc.format.extent 493068 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.language.iso en_US-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0095256001en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 公務人員考試zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 代表性官僚zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 團隊多元化zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 地位取得zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 社會流動zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) civil service examinationen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) representative bureaucracyen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) team diversityen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) status attainmenten_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) social mobilityen_US
dc.title (題名) 公務人員高等考試錄取者人口特性之比較分析zh_TW
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 王濟川、郭志剛（2003）。Logistic迴歸模型：方法及應用。台北：五南。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 江大樹（1997）。國家發展與文官政策：台灣經驗分析（1949-1996）。台北：憬藝。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 江豐富（1990）。文憑主義在臺灣勞動市場的重要性：以學歷取才還是以人力資本取才。經濟論文，第18卷第2期，頁129-178。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 行政院主計處（2005）。94年人力運用調查報告，2008年7月29日取自：http://www.dgbas.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=14676&ctNode=3580zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 行政院經建會（1991）。國家建設六年計畫。台北：行政院經濟建設委員會。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 台灣師範大學教育評鑑與發展研究中心（2006）。九十三學年度大專畢業生畢業後一年問卷調查統計分析結果，2008年11月16日取自：http://www.cher.ed.ntnu.edu.tw/analyze/data/edu93_postgra_ba/pdf/2-1.pdfzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 考選部（2008）。97年公務人員高等考試一級暨二等考試。97年公務考試統計，2008年12月11日取自：http://wwwc.moex.gov.tw/public/Data/811612361571.pdfzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ______（2007）。96年公務人員高等考試三等考試。96年公務考試統計，2008年8月1日取自：http://wwwc.moex.gov.tw/public/Data/7101911485371.pdfzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 呂明和（1987）。我國文官考選制度政治功能的研析。政治大學公共行政研究所碩士論文，未出版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 李以德（2007）。我國國家考試應考資格法定限制之研究。中國文化大學政治學研究所博士論文，未出版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 李弘祺（2006）。中國與東亞的教育傳統。台北：喜馬拉雅基金會。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 李秀如、王德睦（2007）。係貧窮的原罪？或係城鄉差距？談影響兒童英語學習機會的因素。教育與社會研究，第12期，頁113-135。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 李震洲（2006）。公務人員考試法研修之我見。人事行政，第157期，頁15-19。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ______（2005a）。國家考試申論式試題應否公布參考答案之研究。考銓，第42期，頁57-73。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ______（2005b）。國家考試英文科目改由國內現有英語能力測驗取代是否可行？。人事行政，第153期，頁3-8。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 余致力（2007）。性別差異對公共管理者任用之影響；代表性官僚體系的理論省思。國家菁英，第3卷第4期，頁61-84。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ______（2002）。台灣行政學研究的新課題：政黨輪替對文官體系的衝擊與影響。中國行政學會編，張金鑑教授百齡誕辰紀念會曁學術硏討會論文集。台北：中國行政學會。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 吳復新（2007）。國家考試口試方法技術檢討與改進之研究。空大行政學報，第18期，頁1-24。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 林大森（2002）。高中／高職的公立／私立分流對地位取得之影響。教育與心理研究。第25期，頁35-62。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 邱志淳（1997）。考試與人事行政之涵義辨疑：兼論憲改後考試院之地位。世新大學學報，第7期，頁37-59。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 周祝瑛（2003）。誰捉弄了台灣教改？。台北：心理。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 馬信行（1993）。台灣地區近四十年來教育資源之分配情形。政治大學學報，第51期，頁139-165。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 施能傑（2003）。公務人員考選制度的評估。臺灣政治學刊，第7卷第1期，頁157-207。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ______（1996）。我國文官考選政策的回顧與檢討。政治大學學報，第73期，頁111-144。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 范煥之、李震洲（1984）。宋代考選制度。台北：考選部。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 徐有守（2006）。考銓制度（3版）。台北：台灣商務印書館。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ______（1999）。考試權的危機：考銓制度的腐蝕與改進。台北：台灣商務印書館。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 翁興利、陳文學（2008）。我國原住民文官之研究：消極代表性官僚的測量。國家菁英，第4卷第1期，頁1-18。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 高明士（1999）。隋唐貢舉制度。台北：文津。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 陳伯熹（2006）。國家考試電腦化測驗相關問題探討。國家菁英，第2卷第2期，頁125-138。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 陳金貴（1996）。中華民國文官制度改革的研究。政治學報，第27期，頁123-146。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 陳建志（2001）。台灣地區就業市場收入性別差異之探討。教育與社會研究，第2期，頁123-154。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 陳新萌（1978）。惡補、聯考、升學主義、文憑主義、人事制度之連鎖關係平議。人事行政，第52期，頁93-98。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 章英華、傅仰止編（2006）。台灣地區社會變遷基本調查計畫：第五期第一次調查計畫執行報告。台北：中央研究院社會學研究所。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 章英華、薛承泰、黃毅志（1996）。教育分流與社會經濟地位：兼論對技職教育改革的政策意涵。台北：行政院教育改革審議委員會。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 許南雄（1988）。從人事行政觀點探討我國憲法考銓機構之體制。法商學報，第22期，頁79-107。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 許嘉猷（1986）。社會階層化與社會流動。台北：三民。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 許濱松（1992）。中華民國公務人員考試制度。台北：五南。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 張福建、劉義周（2002）。代表的理論與實際。政治與社會哲學評論，第1期，頁117-149。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 曾天韻（2004）。台灣地區出身背景對大學及研究所入學機會之影響。教育與心理研究，第27卷，第2期，頁255-281。