本文的目的是在重新思考教育批判民族誌中的「批判」意涵。在教育領域中，一般批判民族誌的研究大多致力於解放遭受不平等待遇的受壓迫團體，此類研究取向，界定了批判民族誌中關於「批判」的規範，藉由法國哲學家傅柯的批判概念，作者從兩個面向來申論這個概念的應用。首先，是對於一般認定的批判民族誌的批判，除了解放受壓迫團體之外，主張批判民族誌可以有其他的「批判」思維與做法；再者，借用傅柯的「批判」的意涵，作者提出批判民族誌的閱讀與寫作，可以視為是一種德行、倫理的實踐，這是一種將自我視為田野加以探究的教育批判民族誌，其教育目的在於幫助個體生命的轉化，並超越個人主體化歷程的限制，如此的轉化，是在質疑各種壓迫在主體身上的真理，以及實踐傅柯「拒絕我們之所是」的主張。

The aim of this paper is to rethink the significance of the word ‘critical’ in critical ethnography in educational research. The conventional practice of critical ethnography in education is dedicated to the emancipation of oppressed groups from their experience of inequality. This approach, however, has become a norm, a dominant thinking of what is meant by “critical” within critical ethnography. Drawing on Foucault’s concept of critique, I argue that the first implication of this concept is “how not to be governed” by the conventional thinking of critical ethnography. Second, writing and reading research in critical ethnography can be regarded as a virtue, an ethical practice to transform the limits of subjugation or to invest the desubjugation of the subject. Rather than investigating an unquestionable truth, it explores both the knowledge of what we are and the possibility of rejecting what we are.