近年來對於大學多元入學方案的研究很多，但多半是制度演進的政策評估，基於實證資料的分析與討論則較為缺乏。本研究以「台灣高等教育資料庫」的資料進行量化分析，探討自然組學生加考社會組數乙的「跨考」議題。本文先陳述指定考試中跨考的制度起源、人數演變，並對近年來有關跨考的論述整理分析，最後以實證資料比較跨考者與非跨考者考試結果的差異。研究發現：1.就制度面而言，跨考行為並不影響考試整體的公平性；2.比起非跨考者，跨考者的整體成績普遍較差；3.跨考者對考取科系的主觀評價，明顯低於非跨考者。本文認為，即使有部分自然組學生因為跨考錄取了國立商管科系，但我們實不宜過分誇大跨考的優勢。

The issue of the Multiple-College-Entrance-Project has been getting popular for many researchers. Nevertheless, most of such studies were concerned with exploring theoretical arguments rather than giving empirical findings. This study was designed to lessen the above weakness and to discover solid findings based on the data of “Taiwan Higher Education Data System”. The purposes of this study mainly focus on uncovering the cross-group effects of natural and scientific students’ taking the mathematics exam designed for students from the social group. This article will first address the origin of the policy of interdisciplinary exams in the Department Required Test, the number of examinees every year, and the discourses about interdisciplinary exams in recent years. Secondly, this article will compare the grades of the examinees who took the interdisciplinary exams with others who didn’t. Major findings of this study are as follows: First, the design interdisciplinary exams do not influence the equity of exams. Secondly, the performance of the examinees who took interdisciplinary exams are worse than those who didn’t. Last, the level of subjective evaluations within departments of the examinees who took interdisciplinary exams are significantly lower than the others. As a result, even if some natural and scientific students enter the business and financial departments of national universities through interdisciplinary exams, we should not exaggerate the advantages of taking interdisciplinary exams.