AWA: Academic Writing at Auckland

Introduction 

Over the past thirty years, narrative inquiry has become a recognized method of qualitative research in the humanities and social sciences. Studies related specifically to language learning were conducted in the late 70s, initially focusing on second language (L2) learners’ narratives, in the form of student diaries. Since that time, these and other types of personal narratives, including those of teachers, have been examined.

As the practice of narrative inquiry grows, there continues to be an ‘absence of any single universal theory that shapes narrative research’ and ‘many issues remain unresolved’ (Kramp, 2004: 106). Both Kramp and Pavlenko are representative of scholars engaged in the ongoing debate on effective approaches to narrative inquiry. They come from different fields – Kramp from education, which included a career as a teacher, and Pavlenko from applied linguistics. Both have undertaken empirical research based on the study of narrative.

Kramp’s book chapter, ‘Exploring life and experience through narrative inquiry’ in Foundations for research: methods of inquiry in education and the social sciences (2004), gives an overview of narrative as a research method and considers narratives of learning, which focus on the experiences of teachers and their students. Pavlenko’s Applied Linguistics journal article ‘Autobiographic narratives as data in applied linguistics’ (2007) has a more specific focus on bilingual and L2 speakers’ autobiographical narratives, and offers a critique of analytical frameworks applied to these, as well as recommendations for a systematic method of analysis.

Based on information provided by these two articles, the aim of this assignment is to discuss narrative inquiry as a method of research, incorporating the following topics:

• a definition of narrative inquiry and important features
• ways of analyzing narratives
• the value of narrative inquiry for teachers learning about their own practice and their learners’ learning.

Integrated into the discussion of these topics will be references to the most significant message learned from each article, from a personal perspective, as well as ideas generated in relation to personal narrative portfolio theme ‘imagined communities’.

1. Narrative inquiry as a method of research

1. Definition

When describing narrative inquiry as a method of research, Pavlenko and Kramp repeatedly refer to three defining features – understanding, meaning, and experience. Indeed, one could state that the overall goal of researchers engaged in narrative inquiry is to understand the meaning of an experience, as narrated or ‘constructed’ by someone who has undergone that experience. Pavlenko links narrative inquiry specifically to language learning, describing the reason for study as ‘an effort to understand how people experience second language learning and make sense of this experience’ (2007: 164).

Pavlenko examines narrative study in terms of types of information the researcher is seeking, dividing these into three categories: 1) the narrator’s experience (subject reality, focusing on content), 2) the actual situation of events (life reality, focusing on context), and 3) the words and resources used to articulate the narrator’s experience (text reality, focusing on form). Although she emphasizes that the three are interrelated, their demarcation into three separate ‘realities’ comes across as ‘forced’. References to studies that overlap categories also indicate that researchers do not necessarily consider one category to the exclusion of others.

By way of contrast, Kramp approaches narrative inquiry from a holistic stance, naming the object of research as ‘lived’ experience. Context and form are acknowledged as being integral to interpreting the meaning of this experience. Kramp (2004:105) refers to a ‘respect for context, especially time and place’ held by qualitative researchers who use narrative inquiry, and their cognizance of the important connections these elements provide. Form is also recognized as central to analysis of narrative, as narrative is viewed as a construction. The use of features such as connotative language and metaphor, and the way in which a narrator’s language ‘constructs what it narrates’ (Kramp, 2004:116) are important clues to understanding a narrator’s intended meaning.

       2. Important features

An awareness of ‘the interpretative nature of narration’ (Pavlenko, 2007:169) and contrasting points of view are fundamental to achieving understanding in narrative inquiry. According to Kramp (2004:107), appreciation of narrative as a method of research is ‘shaped and informed by narrative as a way of knowing and narrative as a genre with formal characteristics.’ The former takes into account narrative cognition (Bruner, as cited in Kramp, 2004:107), which focuses on giving meaning to experience, as opposed to paradigmatic cognition, which seeks explanation and empirical truth. As Pavlenko (2007:168) points out, narratives reflect a narrator’s beliefs, and ‘people’s descriptions of their own and other’s...behaviours do not always correspond to reality’. Indeed, ‘reality’ in narrative can differ according to a narrator’s point of view.

This leads us to the second element highlighted by Kramp – that of narrative as a genre. The construction or emplotment of a story – the choice of characters, structuring of relationships, and sequencing of selected events – reflect a narrator’s intention and perspective. Emplotment can also vary depending on the audience for whom the narrative is constructed or, in the case of oral narrative, with whom the story is co-constructed. Complementing perspective is the specific social, cultural, or political setting in which the narrator situates the story. For researchers “to understand well what something ‘means’ requires some awareness of alternative meanings that can be attached” (Bruner, as cited in Kramp, 2004:108).

The most significant message Kramp conveys to me personally is how complex narrative study is. Despite stories being described as ‘natural to us’ and ‘not formally taught’, narratives involve many facets and dimensions of meaning. To study the human activity of storytelling is to study the complexities and contradictions of human beings. Inquirers, therefore, need to be constantly alert to multiple possibilities in interpretation. As narrative is a ‘universal means of organizing and articulating experience’ (Turner & Bruner, as cited in Kramp, 2004: 106), it is of interest to scholars in a variety of disciplines, all of whom contribute to the complication of its research.

2. Ways of analyzing narratives

There are a variety of frameworks available to researchers using narrative inquiry to assist in the analysis of data. Pavlenko refers to a large number of these, along with specific studies. These include ‘atheoretical’ thematic or content analysis, which she severely criticizes, particularly with regard to the lack of consideration for context and form. As discussed above, these elements are embedded in narrative, and the criticism is perhaps relevant not so much to the approach itself, but to how thoroughly it is undertaken. Pavlenko also outlines three theoretical approaches – cognitive, textual and discursive – focusing on textual analysis in particular, suggesting a wide range of tools to apply at either a macro- or micro-level. An example of an approach which takes into account the ‘performative nature’ of narrative is positioning (Davies & Harré as cited in Pavlenko, 2007), which considers how narrators describe others and situate themselves.

