以作者名、篇名、關鍵字或DOI查詢

期刊目錄列表 - 71卷(2026) - 【教育科學研究期刊】71(3)九月刊
回上一頁

不只是替代照護：從Bruner出發，重構臺灣托育制度中的文化意涵與公共性 作者:
中國文化大學師資培育中心 羅逸平
國立臺中教育大學諮商與應用心理學系 許建中

卷期：71卷第3期
日期：2026年9月
頁碼：131-156
DOI：https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202609_71(3).0005

摘要：

　　臺灣當前托育政策雖持續推動公共化與準公共化改革，然其制度設計多以協助女性就業與減輕家庭負擔為核心目標，導致托育行動長期被限縮於替代性照護的功能性角色，忽略了女性作為文化教育實踐與公共責任承載的潛能。本文以J. Bruner的文化心理學與其〈Care Away from Home〉一文為理論基礎，運用「詮釋循環」（hermeneutic circle）作為研究方法，批判性地分析臺灣托育制度在文化意涵、公共性實踐與性別治理等面向的結構盲點，並提出文化轉向的制度重構構想。研究發現，臺灣托育制度存在三項核心問題：一、照護行動遭工具化與去文化化處理，缺乏對其教育性與文化內涵的系統性建構；二、制度依賴市場機制與家庭資源，造成公共性錯位與社會責任不足；三、照護者專業性與文化中介角色未被肯認，職涯發展與社會認同長期受限。為回應此困境，本研究主張托育制度應從三個方向進行轉型：一是將照護重新定位為文化實踐與育人場域；二是強化社區參與和集體承擔，建構具在地文化根基的公共托育體系；三是賦權照護者專業主體性，使其成為教育與文化傳遞的重要行動者。本研究企圖從Bruner文化心理學的視角，突破現行制度的技術治理思維，回應照護即教育、制度即文化的根本命題，為臺灣托育政策提供一條以文化與公共性為核心的批判性重構路徑。

關鍵詞：J. Bruner、文化心理學、托育制度、教育文化實踐、照護者

《詳全文》 檔名

參考文獻：
王兆慶、王舒芸（2024）。兩種準公共化：衛福部與教育部的托育政策分化成因。台灣社會學， 47，71-110。
【Wang, C.-C., & Wang, S.-Y. (2024). Two models of quasi-public: Driving forces for Taiwan’s childcare policy and its divergence. Taiwanese Sociology, 47, 71-110.】
王舒芸（2014）。門裡門外誰照顧、平價普及路迢迢？臺灣嬰兒照顧政策之體制內涵分析。台灣社會研究季刊，6，49-93。
【Wang, S.-Y. (2014). The analysis of infant care policies and debates in Taiwan. Taiwan: A Radical Quarterly in Social Studies, 6, 49-93.】
朱敬先（1983）。幼兒教育。五南。
【Chu, J.-H. (1983). Early childhood education. Wu-Nan Book.】
行政院（2024）。我國少子女化對策計畫（107年至114年）。https://www.sfaa.gov.tw/SFAA/Pages/ashx/File.ashx?FilePath=~/File/Attach/10375/File_192514.pdf
【Executive Yuan. (2024). Taiwan’s plan to address the population decline, 2018-2025. https://www.sfaa.gov.tw/SFAA/Pages/ashx/File.ashx?FilePath=~/File/Attach/10375/File_192514.pdf】
行政院主計處（2024）。113年5月人力運用調查統計結果。https://ws.dgbas.gov.tw/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9VcGxvYWQvNDYzL3JlbGZpbGUvMTA5ODAvMjM0MTk4Lzc5Y2M5MmE2LWRlOTktNDdiMy05ZTZmLTkzZDNhMDljMWI1NC5wZGY%3d&n=MTEz5bm05Lq65Yqb6YGL55So6Kq%2f5p%2bl5paw6IGe56i%2fLnBkZg%3d%3d
【Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics, Executive Yuan. (2024). Human resources utilization survey statistics for May 2024. https://ws.dgbas.gov.tw/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9VcGxvYWQvNDYzL3JlbGZpbGUvMTA5ODAvMjM0MTk4Lzc5Y2M5MmE2LWRlOTktNDdiMy05ZTZmLTkzZDNhMDljMWI1NC5wZGY%3d&n=MTEz5bm05Lq65Yqb6YGL55So6Kq%2f5p%2bl5paw6IGe56i%2fLnBkZg%3d%3d】
» 展開更多
中文APA引文格式
羅逸平、許建中（2026）。不只是替代照護：從Bruner出發，重構臺灣托育制度中的文化意涵與公共性。教育科學研究期刊，71（3），131-156。
https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202609_71(3).0005
APA Format
Lo, Y.-P., & Hsu, C.-C. (2026). More than Substitute Care: Reconstructing the Cultural Meaning and Publicness of Taiwan’s Childcare System Through Bruner’s Perspective. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 71(3), 131-156.
https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202609_71(3).0005

