隨著經濟穩定發展，使得公共事務日益繁雜，導致政府的職能與角色備受關注。而政府職能的推動與落實，公務人員著實扮演著重要而且關鍵的角色，透過考選的制度，對應試人員作智能的鑑別，視其優劣以為任用之依據，並考量其所具有的專業能力，一直是政府在施政上的重要議題。 公務人員考選制度從舉辦考試的報名書表開始，經過應考資格的審查、彌封作業、闈場作業、場務作業、考試作業、應考人提出試題疑義作業、卷務作業、成績評閱作業到成績放榜作業、應考人申請成績複查考成績處理及不服成績評定而進行之訴願，行政訴訟等都是考選制度之重要環結。本研究從行政法之公平原則角度將考選制度分為三部分略為探討： 一．事前部分：應考資格審查部分及體格檢查標準部分－即從現行各種考試之應考資格及體檢標準規定先敘明，再以行政法之公平原則－平等原則、比例原則、依法行政原則及正當法律程序原則，再加以分析其訂定各種應考資格及體檢標準之公平性與否。 二．事中部分：典試機關之命題，試題疑義部分及評閱部分－敘明目前法令之規定與實際執行情形，若與法令有所違背，是否有改進之處。 三．事後部分：複查制度部分與行政救濟部分－探討考生對於因試務機關行政疏失之補救之道，以個別案例歸納目前救濟制度之執行情形，並提出可改進之道。 本文盼藉著行政法制之公平原則分析我國現行考選制度之優缺點與改進之道，以建立健全，公平，合理之國家考試制度，冀能維人事制度之健全及人事行政工作之正常運作。

我國以公開的考試方式作為考選任用政府文官的思想及制度可說具有悠久的歷史傳統 及深厚的社會基礎，並已成為我國政治結構的特色之一，而有關我國文官考試的思想 及制度，長久以來也成為中外政治社會學家及歷史學者關注、思考及研究的主題，本 文乃承繼此一傳統，然著力的重心及焦點，乃在於以巨觀（Macri View）的政治視野 ，觀察分析文官考選制度對我國政治體系斤產生的功能及意涵。 全文分五章論述，首章緒論部分係就本文研究的背景及分析的架構予以闡明，並界定 釐清指涉研究主題的相關概念；次章則析述我國文官考選制度在傳統政治及社會格局 中所突顯的政治本質及意義，並分析 國父孫中山先生在其三民主義的思想體系中對 上一制度之倡導所冀達成的政治目標；第二章係就目前我國憲政制度對文官考選制度 的規範以及目前此一制度的基本結構在我國政治系絡中運作的特色予以析論；第四章 則以目前文官考選制度中較具政治特色的考試種類為分析的焦點以析論此一制度對政 治體系所蘊含的政治功能；末章則分別從功績制原制的挑戰以及民主與效率本質上的 爭論觀點，對我國文官考選制度所蘊含的政治功能予以反省，並思考其對目前之制度 的啟示，以作為本文結論。

就政府機關而言，公務人力素質之良寙對工作績效與競爭力的提升有密切關聯，而考選則居於人力素質把關的第一線，因此做好公務人員的入口關乃是現代化國家健全文官體制的首要課題。從而公務人員考選的目的即是運用最佳的考試技術與方法，藉以選拔具有一定的知識、技術與能力的人才，以符合用人機關工作職位的需求。 兩岸雖同文同種，但彼此因政治制度及意識形態的不同，導致考選制度有顯著的差異，因此本論文從兩岸的考選法制及考選技術深入探討及比較分析，發現我國公務人員考選制度已落實功績制，而中華人民共和國仍強調「堅持黨管幹部原則」，因此無論考選法規的訂定或考選技術的施行，均無法擺脫以「中國共產黨」利益為優先的陰影，再者戶口限制人民報考機會，且辦理考試機關常是有法不依，或藉口試（面試）機會挑選政治條件好、思想純正、品德優良人員，是以兩岸公務人員考選之公正性與公平性仍有落差。又中華人民共和國公務人員考選對少數民族及退伍軍人之優惠措施遠不及我國針對原住民族及退除役軍人舉辦特種考試，再者體格檢查標準嚴格，殘疾人士並無參加考試的機會，不若我國為身心障礙者參加考試提供各種照護措施，並舉辦身心障礙人員特種考試。 兩岸公務人員考試均呈現激烈競爭的場面，除要嚴守公正、公平公開的原則，更要彰顯考試的效度與信度，故口試要朝結構化進行，筆試要測試核心工作能力之科目，並建立質優量大的題庫試題，俾能達成評鑑與預測的目的。 關鍵字：考選制度、公務人員考選法制、考選技術 / For government agencies, a close relationship exists between the professional quality of civil servants and the enhancement of job performance and competitiveness. As recruitment is the front line of human resources quality control, ensuring that this entry point is optimized is an issue of primary importance for modern countries aiming to improve their public service systems. It follows that the objective of recruitment procedures is to use the best examination techniques and methodology so as to select personnel with the most suitable knowledge, skills and abilities to meet the needs of employing agencies for the vacancies they aim to fill. Even though the people of Taiwan and China are of the same general ethnicity and use the same language, the political systems and prevailing ideologies on either side of the Taiwan Strait are different and this leads to there being clear differences in the respective civil service recruitment systems. This study looks at the systems and techniques used in the two territories for civil service recruitment and, through a comparative analysis, shows that while Taiwan has put in place a merit system, the People’s Republic of China still emphasizes the “subordination of all cadres to the leadership of the Party”. This means that the interests of the Chinese Communist Party cast an inescapable shadow over both the pertinent legislation and the practical recruitment techniques in use. In addition, citizens’ opportunities to take examinations are subject to restrictions related to identity and household origin, while agencies conducting such examinations often ignore procedures set out in law, or rely on oral testing (interviews) to select persons with the right political stance, correct thinking and good morals. In terms of impartiality and fairness, therefore, there is some difference between the recruitment systems in operation on either side of the Strait. The preferential measures put in place by the PRC in favor of the country’s ethnic minorities and retired military personnel in the context of civil service recruitment are far from matching Taiwan’s system of Special Examinations for indigenous persons and military personnel transferring to the civil service, while physical fitness requirements in China are strict and disabled persons do not have opportunities to take civil service examinations. This contrasts with Taiwan where many facilities are provided for the convenience of disabled examinees and a specific Special Examination for the Disabled is also administered. In both territories, civil service examinations feature intense competition, and while the principles of impartiality and fair openness are paramount, it is even more important that recruitment procedures demonstrate effectiveness and credibility. Accordingly, oral tests should be conducted in a structured manner, written examinations should address subjects pertinent to the core abilities of the job in question, and question banks should be maintained with a high volume of items of high quality. Such steps further the ultimate testing goals of appraisal and pre-assessment of candidate suitability for civil service employment. Keywords: recruitment systems, civil service recruitment law, examination and recruitment technology