Kramp (2004:116), instead, offers a ‘generic framework that focuses on the text as a narrative structure’. She advises that a researcher’s discipline may determine the type of framework selected, and describes two approaches suggested by Polkinghorne (as cited in Kramp, 2004:119) – analysis of narrative (paradigmatic analysis), which involves identifying common themes and metaphors across stories, and ‘narrative analysis’ (storied analysis), which results in the construction of a narrative on the part of the researcher based on the data gathered.  She addresses another of Pavlenko’s concerns about thematic analysis – the failure to identify links between recurrent themes and categories – with a suggestion for a visual paradigmatic structure, such as a matrix. This is described as ‘especially effective’ because ‘the variations on a theme remain explicit and meaningful at the same time the common themes are identified and illustrated’ (Kramp, 2004:119).

Recommendations to researchers utilizing narrative inquiry are not limited to kinds of analyses. Kramp suggests a preparatory step before undertaking oral interviews, which can greatly impact the quality of data collected and consequent analysis. This involves creating prompts, such as the open-ended question ‘Tell me about a time...’, which give the interviewee considerable freedom and choice of response. According to Kramp (2004:115), ‘this is critical to the process of narrative inquiry, because the more the process is focused on the participant and the power of each to construct the narrative, the greater the understanding derived from the telling.’

3. Value of narrative inquiry for teachers

Kramp refers to the growing respect for the value of narrative and its study across various disciplines. Certainly in the field of education, narrative inquiry has considerable potential for teachers learning about their own practice and learners’ learning.

Through reading the two articles, four areas of opportunity are apparent:

• Reflection

Narratives have value as reflections, for both narrator and audience. By studying college teachers’ narratives, Kramp and Humphreys (as cited in Kramp, 2004) noticed a connection between the stories told to teachers by their students and continued reflections of teachers on themselves and their teaching practice. Narrative also invites narrators and readers/hearers ‘to imagine alternative ways of being in the world’ (Pavlenko, 2007:180). This suggestion in turn encourages me, as part of my portfolio investigation into ‘imagined communities’, to explore how language learning is envisioned in the future – through my own narratives, in addition to those of my learners.

• Hearing real voices

As narratives are personal constructions, they offer ‘an insider’s view of the processes of language learning’ (Pavlenko, 2007:165) that observation cannot provide. Thematic analysis of narratives can reveal themes that are important to L2 learners, related to matters such as gender and language learning strategies. Analysis of narrative structure, and how learners position themselves in narrative plots, can also reflect attitudes to language learning. Through reading their own and students’ narratives, teachers can confirm or disprove anticipated issues, or discover new, unexpected ones.  This has implications for classroom practice and planning, as narrative inquiry offers teachers a way to consciously and actively learn more about their students.

• Evaluation

Narrative inquiry provides the opportunity to compare beliefs with behaviour and how these may differ or change over time. Learners’ narratives can also reveal how perspectives change as language learning progresses.

• Agency

 A unique feature of narrative inquiry is the special relationship that exists between the narrator and the hearer/listener. Pavlenko (2007:180) alludes to ‘a shift of power...making the object of inquiry into the subject and granting the subject both agency and voice’. Investing learners with the authority of the narrator, encourages their engagement in the learning process. Similarly, giving teachers agency promotes active involvement in their own professional development.

From the personal perspective of an ESOL teacher, I find Pavlenko’s discussion of the dichotomy in learners’ narratives to be her most significant message – particularly in reference to what is said and what is omitted by narrators. In narrative, silence can be equally informative as speech. These factors of inclusion and exclusion can relate to either linguistic proficiency and/or cultural conventions and values. Pavlenko highlights the importance of considering cross-linguistic variation in narrative inquiry, such as differences in culturally-approved topics, storytelling conventions, preferred story structure (e.g. thematic or episodic in Spanish, rather than chronological), and preferred narrator voice (e.g. use of third person in Chinese, as opposed to first person in English). Awareness of such variation is of value to teachers, especially in L2 writing classes. Findings show ‘how people draw on culturally-sanctioned narrative resources to...present themselves as recognizable members of particular linguistic, social and institutional communities’ (Linde, as cited in Pavlenko, 2007:178). The connection between language and identity in narrative inquiry is one that I would like to investigate further, in relation to my portfolio theme of ‘imagined communities’ – especially examining the feature of ‘silence’.

4. Conclusion

Studies of language learning experiences show narrative inquiry to be a legitimate method of research and a valuable pedagogical tool. Narrative study is an effective way to gain insight into the feelings, beliefs and perceptions of individual participants engaged in the language learning process. By empowering people to tell us their stories and through hearing their voices– whether they be those of teachers or learners, our own or others – we are given the opportunity to explore what is personal, contextual and meaningful. A large number of frameworks exist which can be used to analyze narrative data and assist inquirers in their quest for patterns, connections and contradictions that may lead to understanding the meaning of private, constructed experiences. It is through the richness of the actual words of individual narrators that we can learn more about ourselves, other teachers, and our learners than we can through generalizations or simple observation.

Word Count: 2037

References

Kramp, M. (2004). Exploring life and experience through narrative inquiry. In K. deMarrais & S. D. Lapan (Eds.), Foundations for research: methods of inquiry in education and the social sciences (pp. 103-121). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Pavlenko, A. (2007). Autobiographic narratives as data in Applied Linguistics. Applied Linguistics, 28(2), 163-188.