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 黃家齊、蔡達人（2003）。團隊多元化與知識分享、知識創造及創新積效。台大管理論叢，第13卷第2期，頁233-280。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 黃毅志（2003）。臺灣地區新職業聲望與社經地位量表之建構與評估：社會科學與教育社會學研究本土化。教育研究集刊，第49卷第4期，頁1-31。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ＿＿＿（2002）。社會階層、社會網絡與主觀意識：台灣地區不公平的社會階層體系之延續（2版）。台北：巨流。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ______（1994）。社經背景與地位取得過程之結構機制：教育、社會資源及文化資本。東海大學社會學研究所博士論文，未出版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 楊戊龍（2007）。公務人員考選變革的小議題與大價值。國家菁英，第3卷第1期，頁105-126。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 董保城（2005）。應考試權與實質正當程序之保障：釋字第319號解釋再省思。國家菁英，第1卷第2期，頁143-168。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 蓋浙生（2006）。建構我國高等教育「退場機制」之檢視。教育與心理研究。第29卷第1期，頁29-46。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 蔡允棟、宋學文（2005）。政府改造與我國中央政府未來人事組織之發展。國家菁英，第1卷第3期，頁13-34。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 蔡良文（2005a）。論政府改造中考試院職能調整之研析。考銓，第41期，頁35-61。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ______（2005b）。考選制度與政策的變革與發展。考銓，第44期，頁101-124。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 蔡宏明譯（J. Pfeffer and R. I. Sutton原著）（2007）。真相、傳言與胡扯。台北，梅霖。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 蔡淑鈴（1988）。社會地位取得：山地、閩客及外省之比較。楊國樞、瞿海源主編，變遷中的台灣社會。台北：中央研究院民族學研究所。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 蔡瑞明（1985）。台灣高山族社會流動之研究。台灣大學社會學研究所碩士論文，未出版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 蔡銘宗（2001）。公務人員考試法修正重點介紹。人事行政，第138期，頁25-29。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 駱明慶（2002）。誰是台大學生？性別、省籍和城鄉差異。經濟論文叢刊，第30卷第1期，頁113-147。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ______（2001）。教育成就的省籍與性別差異。經濟論文叢刊，第29卷第2期，頁117-152。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 謝偉姝、林政忠（2006）。政院推優退，公務員將掀退休潮。經濟日報，2006.10.20，版A9。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 劉正、陳建州（2007）臺灣大專科系的性別區隔與變遷：1972-2003。教育與心理研究，第30卷第4期，頁1-25。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 劉昊洲（1996）。公務人員考試法修正案詳析。人事行政，第116期，頁15-21。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 劉慧珍、吳志功、朱旭東譯（R. Collins原著）（1998）。文憑社會：教育與階層化的歷史社會學。台北：桂冠。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Althusser, L. (1971). Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays. New York: Monthly Review Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Agresti, A. (1996). An Introduction to Categorical Data Analysis. New York: John Wiley & Sons.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Blau, P. M. and O. D. Duncan (1967). The American Occupational Structure. New York: John Wiley & Sons.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Bowles, S. and H. Gintis (1976). Schooling in Capitalist America: Educational Reform and the Contradictions of Economic Life. New York: Basic Books.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Colclough, G. S. and P. M. Horan (1983). “The Status Attainment Paradigm: An Application of a Kuhnian Perspective.” The Sociological Quarterly, 24(1), 25-42.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Coser, L. A. (1975). “Presidential Address: Two Methods in Search of a Substance.” American Sociological Review, 40(6), 691-700.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Cox, T. H. (1997). Developing Competency to Manage Diversity: Reading, Cases and Activities. San Francisco, C.A.: Berrett-Koehler.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Cox, T. H., S. A. Lobel, and P. L. McLeod (1991). “Effects of Ethnic Group Cultural Differences on Cooperative and Competitive Behavior on a Group Task.” The Academy of Management Journal, 34(4), 827-847.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Dolan, J. and D. H. Rosenbloom eds. (2003). Representative Bureaucracy: Classical Readings and Continuing Controversies. Armonk, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Dresang, D. L. (1991). Public Personnel Management and Public Policy. (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) ________ (1974). “Ethnics Politics, Representative Bureaucracy, and Development Administration.” American Political Science Review, 68(4), 1605-1617.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Duncan, O. D., D. L. Featherman, and B. Duncan (1972). Socioeconomic Background and Achievement. New York: Seminar Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Ehrman, M. and R. Oxford (1989). “Effects of Sex Differences, Career Choice, and Psychological Type on Adult Language Learning Strategies.” Modern Language Journal, 73, 1-13.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Ely, R. J. and D. A. Thomas (2001). “Cultural Diversity at Work: The Effects of Diversity Perspectives on Work Group Processes and Outcomes.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(2), 229-273.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Featherman, D. L. and R. M. Hauser (1976). “Sexual Inequalities Socioeconomic Achievement in the U.S., 1962-1973.” American Sociological Review, 41(3), 462-483.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Featherman, D. L. and R. M. Hauser (1978). Opportunity and Change. New York: Academic Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Fernandez, J. P. (1993). The Diversity Advantage: How American Business Can Out-Perform Japanese and European Companies in the Global Marketplace. New York: Lexington Books.