Chapter 1 An Example of Metaphorical Thinking

Before we go further with ed tech as the focus for metaphors, it is worth expanding on the role of metaphors in shaping how we approach a subject. In this book, we will examine the type of generative, or interactive, metaphor mentioned previously, which potentially allows us to think about a topic in a new manner and examine the use of existing metaphors in ed tech and how they have influenced the conversation on implementation. However, with both of these uses of metaphor, our existing views on ed tech will also influence how we then think about the validity of the metaphor itself. The mapping outlined in the introduction is not just one way from the base domain to the target domain, but there is a reverse influence from our knowledge of the target domain that shapes how we view the base domain. For example, if I propose a metaphor of LMS (learning management system or VLE [virtual learning environment]) as a “toolbox,” and if you have used an LMS and have existing views on its usefulness, then they will determine to an extent how relevant the analogy is for you. It is perhaps beneficial to start the consideration of metaphors with an education example, but one that lacks the technology aspect, in which the function of the metaphors themselves can be highlighted without any contamination of existing views.

I have chosen to use some visual work realized for the open program at the UK Open University (UKOU) for this purpose, for three reasons. First, it is still within the domain of education and hopefully easily understood; second, it is likely to meet the criterion of being relatively unfamiliar to most readers, so I can focus on the role of metaphors themselves; third, the images provide a useful basis for starting the discussion on metaphors.

The open program at the UKOU is a multidisciplinary degree. When the UKOU was founded in 1969, the only option available was a BA(Open); there were no named degrees. This was an explicit attempt by the UKOU’s founders to make a UKOU degree different not just in mode of study but also in substance. Students constructed their own degree profiles, meaning that the modules were truly modular and could be combined as students saw fit, with no predetermined set of modules. The UKOU’s first vice-chancellor, Walter Perry (1976, p. 61), stated that “a student is the best judge of what [s]he wishes to learn and that [s]he should be given the maximum freedom of choice consistent with a coherent overall pattern.” Cooke et al. (2018, p. 128) set out the benefits of the open degree approach:

Open degrees provide a valued alternative to subject-specific degrees by offering students the opportunity to study a flexible, personalized degree, where they can choose the modules they wish to study, constrained only by the need to study a required number of credits at each level or stage of study. This approach provides students with access to a wide variety of subjects that match and build on their existing skills and knowledge to develop a personalized curriculum that reinforces their existing experience to meet their vocational needs and personal interests.

However, the concept of an open degree and its potential benefits for some learners can be difficult to convey in the current educational context, in which most students and educators think of degrees in terms of named degrees with prescribed pathways. To attempt to articulate some of the ideas about the open degree, the open program team worked with artist Bryan Mathers (who also created the artwork for this book) to develop a number of visual prompts. The outcomes of these sessions constitute the metaphors that we will examine in this chapter.

“An uncharted pathway”: the image shows footprints, like those left in sand, with the instruction to “walk your own path!” The intention was to highlight the unconstrained nature of the open degree in not following a predetermined path. By adding text to each footstep, the indication is that an open degree can be used to combine different aspects that motivate and make an individual, such as interest, career, and passion. The implication is that a conventional degree is both more constrained and might serve only one or two of these demands. A limitation of this metaphor is that the factors that contribute to the pathway might be more than the three indicated here and that there is no connection among the individual footprints.

“Brave learners”: in this image, the shield bears the UKOU crest, and the legend declares that the open program is perfect for brave learners. The metaphor here is that the degree itself acts as a shield and facilitates the courage of learners in choosing to develop their own paths. A negative implication might be that learning itself is a dangerous enterprise through which the student has to battle.

“Pick and mix”: this image uses the metaphor of a sweet shop offering a pick and mix selection, which allows consumers to place the sweets of their choice into one container. This metaphor conveys the personalized choice aspect of the degree and placing different elements into a single-size container (the sweet bag is analogous to the degree structure), but it is worth noting that some members of the program thought that it conveyed a negative message of indiscriminate combination rather than more purposeful construction. Pick and mix might also be culturally dependent and not resonate with some people.

“Space cadet”: the UKOU celebrated its 50th anniversary in 2019, so the metaphor of the astronaut hearkened back to the moon landing, also in its golden jubilee year. But there is a further connotation of the theme of exploring and stepping where others have not. Many open program students take combinations of modules that no other student has taken. A negative aspect of this metaphor is that it might have connotations of a lonely learner in which there is no sense of a community or cohort.

“Decision tree”: this builds upon the metaphor of choosing and navigating one’s own path. The text states “choose the path of greatest interest,” suggesting that at any stage interest rather than a predetermined decision can dictate the path. As mentioned above, students choose from among a wide range of pathways, so at each of the nodes in the tree there are different numbers of student “leaves.” This highlights that some pathway choices are more popular but that all are valid. There is also a temporal element to the metaphor in that the student is at the start of the journey, and the choices made can change as progress is made, and all options remain open. A limitation of this metaphor is that it might suggest that once a path is chosen there is no going back—for instance, that a choice down a science branch means that only science can be pursued, whereas that is not the case.

These are fairly simple metaphors, chosen for their visual impacts, but each of them carries subtle connotations that might or might not be apparent to the audience. There are also limitations to or possible negative inferences for each of them, which highlights that metaphors should be used with caution. The metaphors in these images also do not address some aspects of the open degree, and multidisciplinary study in general, such as the need for much knowledge to solve complex problems or the complementary relationship between such degrees and more specialist knowledge in teams.

These images also highlight how discussion on different metaphors is useful to teams. By talking in terms of metaphors, such as the pick and mix one, interesting points about priorities in the open degree can be raised. Using metaphors as a focus for dialogue and reflection to surface views is a productive approach, and the metaphors proposed in this book can be used for those purposes in HEIs.

The metaphors above were all developed to promote positive aspects of the program, but in this book, I take a nuanced position on ed tech. I use metaphors to apply a critical perspective to how ed tech is developed and implemented, I analyze other metaphors used by the sector to reveal how they frame discussions, and in some chapters I focus on how metaphors can help us to think about better implementation of ed tech for the benefit of learners. Like ed tech itself, metaphors are not intrinsically a beneficial way of approaching a subject, but in the selection that follows I hope that some are of use in your context and more generally that they encourage you to think creatively about the technology and its role in education, through metaphors of your own. As with the examples in this chapter, for each of the metaphors that follows, one could list negative or problematic issues with it. I have done this on occasion, but not systematically, since it might become repetitive, and it is unlikely that I could capture all possible alternative interpretations. However, I invite you to ask, “yes, but what about . . . ?” at the end of each chapter. Metaphors are never complete, always potentially hazardous and open to reinterpretation. It is this very process of thinking through them in relation to the topic of interest—ed tech in our case—that makes them useful.