Dean, L

English

Leeds Beckett Repository

A critical look at the use of metaphors in the development ofelectronic learning resourcesLaura DeanALT JOURNAL NUMBER 5: SPRING 200926Design is a creative process, but also one thatrequires rational objective analysis. The field ofhuman-machine interaction provides tools for thisobjective analysis which can be used to assess thebenefits of using metaphors in software design.However, for most educators diligently creatingelectronic resources, no design expert is employedand so they rely on the techniques that haveserved them in face-to-face interaction, includingmetaphors. This article provides a brief overviewof the theory of the use of metaphors in designingresources, and so allows teachers to assessimpartially whether their metaphors help orhinder learning.We can all recognise a metaphor, and they arefrequently used, along with similes, in formal andinformal teaching situations. In face-to-faceteaching, they can be highly effective in enablinglearners to create mental representations ofcomplex or abstract concepts. Lakoff and Johnson’s(1980) seminal book describes how they can beused to extrapolate from our existing knowledge tounderstand new subjects, and as a tool we employto provide structure to our thoughts and deepenunderstanding.When teaching face to face educators can try outseveral metaphors until they find one that allowsthe learner to recognise the key similarities andtherefore grasp something new about the conceptor idea the teacher is expounding. Metaphors canbe highly effective tools in assisting understandingand embedding new concepts. They also have thepotential to be misleading, inappropriate andconfusing, particularly for international studentsand first generation entrants to higher education.The main danger with their use is that learners maymake links between inappropriate aspects of thecomparison object; for example let us take a well-known metaphor and simile:“All the world’s a stage and all the men and womenmerely players”(Shakespeare, As You Like It)This metaphor is effective to English speakers inrapidly portraying a complex series of ideas: peopleare not in control of their destinies; they may ‘act’ indifferent roles throughout their lives; people are thesame across the world.In comparison let us take the simile:“Life is like a box of chocolates.”(Forrest Gump)Without this quote’s subsequent clarification (“Younever know what you’re going to get”) it is lesseffective for learning. How is the learner to knowwhich aspect of a box of chocolates is to becompared? There are many aspects of chocolates.Are they similar in that both are fattening? In thatboth can be presents? That neither lasts long? Eachindividual may focus on a different property tocompare the two objects or ideas, which is notnecessarily the one the educator intended.In teaching, the purpose of metaphor is to increaseunderstanding: as a “bridge enabling passage fromone world to another” (Schiff, 1979). If a metaphordoes not work for one learner the educator can adaptit. However, when using metaphors for electronicresources, there is less flexibility to switch if it is noteffective. Therefore in designing e-resources onlymetaphors effective for all learners should be used.Ortony (1993) argues that to be effective metaphormust be vivid, compact and also expressible. It is alsovital that if metaphors are used they do not cause‘overlearning’. Halasz and Moran (1982) describe thedangers of overlearning, i.e. carrying moreinformation from the comparison item than isrequired. For example, if we return to ourShakespearian quote “All the world’s a stage”, alearner may transfer across from the metaphor theidea that the world is like a stage in other ways: madeof wood; surrounded by lights; relatively small. Wewould not want our learners to get mixed up and haveto begin to unlearn these aspects of the metaphor.Anderson, Smyth et al (1994) have developed astep-by-step method to assess whether you shoulduse a metaphor to aid teaching. First, assess whatmental effort is saved by the use of metaphor.Second, identify the conceptual baggage associatedwith the metaphor – which elements aren’t relevantand need disassociating. Then compare the twoelements to decide if effort is saved or not. Finally,designers should consider whether the metaphorcan be extended to support other aspects oflearning in the future.Having chosen one of the world’s best writers andbest metaphors it is hard to see how one could36485_ALT Journal6:Layout 1  3/8/09  12:54  Page 28REFLECTION 27really confuse the relevant aspects of stage