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Frederickson, H. G. (1997). The Spirit of Public Administration. San Francisco: C.A.: Jossey-Bass.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Golembiewski, R. T. (1995). Managing Diversity in Organizations. Tuscaloosa, A.L.: The University of Alabama Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Grusky, D. B. ed. (2001). Social Stratification: Class, Race, and Gender in Sociological Perspective. (2nd ed.). Boulder, C.O.: Westview Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Harris, D. K. (2007). The Sociology of Aging. Lanham, M.D.: Rowman & Littlefield.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Harris, K. (1982). Teachers and Classes: A Marxist Analysis. Boston, M.A.: Routledge & Kegan Paul.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hauser, R. M. and D. L. Featherman (1977). The Process of Stratification: Trend and Analysis. New York: Academic Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hindera, J. J. (1993). “Representative Bureaucracy: Further Evidence of Active Representation in the EEOC District Offices.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 3(4), 415-429.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Ho, P. T. (1962). The Ladder of Success in Imperial China. New York: Columbia University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hochbaum, G., J. Darley, E. Monachesi, and C. Bird (1955). “Socioeconomic Variables in a Large City.” American Journal of Sociology, 61(1), 31-38.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Horan, P. M. (1978). “Is Status Attainment Research Atheoretical?” American Sociological Review, 43(4), 534-541.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Jackson, S. (1992). “Team Composition in Organizations.” In S. Worchel, W. Wood, and J. Simpson (eds.), Group Process and Productivity. Newbury Park, C.A.: Sage Publications.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Jain, H. C., P. J. Sloane, and F. M. Horwitz (2003). Employment Equity and Affirmative Action: An International Comparison. Armonk, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Jencks, C., S. Bartlett, M. Corcoran, J. Crouse, D. Eaglesfield, G. Jackson, K. McClelland, P. Mueser, M. Olneck, J. Schwartz, S. Ward, and J Williams (1979). Who Gets Ahead? The Determinants of Economic Success in America. New York: Basic Books.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Keiser, L. R., V. M. Wilkins, K. J. Meier, and C. A. Holland (2002). “Lipstick and Logarithms: Gender, Institutional Context, and Representative Bureaucracy.” American Political Science Review, 96(3), 553-564.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Knottnerus, J. D. (1987). “Status Attainment Research and its Image of Society.” American Sociological Review, 52(1), 113-121.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Kranz, H. (1978). The Participatory Bureaucracy. Lexington, M.A.: Lexington Bookszh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Krislov, S. (1974). Representative Bureaucracy. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Krislov, S. and D. H. Rosenbloom (1981). Representative Bureaucracy and the American Political System. New York: Praeger.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Lewis, W. G. (1989). “Toward Representative Bureaucracy: Blacks in City Police Organizations, 1976-1985.” Public Administration Review, 49(3), 257-268.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Lin, N., W. M. Ensel, and J. C. Vaughn (1981). “Social Resources and Strength of Ties: Structural Factors in Occupational Status Attainment.” American Sociological Review, 46(4), 393-405.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Liu, J. and A. Sakamoto (2002). “The Role of Schooling in Taiwan`s Labor Market: Human Capital, Screening, or Credentialism?” Taiwanese Journal of Sociology, 29, 1-56.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Maccoby, E. E. and C. N. Jacklin (1974). The Psychology of Sex Differences. Stanford, C.A.: Stanford University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Matras, J. (1984). Social Inequality, Stratification, and Mobility. (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Mee, J. F. (1955). Personnel Handbook. New York: Ronald Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Meier, K. J. (1975). “Representative Bureaucracy: An Empirical Analysis.” American Political Science Review, 69, 526-542.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Meier, K. J. and J. Steward (1992). “The Impact of Representative Bureaucracies: Educational Systems and Public Policies.” American Review of Public Administration, 22(3), 157-171.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Meier, K. J., R. D. Wrinkle, and J. L. Polinard (1999). “Representative Bureaucracy and Distributional Equity: Addressing the Hard Question.” The Journal of Politics, 61(4), 1025-1039.