Constitution of poetic metaphor as a matter of learning in German literature classroom

Submitted by: Bianca Strutz
Abstract: Theoretical underpinnings
Metaphors are usually found in poetic texts and therefore expected by competent readers (see Steen 1994). However, learners first have to learn how to deal with metaphors while developing certain expectations towards literature. Previous research considering the reception of metaphors demonstrates that the ability to explicitly interpret metaphor is acquired at school (see Peskin 2010; Pieper & Wieser 2011). Although it is well-known that dealing with metaphor is a central aspect of literature education, the way teachers design lessons and the way the actual teaching and learning takes place in class, are still largely unexplored (see Pieper & Wieser 2011). Recent results of the LiMet-study show that the development of interpretative skills is not simply age-related but influenced by e.g. epistemological beliefs (see Pieper & Wieser 2018). It could also be shown that teachers approach the field teaching interpretative skills differently so that it is to be examined how epistemic beliefs and interpretative skills are acquired in school (see Lessing-Sattari 2018).

Description of the project
My PHD-study addresses the above-mentioned desideratum. It follows the interaction theory of metaphor (see Christmann & Scheele 2001, Eco 1985), which recognizes the diversity of metaphorical structures and contextual connections. The sample consist of four teachers and their six classes in middle schools and Gymnasium (higher academic track; grades 6, 8, 10 and 12). The study is based on the three metaphorically structured poems “Zirksukind” by Rose Ausländer, “Gefrorener Wasserfall” by Christine Busta and “Wünschelrute” by Joseph von Eichendorff.
The collection of data involves videography and interviews: Teachers were asked to plan and execute a lesson about each of the poems, focusing on the poems’ metaphor and including one plenary discussion of the poems’ metaphor. The lessons were video recorded and afterwards, the teachers were interviewed about some aspects of those lessons. Furthermore, before and after each lesson, four students of each class were asked to think aloud while reading the poems. In total, 18 lessons are recorded, there are 4 preparing and 18 post-processing interviews with teachers and 36 think aloud protocols of students.

Methods
The analysis of the data is based on principles of discourse analysis with a focus on subject learning. The method is adapted to suit research questions that are situated in the frame of subject oriented educational research. Based on an analysis of the macro- and microstructure of the lessons, individual sequences are selected and analysed by using sequential analysis. The approach of discourse analysis focuses on the achievement and indication of mutual understanding in interaction, since students often refer to each other through dialogue in the class discussion, so that individual interpretations are broadened productively (see Segal &Lefstein 2016). Through the approach of sequential analysis, attention is paid to the development of the linguistic action in its chronological order (see Bergmann 2001, Bredel & Pieper 2015). Thus, the common understanding of the lessons’ matter is determined by prompts and questions of the teacher, contributions of the students, methodological accesses and other factors. This is followed by the reconstruction of the constitution of the matter and the (modelled) roles of the interactants of the classroom discussion.

Research question
The paper exemplarily focuses on the question of how the matter of poetic metaphor is constituted in classroom interaction in German literature classes in secondary education.

Discussion
Video sequences of two contrasting cases will be presented and discussed in detail. The questions of how the different reconstructions (based on cases) can be inserted into an overall picture and which role the preparing and post-processing interviews could play are to be discussed in plenary.

Keywords: understanding metaphor, literature classroom, classroom interaction, videography, sequential analysis

Bergmann, J. (2001). Das Konzept der Konversationsanalyse. [The concept of conversation analysis]. In K. Brinker (Ed.), Text- und Gesprächslinguistik. Ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung (S. 919-927). Berlin et al.: de Gruyter (= HSK 16, Bd. 2: Gesprächslinguistik).
Bredel, U. & Pieper, I. (2015). Integrative Deutschdidaktik. Paderborn: Schöningh.
Eco, U. (1985). Semiotics and the philosophy of language. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Christmann, U. & Scheele, B. (2001). Kognitive Konstruktivität am Beispiel Ironie und Metapher [Cognitive constructivity. The case of irony and metaphor]. In N. Groeben (Ed.), Zur Programmatik einer sozialwissenschaftlichen Psychologie. Bd. 2: Objektwissenschaftliche Perspektiven. 1. Halbband: Sozialität, Geschlechtlichkeit, Erlebnisqualitäten, kognitive Konstruktivität (pp. 261-326). Münster: Aschendorff.
Lessing-Sattari, M. (2018). Zur Ausprägung und zum Zusammenspiel von Lehrerüberzeugungen zum literarischen Lesen im Deutschunterricht – Darstellung der dokumentarischen Rekonstruktion von domänenspezifischen Überzeugungen und erste Auswertungsergebnisse der Studie LiMet-L. [On the characterization and interaction of teachers’ beliefs on literary reading in German classrooms – presentation of the documentary reconstruction of domain-specific beliefs and first evaluation of results of the LiMet-L study]. Leseräume, 5, pp. 1-22.
Pieper, I. & Wieser, D. (2011). Forschungsüberblick: Empirische Studien zum Verstehen von Metaphern in literarischen Texten. [State of the art. Empirical studies regarding the understanding of metaphor in literary texts]. Didaktik Deutsch, 30, pp. 74-90.
Pieper, I. & Wieser, D. (2018). Poetologische Überzeugungen und literarisches Verstehen. [poetological beliefs and literary understanding]. Leseräume, 4, in preparation.
Peskin, J. (2010): The Development of Poetic Literacy during the School Years. Discourse Processes Jg. 47, 2, pp. 77-103.
Segal, A. & Lefstein, A. (2016). Exuberant, voiceless participation: an unintended consequence of dialogic sensibilities?, Contribution to a special issue on International Perspectives on Dialogic Theory and Practice, edited by Sue Brindley, Mary Juzwik, and Alison Whitehurst. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 16, pp. 1-19.
Steen, G. (1994). Understanding metaphor in literature. An empirical approach. London/New York: Longman.