Eliciting Metaphors from Narratives of Collaboration Experiences with Teachers in Writing a Textbook

Collaboration of teacher educators with school teachers in developing lesson materials is paramount for professional development. A burgeoning of research on educator-teacher collaboration in writing a textbook, for instance, has existed; however, there is little attention to the narratives on the collaborators’ experiences through the metaphorical lens. Telling stories about collaborative experiences through the metaphorical lens can help understand the complexity of phenomena because thoughts are implicit and difficult to express. This study attempted to fill the void by analyzing the experiences of partnering with English teachers in developing the textbook of classroom action research (CAR). It involved stories of the researchers upon their collaborative writing experiences working with twelve primary school teachers in Aceh, Indonesia. In analyzing the collaborators’ experiences, this study drew upon Lakoff and Johnson’s Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT). Analyses of the collaborators’ stories upon their experiences generated four primary implicit metaphors that represent acquisition metaphors rather than participation metaphors, such as ‘collaborative writing is listening to the trainers’, ‘collaborating teachers as the trainees’, ‘university collaborators as the experts’, and ‘product is more important than the process’. The findings offer insights into the importance of reflecting on the experiences and generating metaphors to make sense of roles played by collaborating teachers and lecturers involved in a collaborative project. abstract concepts into a knowledge base (Chan 2018). Teaching is a complex phenomenon that must start from the premise that there is no single metaphor (Saban, 2006). Metaphors can be used as a tool for reflection and awareness-raising among teachers (De Villamil, In teaching, metaphors can help implicit beliefs about