Journal directory listing - Volume 71 (2026) - Journal of Research in Education Sciences【71(3)】September
Top

More than Substitute Care: Reconstructing the Cultural Meaning and Publicness of Taiwan’s Childcare System Through Bruner’s Perspective Author:
Yi-Ping Lo (Center for Teacher Education, Chinese Culture University)
Chien-Chung Hsu (Department of Counseling and Applied Psychology, National Taichung University of Education)

Vol.&No.：Vol. 71, No. 3
Date：September 2026
Pages：131-156
DOI：https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202609_71(3).0005

Abstract：

Research Motivation and Purpose
　　In contemporary Taiwan, the childcare system has been positioned primarily as a functional policy tool to address the issues of labor market participation, fertility decline, and economic development. While these goals are undeniably important, such instrumental orientation has also obscured the cultural and educational dimensions of childcare. Care has often been reduced to physiological support and service provision, neglecting its role as a fundamental arena for children’s early socialization, cultural participation, and moral learning. Simultaneously, the system continues to be shaped by entrenched gender norms that presume women as primary caregivers, thereby reinforcing structural inequalities between women’s career trajectories and caregiving responsibilities.
　　Against this backdrop, the present study aims to reconceptualize Taiwan’s childcare system by engaging Jerome Bruner’s cultural psychology and reflections on “Care Away from Home”. Bruner
(2006) emphasized that early childcare settings are not merely auxiliary services for working parents but crucial cultural environments in which children acquire language, emotional understanding, and cognitive skills through daily interactions. Drawing on this insight, this study seeks to critique the functionalist logic underlying Taiwanese childcare policy and to highlight the neglected dimensions of culture, public responsibility, and gender equity. Specifically, the research is motivated by two key purposes: first, to uncover the cultural assumptions and epistemological logic embedded in Taiwan’s childcare policies across different historical stages; and second, to propose transformative directions that redefine childcare as an educational and cultural practice rooted in public values and collective responsibility.
Literature Review
　　The development of childcare systems has long been a focal point in international research, with scholars emphasizing accessibility, affordability, and quality as central policy concerns. In Taiwan, however, these priorities have often been approached through a functionalist lens, framing childcare primarily as a mechanism to sustain the labor supply and mitigate demographic challenges. While pragmatic, such framing has overlooked the cultural meanings of care and its role in shaping children’s subjectivity.
　　Jerome Bruner’s cultural psychology offers a critical theoretical lens for re-examining this issue. In Acts of Meaning and The Culture of Education, Bruner argued that human development is inseparable from cultural participation, with narrative and symbolic practices constituting the core of learning. In his essay Care Away from Home, Bruner further highlighted that childcare settings are not secondary to formal schooling but are cultural sites where children acquire language, emotional understanding, and cognitive frameworks through daily routines. This perspective challenges the instrumental treatment of childcare and repositions it as an inherent educational and cultural practice.
　　Complementing Bruner’s work, Rogoff emphasized that children’s development is embedded in cultural practices and community participation, underscoring that learning emerges within shared sociocultural contexts rather than isolated instruction. Similarly, Dasen demonstrated through cross-cultural psychology that developmental trajectories vary according to cultural environments, cautioning against universalizing models of care. These insights resonate with Taiwan’s current struggles, in which reliance on market and family resources reproduces inequality. Furthermore, Bernard critiqued gendered assumptions in early childhood education, showing how caregiving professions are often feminized and devalued, reinforcing systemic inequities.
　　These studies highlight the importance of situating childcare policies within a broader cultural and gender framework. They provide the theoretical foundation for examining Taiwan’s childcare system not only as a matter of service provision, but also as a critical cultural and public institution.
Research Method
