Metaphors in Expert Language

This is an ongoing project. The underlying idea is based on the assumption that any knowledge that we cannot perceive must be understood metaphorically (e.g. Niebert et al., 2012). The project has three milestones. First, we aimed to understand the current research landscape concerned with metaphorical mappings of any sort in a chemistry education context. To this end, we conducted a systematic literature review. In this review, we found that chemistry education research has focused mainly on instructional analogies as opposed to the metaphors inherent to the chemical domain (Müller & Rau, 2025). Specifically, it is not fully clear what these domain-inherent metaphors are in a chemistry education context.

Second, we aim to understand what metaphorical mappings are present in expert discourse - that is what metaphorical mappings do the students need to adopt as they become chemists. To this end, we are currently analysing teacher language and gesture during teaching their usual chemistry class for metaphors.

Third, once we have an overview over the metaphorical mappings, which are unremovable from the chemistry discourse (think “bond breaking” or “electron shell”), we want to further explore how we can support the students in adopting these metaphors by conducting empirical studies.

This page will be updated as the project progresses.

This project is funded by the Collegium Helveticum of ETH Zurich.

People involved: Prof. Dr. Martina Rau (supervision), Daria Ulanova (research assistant).

Müller, C. H., & Rau, M. A. (2025). Instructional Analogies Dominate, Domain-Inherent Metaphors Are Overlooked: A Systematic Review of Metaphorical Mappings in Chemistry Education. Journal of Chemical Education, 102(7), 2576-2591.

Niebert, K., Marsch, S., & Treagust, D. F. (2012). Understanding needs embodiment: A theory‐guided reanalysis of the role of metaphors and analogies in understanding science. Science Education, 96(5), 849-877.