The Missouri Reader Vol. 35, Issue 1 | Page 32

Twenty-four of the 26 students were considered traditional students. They were enrolled in at least one reading
practicum and work with an elementary student during the semester. Over the course of the semester, they were
exposed to a variety of suggested instructional activities as well as being provided opportunities to reinforce
pedagogical skills learned in previous classes.
Data collection
Students in all three classes were asked to generate metaphors of teaching. Despite the best intentions of
three professors, and several e-mail exchanges, it turned out that the number of metaphors requested and the
prompts were idiosyncratic to the professor who collected the metaphors. Depending on the professor and/or
student some students chose to compose their own metaphors while others selected them from popular media such
as movies, books, or websites. Also, a few students generalized their metaphors into the broader context of teaching.
The metaphors from the classes of all three professors were then collected into the same Microsoft Excel ©
spreadsheet and electronically distributed to all three professors.
Data analysis
A grounded theory or Delphi approach was then applied. The list of metaphors was printed, the professor’s
initials were written on the backside of each metaphor, and then the metaphors were cut onto their own separate
slips of papers. Next, each metaphor was read carefully and placed into pile of metaphors judged to have a similar
theme.
The professor from University B first arranged the piles into a circle of piles with nearly similar themes next to
each other. The intent was to consolidate the separate piles into three or four major themes common to professors
at University A and C. However, the professor at University B experienced a webbing effect. This was where the
categorizations fragmented into an increasing number of piles that could not be reduced.
Consistent with the original protocol, researchers at University A and University C derived three to five
categories that best matched the data. However, in our analysis, the data from University B did not align consistently
with University A and C. Upon analysis, the metaphors from University B offered the most diverse and richest
responses. Due to length restrictions, the investigators elected to focus on the analysis and discussion of University B.
Results and Discussion Study 1
As noted above, when Professor B analyzed the pre-test and post-test data, 13 categories of metaphors were
arranged in a circular web. When translating these 13 categories onto a single MS Word page, it became apparent
that two continuums defined the inter-relationship between the categories. Along the top continuum, from left to
right was a gradient that flows from pure child to pure teacher: a) reading/literacy, b) reading/learning development
either by the child alone or with the help of the teacher, c) constructed teaching, d) directed teaching, and e)
teacher’s sense of selfhood arising out of their teaching. Then from the top to the bottom were five sub-topics that
flowed from a) liberation, b) choice (yin yang), c) existential, d) action, and e) concrete. Even though there were only
13 categories in the original circle that flowed from “child-centered” to “teacher-centered” and from “liberation” to
“concrete,” it became evident that given enough examples of metaphors, 25 categories could be found. And as
predicted, once all of the metaphors were analyzed, an example was found for all but a few of the categories.
Figure 1 illustrates the 13 original categories with sample metaphors; it also contains the two continuums
(one across the top and one down the side). For example, flower and teacher as gardener are separated horizontally.

32