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Milliken, F. J. and L. L. Martins (1996). “Searching for Common Threads: Understanding the Multiple Effects of Diversity in Organizational Groups. ” The Academy of Management Review, 21(2), 402-433.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Mosher, F. C. (1968). Democracy and the Public Service. New York, Oxford University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Noe, R. A., J. R. Hollenbeck, B. Grehart, and P. M. Wright (2000). Human Resource Management. (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) O’Reilly, C. A., D. F. Caldwell, and W. Barnett (1989). “Work Group Demography, Social Integration, and Turnover.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 34, 21-37.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Pateman, C. (1989). The Disorder of Women: Democracy, Feminism and Political Theory. Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, C.A.: Sage Publications.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Pelled, L. H., K. M. Eisenhardt, and K. R. Xin (1999). “Exploring the Black Box: An Analysis of Work Group Diversity, Conflict, and Performance.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 1-28.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Pitts, D. W. (2005). “Diversity, Representation, and Performance: Evidence about Race and Ethnicity in Public Organizations.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(4), 615-631.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Rainey, H. G. (2003). Understanding and Managing Public Organizations. San Francisco, C.A.: Jossey-Bass.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Riccucci, N. M. and J. R. Saidel (1997) “The Representativeness of State-Level Bureaucratic Leaders: A Missing Piece of the Representative Bureaucracy Puzzle.” Public Administration Review, 57(5), 423-430.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Ridgeway, C. L. (1997). “Interaction and the Conservation of Gender Inequality: Considering Employment.” American Sociological Review, 62(2), 218-235.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Richard, O. C. (2000). “Racial Diversity, Business Strategy, and Firm Performance: A Resource-Based View.” The Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 164-177.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Robinson, R. and J. Kelley (1979). “Class as Conceived by Marx and Dahrendorf: Effects on Income Inequality and Politics in the United States and Great Britain.” American Sociological Review, 44(1), 35-58.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Rosenbloom, D. H. (1998). Public Administration: Understanding Management, Politics, and Law in the Public Sector. (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Schultz, D. A. and R. Moranto (1998). The Politics and Civil Service Reform. New York: Peter Lang.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Selden, S. C. (1997). The Promise of Representative Bureaucracy: Diversity and Responsiveness in a Government Agency. Armonk, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Sewell, W. H. and R. M. Hauser (1975). Education, Occupation, and Earnings. New York: Academic Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Sewell, W. H., R. M. Hauser, and G. W. Olendorf (1970). “The Eduational and Early Occupational Attainment Process: Replication and Revision.” American Sociological Review, 35(6), 1014-1027.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Sewell, W. H., R. M. Hauser, and W. C. Wolf, (1980). “Sex, Schooling and Occupational Status.” American Journal of Sociology, 86(3), 551-583.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Smith, K. G., K. A. Smith, J. D. Olian, H. P. Sims, D. P. O’ Bannon, and J. A. Scully (1994). “Top Management Team Demography and Process: The Role of Social Integration and Communication.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(3), 412-438.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Sowell, T. (2004). Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One. New York: Basic Books.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Subramaniam, V. (1967). “Representative Bureaucracy: A Reassessment.” The American Political Science Review, 61(4), 1010-1019.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Sweezy, P. M. (1964). The Theory of Capitalist Development: Principles of Marxian Political Economy. New York: Monthly Review Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Terry, L. D. (1998). “Administrative Leadership, Neo-Managerialism, and the Public Management Movement.” Public Administration Review, 58(3), 194-200.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Treiman, D. J. and K. Terrell (1975). “Sex and the Process of Status Attainment.” American Sociological Review, 40(2), 174-200.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Watson, W. E., K. Kumar, and L. K. Michaelsen (1993). “Cultural Diversity`s Impact on Interaction Process and Performance: Comparing Homogeneous and Diverse Task Groups.” The Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 590-602.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Wright, D. W. (1984). Secondary Research. Beverly Hills C.A.: Sage Publications.zh_TW