andworld. Therefore we will now consider a simplerfictional example: a Blackboard module which usesthe metaphor of the Titanic. The Titanic was widelyknown as one of the world’s most impressive shipsowing to its size and luxury prior to its sinking on itsmaiden voyage.Anderson et al’s first stage is to decide what effortis saved. So we look at the imagery associated withthe Titanic module which is helpful. This module isbuilt on a physical resemblance to the ship: theballroom is an area to socialise and discuss currentissues; the library is a repository for resources; thedrawing room is an area for more structured debateon a particular issue. The module designer may useimages of the deck plan of the ship so that studentscan see the different areas they can enter. Thesecomparisons are useful: students can easily seethey should go to the library area for resources, butwhat about an area like the kitchen? How does thatwork in this metaphor?This takes us to the second stage of analysis: whatknowledge of the Titanic do we not want carriedover in this metaphor? In this example there areseveral associations that may confuse the learner.What springs to your mind when you consider theTitanic: size? An awful song? Drowning? Icebergs?None of these aspects of the comparison item isuseful for facilitating learning. So in step three wecan see that the unhelpful elements outweigh thehelpful ones, making this an inappropriatemetaphor for aiding learning. While it is easy tobuild an attractive-looking module based on thismetaphor, using deck plans and pictures, themetaphor is not a strong one for this purpose.In comparison an effective metaphor, assessed byAnderson et al’s method, is the recycle bin inMicrosoft applications, which carries over all theappropriate knowledge from a real recycle bin:things can be retrieved from it (if done quickly); theyare physically removed from the original location;files in here will be deleted eventually; its contentsare not immediately removed, so it is notappropriate for confidential documents. However,even with this metaphor some elements do notmatch. Some users expect the bin to be emptiedautomatically (as their own recycle bin is). Othersexpect to have to empty the bin themselves (as theydo their own recycle bin). The learner’s currentassociations with the comparison object are likelyto be different from those of other learners and so itis likely their learning will be different because ofthis: the greatest difficulty may be experienced bythose learners from different cultural backgroundsto that of the resource designer.So does this mean metaphor is too difficult to usewith online resources? I hope not, for using ametaphor allows resource designers to use imagesand structures which can initially draw studentsinto using a resource they might not otherwise beattracted to. By assessing the metaphors you haveconsidered using you should now be able to assesswhat is and isn’t effective in increasing learning bythe widest group of students.ReferencesAnderson, B., Smyth, M., Knott, R., Bergan, M.,Bergan, J., and Alty, J. (1994) MinimisingConceptual Baggage: making choices aboutmetaphor. In: Proceedings of People and ComputersIX, HCI ‘94, Glasgow, UK, August 1994.Forrest Gump (1994) Directed by Robert Zemeckis.London: Paramount Pictures [video: VHS].Halasz, F., & Moran, T. P. (1982) Analogy consideredharmful. Proceedings of CHI 82, 383-386. New York:Association for Computing Machinery.Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980) Metaphors we live by.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Ortony, A. (ed) (1993) Metaphor and Thought (2nded). London: Cambridge University Press.Shakespeare, W. (1623). As You Like It. London:Jaggard.Schiff, R. (1979). Art and life: a metaphoricrelationship. In: Sacks, S. (ed) On Metaphor.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Laura DeanHead of EmployabilityOffice of the Pro-Vice-Chancellor: Assessment,Learning and Teaching36485_ALT Journal6:Layout 1  3/8/09  12:54  Page 29

Analogy considered harmful.

Art and life: a metaphoric relationship. In: Sacks,

As You Like It.

Directed by Robert Zemeckis. London: Paramount Pictures [video:

Metaphor and Thought (2nd ed). London:

Metaphors we live by. Chicago:

Minimising Conceptual Baggage: making choices about metaphor. In:

Reflection: A critical look at the use of metaphors in the development of electronic learning resources

Reflection: A critical look at the use of metaphors in the development of electronic learning resources

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Leeds Beckett Repository