建制民族誌「為何」書寫？探索建制民族誌的系譜、方法特質與挑戰

Revisiting Institutional Ethnography: Conceptual Roots/Routes, Methodological Characteristics and Analytical Challenges

齊偉先(Wei-hsian CHI)

建制民族誌 ； 支配關係 ； 文本中介 ； 斷裂 ； 女性主義 ； institutional ethnography ； ruling relations ； textually mediated ； disjuncture ； feminism

台灣社會研究季刊

112期（2019 / 04 / 30）

147 - 170

繁體中文

本文試圖從經驗研究操作的角度爬梳建制民族誌的特色，並說明建制民族誌的可能限制。首先，從理論系譜的角度切入，揭示建制民族誌在發展系譜上所傳承的內涵，說明它如何傳承及調整馬克思理論傳統、俗民方法學以及傅柯的論述理論。同時從研究對象設定及方法特質，說明建制民族誌這研究取徑的特色。接著本文從經驗研究的實際操作面切入，指出台灣相關經驗研究所透露出的建制民族誌的可能限制。具體指出在反抗議題和文化議題上，現有的建制民族誌研究並未能對此有所回應，藉此說明運用建制民族制所可能面臨的限制與挑戰。

This article sets up to capture the analytical features of institutional ethnography (IE), while illustrating the potential conceptual limitations encountered. First, I begin with the theoretical tracing of IE and its conceptual roots/routes, including how IE works with and against Marxist tradition, ethnomethodology and Foucauldian discourse. Meanwhile, I characterize the methodology of IE by explaining how and what IE is implemented. Next, I culturally contextualize IE and its practices within the Taiwanese context and show the potential methodological challenges encountered. In particular, I argue that the notion of resistance and the concept of culture are under-theocratized in the analytical landscape of IE and needs to be better accommodated. This shows the methodological limitations and challenges while practicing institutional ethnography.

1. 林昱瑄(2018)。追求教學卓越？台灣高教的表現管理建制研究。臺灣社會學，35，59-107。
   連結：
2. Breimo, J. P.(2015).Captured by care: An institutional ethnography on the work of being in a rehabilitation process in Norway.Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare,42(2),13-29.
3. Campbell, M. L.(2003).Dorothy Smith and knowing the world we live in.Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare,30,3-22.
4. Campbell, M. L.(2001).Textual accounts, ruling action: The intersection of knowledge and power in the routine conduct of community nursing work.Studies in Cultures, Organizations and Societies,7,231-250.
5. Clough, P. T.(1993).On the brink of deconstructing sociology: critical reading of Dorothy Smith's standpoint epistemology.The Sociological Quarterly,34(1),169-182.
6. Collins, P. H.(1992).Transforming the inner circle: Dorothy Smith's challenge to sociological theory.Sociological Theory,10(1),73-80.
7. Deleuze, G.,Guattari, F.(1980).Mille plateaux: Capitalisme et schizophrénie.Paris:De Minuit.
8. DeVault, M. L.(1991).Feeding the family: The social organization of caring as gendered work.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
9. Doran, C.(1993).The everyday world is problematic: Ideology and recursion in Dorothy Smith's micro-sociology.Canadian Journal of Sociology,18(1),43-63.
10. Griffith, A. I.,Smith, D. E.(2005).Mothering for schooling.New York:RoutledgeFalmer.
11. Lemert, C.(1992).Subjectivity's limit: The unsolved riddle of the standpoint.Sociological Theory,10(1),63-72.
12. McCoy, L.(2006).Keeping the institution in view: Working with interview accounts of everyday experience.Institutional ethnography as practice,Lanham:
13. McNeil, L. L.(2008).Applying institutional ethnography to childcare.Qualitative Sociology Review,4(1),109-130.
14. Mykhalovskiy, E.,McCoy, L.(2002).Troubling ruling discourses of health: Using institutional ethnography in community-based research.Critical Public Health,12(1),17-37.
15. Rankin, J. M.(2015).The rhetoric of patient and family centred care: An institutional ethnography into what actually happens.Journal of Advanced Nursing,71(3),526-534.
16. Rankin, J. M.,Campbell, M. L.(2006).Managing to nurse: Inside Canada's health care reform.Toronto:University of Toronto Press.
17. Smith, D. E.(2005).Institutional ethnography: A sociology for people.Lanham:AltaMira Press.
18. Smith, D. E.(2007).Making change from below.Socialist Studies,Fall 2007,7-30.
19. Smith, D. E.(1990).Text, facts, and feminity: Exploring the relations of ruling.London:Routledge.
20. Smith, D. E.(1992).Sociology from women's experience: A reaffirmation.Sociological Theory,10(1),88-98.
21. Smith, D. E.(2004).Ideology, science and social relations: A reinterpretation of Marx's epistemology.European Journal of Social Theory,7(4),445-462.
22. Smith, D. E.(1981).On sociological description: A method from Marx.Human Studies,4(1),313-337.
23. Smith, D. E.(1975).What it might mean to do a Canadian sociology: The everyday world as problematic.The Canadian Journal of Sociology,1(3),363-376.
24. Smith, D. E.(2009).Categories are not enough.Gender & Society,23,76-80.
25. Smith, D. E.(1987).The everyday world as problematic: A feminist sociology.Boston:Northeastern University Press.
26. Smith, D. E.(1975).An analysis of ideological structures and how women are excluded: Considerations for academic women.Canadian Review of Sociology,12(4),353-369.
27. Water, N.(2015).Towards an institutional counter-cartography of nurses’ wound work.Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare,17(2),127-156.
28. Wilson, A.,Pence, E.(2006).U.S. legal interventions in the lives of battered women: An indigenous assessment.Institutional ethnography as practice,Lanham:
29. 張麗珍,黃明華,齊偉先(2017)。醫療場域中專業協作的順從與反抗：呼吸治療的建制民族誌。臺灣社會學刊，61，135-184。
30. 許可依(2017)。政治大學社會工作研究所。
31. 蔡昇倍(2015)。政治大學社會工作研究所。

1. 程婉若(2019)。超越「危險」與「安全」：從個案抗拒探討親密伴侶暴力防治建制。輔導與諮商學報，41(2)，1-23。