Speaker
Description
I describe designing a 3-week unit to promote reflection by eliciting students' metaphors for genAI use in education contexts. Student responses (n=52) to an Elicited Metaphor Analysis prompt in 1st-year basic English courses at two universities revealed mixed and sometimes ambivalent responses to the technology. This presentation will center ways to adapt the EMA method for EFL contexts in Japanese universities and the potential of this method as a classroom intervention.
Abstract section 5: References
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic Analysis: A practical guide. SAGE.
Jin, F., Sun, L., Pan, Y., & Lin, C. H. (2025). High heels, compass, spider-man, or drug? Metaphor analysis of generative artificial intelligence in academic writing. Computers & Education, 228, 105248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2025.105248
Low, G. (2015). A practical validation method for researching elicited metphor. In W. Wan & G. Low, (Eds). Elicited Metaphor Analysis in educational discourse (pp. 15-37). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Wan, W. & Low, G. (2015). Introduction. In W. Wan & G. Low, (Eds). Elicited Metaphor Analysis in educational discourse (pp. 1-12). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Abstract section 2: Contribution/research questions
- How do students at Japanese universities perceive the role of genAI in their learning processes?
- Do students produce valid metaphors when allowed to translanguage?
- What effects will introducing multiple example metaphors have on student-produced metaphors?
- Can EMA on the topic of genAI support intervention regarding students’ at times uncritical uptake of genAI tools?
Abstract section 1: Relevance
The unprecedentedness of genAI demands new frameworks for understanding learner development. Elicited Metaphor Analysis (Wan & Low, 2015) inquires into respondents’ processes of making meaning about the world by using prompts to learn respondents’ analogous connections between the research topic and other familiar concepts, revealing mental representations. This project used EMA to examine 50 undergraduate students’ understanding of genAI in the contexts of education and society. Addressing the needs of EFL students, explicit lessons on metaphors were taught and students were allowed a translanguaging approach to extending either a metaphor from the class materials or an original metaphor in writing.
Abstract section 4: Outcomes/results
Data collection was completed; analysis will be conducted following Low (2015). Starting with Thematic Analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2021), results will be compared with Jin et. al.’s (2025) framework for understanding genAI within academic EFL contexts. Cursory analysis showed that of 50 valid metaphors in the data set, 34 were original and 16 extended one metaphor introduced during the lesson. Twenty student descriptions of their original metaphors noted a double-edged or ambivalent quality of genAI, revealing students’ uncertainty about the impact of genAI on their learning and the potential for EMA methods as an intervention to combat overreliance on genAI.
Abstract section 3: Content/method
In this 2025 pilot study, I taught a 3-week unit at a private university where I collected survey data about AI use, introduced metaphors for A.I., then distributed the prompt “GenAI is __ because __.” I conducted analysis of the types of metaphors explained in 31 student essays (12 in English and 19 Japanese). I repeated the unit in a more condensed format at a public university with 21 students generating paragraph-long responses in English.
| Title | Elicited Metaphor Analysis: University Students on GenA.I. |
|---|---|
| Teaching Context | College and university education |