The Place of Story in the Study of Teaching and Teacher Education

ith increasing frequency over the past several years we, as members of a community of investigator-practitioners, have been telling stories about teaching and teacher education rather than simply reporting correlation coefficients or generating lists of findings. This trend has been upsetting to some who mourn the loss of quantitative precision and, they would argue, scientific rigor. For many of us, however, these stories capture, more than scores or mathematical formulae ever can, the richness and indeterminacy of our experiences as teachers and the complexity of our understandings of what teaching is and how others can be prepared to engage in this profession. It is not altogether surprising, then, that this attraction to stories has evolved into an explicit attempt to use the literatures on "story" or "narrative" to define both the method and the object of inquiry in teaching and teacher education. Story has become, in other words, more than simply a rhetorical device for expressing sentiments about teachers or candidates for the teaching profession. It is now, rather, a central focus for conducting research in the field. We are certainly not alone in giving formal attention to story. This term, like others from linguistics and literary theory (e.g., discourse, text, deconstruction), has caught on with considerable enthusiasm throughout the intellectual world and is beginning to appear in widely different contexts. In psychology, for example, Bruner (1985) speaks of a narrative mode of thought, and Sarbin (1986) proposes story as a "root metaphor" for the study of human conduct. Within education, scholars such as Cole and Knowles (1992); Clandinin and Connelly (1992); Elbaz (1991); Grossman (1987); Gudmundsdottir (1991); Hollingsworth (in press); and Richert (1990) have recently made story a central element in their analyses of teachers' knowledge. As Mitchell (1981) noted as early as 1981, "The study of narrative is no longer the province of literary specialists or folklorists ... but has now become a positive source of insight for all branches of human and natural science" (p. ix). Anyone with even a passing familiarity with the literatures on story soon realizes, however, that these are quite turbulent intellectual waters and quickly abandons the expectation of safe passage toward the resolution, once and for all, of the many puzzles and dilemmas we face in advancing our knowledge of teaching. Much needs to be learned about the nature of story and its value to our common enterprise, and about the wide range of purposes, approaches, and claims made by those who have adopted story as a central analytical framework. What does story capture and what does it leave out? How does this notion fit within the emerging sense of the nature of teaching and what it means to educate teachers? These and many other critical questions need to be faced if story is to become more than a loose metaphor for everything from a paradigm or worldview to a technique for bringing home a point in a lecture on a Thursday afternoon. Given both the excitement story has generated and the many issues this movement has brought to the fore, it seems appropriate to provide an analysis of the place of story in the study of teaching and teacher education. My overall purpose here is to begin the process of clarifying the arguments, mapping the intellectual terrain, and casting light on the major issues we need to consider in incorporating story into our research activities. I have no illusions that this discus-