　　This study employs the hermeneutic circle method to critically analyze the structural blind spots in Taiwan’s childcare system, particularly regarding cultural meaning, publicness, and gender governance, and proposes a culturally oriented framework for policy reconstruction. The interpretive circle emphasizes the dynamic movement between part and whole, text, and context, enabling the researcher to uncover the implicit cultural assumptions and epistemological logic embedded in institutional arrangements.
　　Through this approach, the analysis revealed how each stage was shaped by specific cultural presuppositions– for instance, the gendered assumption of “motherhood as care,” the functionalist framing of childcare as an economic instrument, and the reliance on market and family resources as substitutes for public responsibility. By returning repeatedly from these historical cases to Bruner’s theoretical concepts– such as cultural participation, narrative meaning-making, and the distinction between “big C” and “small c” culture– the study was able to reframe childcare not as a neutral service but as a deeply cultural and public practice. Thus, the hermeneutic circle provides both a methodological pathway and a critical stance for interrogating the cultural foundations of Taiwan’s childcare system and envisioning transformative alternatives.
Research Findings
　　This study identified three structural challenges embedded in Taiwan’s childcare system. First, care has been reduced to a functional service, narrowly defined as meeting physiological needs or enabling parental employment, while its deeper cultural and educational roles in children’s socialization and meaning-making remain overlooked. Second, the system relies heavily on families and the market, resulting in high costs and a limited public provision. This dependence reflects the cultural assumptions of family responsibility and contributes to inequality, as access to quality childcare becomes stratified by socioeconomic status. Third, care work has been narrowly professionalized, focusing on technical procedures and labor substitution, while neglecting caregivers’ roles as cultural and ethical mediators. This has marginalized care as low-status labor and undermined its recognition as a professional and cultural practice.
　　To address these challenges, this study proposed three transformative directions. The first is “Care as Education,” which redefines childcare as a cultural arena that supports children’s early development and participation in shared practices. The second is “From Individual Choice to Collective Responsibility,” which calls for expanding public investment and recognizing childcare as essential social infrastructure. The third is “Reconstructing Caregivers’ Professional Role,” which positions caregivers as cultural practitioners and educational mediators, thereby enhancing their professional identity and social recognition. Together, these directions suggest a shift away from functionalist governance toward a childcare system grounded in cultural meaning, public values, and gender equity.
Discussion and Suggestions
　　The findings reveal that Taiwan’s childcare system remains bound by functionalist governance and gendered cultural assumptions, although responsive to demands for accessibility and quality. To overcome these structural limitations, the study applies Bruner’s cultural psychology, particularly his distinction between “big C” Culture and “small c” culture. Policies have emphasized “big C” frameworks– formal governance, demographic management, and economic rationality– while neglecting the “small c” cultural practices embedded in daily caregiving, where children acquire language, emotional understanding, and social norms. Recognizing care as “small c” culture underscores its role as a site of meaning making and public responsibility.
　　Based on this perspective, three key suggestions were proposed. First, it redefines childcare as a cultural-educational practice by embedding cultural participation and ethical dimensions into policy narratives, curricula, and institutional design. Second, it strengthens the public character of childcare through expanded state responsibility, equitable access, and investment in childcare as social infrastructure. Third, reconstruct caregivers’ professional and social identities, recognizing them not as feminized or technical labor but as cultural mediators and educational actors.
　　In sum, situating childcare within a cultural-psychological framework allows for a transformative vision that transcends functionalist constraints and affirms childcare as a cornerstone of cultural participation, public value, and gender equity in Taiwan’s future.

Keywords：J. Bruner, cultural psychology, childcare policy, educational and cultural practice, caregivers