INTRODUCTION
The collaborative working of university lecturers with teachers in developing lesson materials is to some extent school work-integrated learning, which has been strongly encouraged in the education sector as it is part of professional development. Teachers can potentially use the books in their daily professional jobs by collaboratively developing them. In this study, the university English lecturers and primary school teachers in Aceh, Indonesia, collaboratively developed a textbook on classroom action research (CAR), during which several primary school teachers participated. They have meaningful experiences developing a textbook from the beginning to the end or the A-to-Z writing process through participation. Participating in action research is crucial for the teachers because teachers are the core stakeholders (Voogt et al., 2019). Teachers are not only the object of research, but they also must research their own work (Morales, 2016). The teachers also know what really happens in their classrooms. More importantly, engaging in the CAR textbook development can support them to easily understand the contents and their utilization in the teaching and learning process. CAR is a strategy for sustainable teacher professional development (Meesuk et al., 2020).
Many studies on collaboration among teachers in developing a textbook or lesson materials, for instance, demonstrate several important benefits. This positively recognizes the professional and pedagogical expertise of many teachers and teacher educators recruited for the textbook authoring team (Moate, 2021). Besides, subject textbooks are also of high quality and written collaboratively by experienced subject teachers and teacher educators to improve the connection between the theoretical expertise (i.e., such as university professors) and the practical context of the classroom (Tainio, 2012). In addition, it can improve the textbook's practicality as it allows negotiation and collaboration of the parties involved in the design and development of a learning book (Widodo, 2015).
Despite studies concerning the efficacy of teachers' collaboration in developing a textbook, attention to the implicit metaphors from the educator-researchers' experiences or images of their collaborative work with the teachers in the Indonesian context is rare. Understanding their experiences from a metaphorical lens, for instance, is essential because thoughts about teaching and learning are implicit and not easy to express, which needs a linguistic tool like a metaphor to accommodate unfamiliar or abstract concepts into a knowledge base (Chan et al., 2018). Teaching is a complex phenomenon that must start from the premise that there is no single metaphor (Saban, 2006). Metaphors can be used as a tool for reflection and awareness-raising among teachers (De Guerrero & Villamil, 2002). In teaching, metaphors can help express implicit beliefs about concepts such as teaching and learning (Wegner et al., 2020). Besides, theoretical accounts and empirical evidence of the role of metaphors as crucial cognitive and communicative tools (Semino, 2021).
This study focuses on the researchers' narratives of their experiences of collaborating with school teachers for developing a textbook through a metaphorical lens. Metaphor is pervasive in thought and everyday language (Kövecses, 2002). Johnson (1980, as cited by de Leon-Carillo, 2007) emphasized that metaphors are essential in expressing phenomenological realities, stressing how personal concepts and views are commonly framed based on similarities or disparities. Metaphor analysis is beneficial in researching the context of the collaboration process in the search for insights into their conceptions of the collaboration. Metaphors operate as a "guide for future action" (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980, p. 156) or "blueprint of thinking" (Martinez et al., 2001, p. 966) that bring together experiences within personal and professional knowledge landscapes: our past experiences as language learners, present experiences like stories of teaching for the first time, and future goals as teachers. Thinking through metaphors bridges the gap between the complexities of a phenomenon, event, or idea and a more familiar symbol, consequently facilitating a better grasp of meanings through a set of more understandable and familiar features or tools (Oxford et al., 1998, cited in de Leon-Carillo, 2007. Many related studies on the use of experiences through the metaphorical lens have existed (e.g., Blau et al., 2018;Chan et al., 2018;de Leon-Carillo, 2007;Duru, 2015;Neuman & Guterman, 2020). Chan et al. (2018) examined the partnership of the teacher-student relationship to generate metaphors. It demonstrated that collecting and analyzing metaphors is a valuable strategy in seeking data that are difficult to collect via verbal interviews, or statistics cannot represent that. The research revealed several metaphors for the teacher-student relationship, such as nurturing, guiding, insufficient connection, and promoting development. Another researcher, de Leon-Carillo (2007), explored Filipino pre-service teachers' preconceptions of the roles of teachers through the lens of metaphors. The results showed that their preconceptions fall into five categories: knowledge source, direction-setter, character formatter, change agent, and learner. However, their roles mostly reflect what they call instructivist rather than constructivist learning. Duru (2015) analyzed the metaphors from the beliefs of elementary student teachers and conceptions about teaching in the contexts of student-and teachercentered educational perspectives. It revealed several metaphors such as teachers as gardeners, knowledge givers, and social controllers. Descriptively, 227 (85.7%) of 267 future teachers had teacher-centered beliefs, 11 (4.1%) had student-centered beliefs, and 29 (10.1%) had mixed beliefs. Other researchers such as Neuman and Guterman (2020) studied teenagers' attitudes toward learning, homeschooling, and school education and uses metaphors to do so. They asked fifteen homeschooled children to describe metaphors regarding three things: learning, homeschooling, and school. The results show several meta-categories of metaphors, such as food, nature, movement, sports, and more. Categorically, they fall into positive, neutral, and negative metaphors. Among the examples, the positive metaphor for learning is: 'key door going to a cave' and 'flying an airplane' (Neuman & Guterman, 2020, p. 6). Blau et al. (2018) analyzed bottom-up and top-down metaphors for teaching and learning and digital learning. Results show several metaphors of general learning: acquisition, participation, and knowledge creation. Meanwhile, the metaphors of digital learning include toolbox, active player, creative mind, shared desktop, and inter-connected world.
However, to the best of our knowledge, there is scant research on the metaphors emerging from researchers' reflections. This paper argues that understanding the ways the teachers participate in the collaborative project of developing the textbook through the metaphorical lens is advantageous because it can provide insights on how to see what really happens and how to do better collaboration in the future. This study, therefore, endeavors to fill in the void by exploring the conceptual metaphors from the researcher-trainers' reflections on the training of English teachers in CAR (Usman et al., 2021). The research question to be answered is: • What are the metaphorical representations from the linguistic expressions of the university English educators-collaborators after having collaborated with the English teachers in the CAR textbook writing project? Generating and understanding metaphors using the researcher-collaborators' reflections on the training process of classroom action research is essential because it supports understanding the abstract things about what happened there in more concrete concepts. It can bring the participants' attitudes to the surface (Neuman & Guterman, 2020), such as their participation, seriousness, and enthusiasm obtained through the trainers' observations. This research, then, attempted to elicit metaphorical representations from the linguistic expressions of the university English educatorscollaborators after having collaborated with the English teachers in the CAR textbook writing project.

The Nature of Metaphor and its Types
Metaphors are pervasive in all domains of our lives, even though some people are not aware of their existence. This is so because talking and thinking metaphorically are often unconscious characteristics of human beings (Semino, 2021). According to Johnson (1980, 2003), metaphor referred to "understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another thing" (p. 5). In the same vein, Kövecses (2017, p. 1) defined a conceptual metaphor as "understanding one domain of experience (that is typically abstract) in terms of another (that is typically concrete)". Neuman and Guterman (2020, p. 3) equalized a metaphor to "an analogy that enables one to map a certain experience using terminology from a different experience". Nevertheless, Duru (2015) argued that metaphors are more than analogies, as they are directly connected to the cognitive structure and reflect a thought structure, a mental model, stemming from experience. In understanding a metaphor, it needs "a mapping across conceptual domains, from the familiar source domain to the less familiar target domain" (Clarke & Holt, 2017, p. 477). Therefore, a preexisting understanding of the compared domains and the metaphor's context is necessary (Cornelissen, 2006). In this way, metaphors can facilitate understanding of complex ideas, communicating efficiently, and persuading others (Thibodeau et al., 2019).
Scholars have distinguished metaphors into many types. Some scholars have distinguished metaphors into (1) stock and novel metaphors, and (2) ascribed and emergent metaphors (Craig, 2018). Novel metaphors have image quality and possess generative power, whereas stock metaphors are commonly used in a society that risks overuse accordingly. An example of a stock metaphor is 'classroom as home'. In this example, classroom and home are two common concepts and the metaphor has overtly been used in many societies. The metaphor 'classroom as home' implicitly means a classroom that is comfortable and elegant for all students in the learning process, and teachers mitigate their authority in the learning environment. Emergent metaphors are the metaphors the educators intuitively hold and express naturally to express a concept. Differently, ascribed metaphors are "novel or stock metaphors that researchers intentionally adopt to describe a phenomenon they personally have identified or what they view as teachers' perceived teaching experiences" (Craig, 2018, p. 302). For instance, a teacher uses a commonly used concept (e.g., gardening) to describe the concept of teaching practice, as in: 'In what ways does your teaching practice resemble gardening?' (Connelly & Xu, 2008). In this example, gardening is a stock metaphor used to represent teaching practice.

Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT)
There are many theories of metaphors that scholars have developed. Among the most popular cognitive linguistics perspective is Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT), developed by Johnson in 1980 (Pérez, 2019), and has been refined and expanded by Kövecses (2002Kövecses ( , 2010Kövecses ( , 2017. Kövecses (2002) defined a conceptual metaphor as a systematic set of correspondences between two domains of experience. This theory proposes that metaphor is not just an aspect of language but also a fundamental part of human thought. That is why this kind of metaphor is also called thought metaphor and conceptual metaphor (Gibbs Jr., 2011). In this theory, there is a strong relationship between the conceptual metaphors and the metaphorical linguistic expressions as "the linguistic expressions (i.e., ways of talking) make explicit, or are manifestations of, the conceptual metaphors (i.e., ways of thinking)" (Kövecses, 2017, p. 6).
Furthermore, Kövecses (2002) explained the CMT with several examples. In generating the metaphor of 'love is a journey', he provided several linguistic expressions as the following: Look how far we've come. We're at a crossroads. We'll just have to go our separate ways. We can't turn back now. I don't think this relationship is going anywhere. Where are we? We're stuck. It's been a long, bumpy road. This relationship is a dead-end street. We're just spinning our wheels. Our marriage is on the rocks. We've gotten off the track. This relationship is foundering. (Kövecses, 2002, p. 5) It is clear from the example above that all expressions use phrases in italics from the domain of a journey. 'How far we've come and at a crossroads,' for instance, indicates a journey. The rest of the phrases in the linguistic expressions also indicate a journey, such as 'turn back', 'a long, bumpy road', 'going anywhere', 'a dead-end street', 'spinning our wheels', 'on the rocks', 'off the track', and 'foundering'. The linguistic expressions are manifestations of the conceptual metaphor 'love is a journey'.
In the same vein, Gibbs Jr. (2014) exemplified a conceptual metaphor 'life is a journey'. Life is a journey is a way of thinking extracted from ways of talking, as in the following: His life took an unexpected turn after he met her. John is struggling to get someplace in his career. Sally is off to a slow start working on her thesis. Their relationship was moving along in a good direction. Jack was spinning his wheels trying to solve math the problem. (Gibbs Jr., 2014, p. 19) All the expressions exemplified above reflect a particular way of thinking about life; they demonstrate the metaphorical concept of life from the journey domain (Gibbs Jr., 2014). The metaphor helps in understanding the concept of life through the concept of a journey.

Collaboration within Indonesian Learning Cultures
Collaboration is a notion and a learning metaphor that necessitates participation in the process of knowledge co-construction. When doing a collaborative project, for instance, developing lesson materials needs to involve agency, voice, and identity in the process (Widodo, 2017). By agency, Mercer (2011, cited in Widodo, 2017 means "the latent potential for self-initiated engagement. It is one's capacity to make a personal choice and to act on this choice in a way that makes a difference in one's life". Agency means individuals engaging in making decisions, taking initiatives, and acting proactively (Goller & Paloniemi, 2017). In the professional learning approach, they need to be active participants, who are responsible for creating change (Vähäsantanen et al., 2017). 'Agency', which is strongly linked to individuals' identities, goals, interests, and beliefs, is a driver and a precondition of work-related learning; it is an activity and a learning outcome that is shaped throughout their personal life history (Goller, 2017). Besides, the 'voice' of collaborators is crucial in a collaborative working project (Widodo, 2017). By voice, Faux et al. (2006) referred it to as a process leading to empowerment through active engagement with those in positions of power in order to express views, intent, beliefs, motivation, and motives regarding their language learning experiences as teachers' co-collaborators. The teachers, as collaborators, should give their voices (Stewart, 2010) by engaging in making decisions on what, why, and how to write the textbook. In addition, as Mercer (2011) suggested, the process of collaboration involves 'identity'. Identity is about "our understanding of who we are and who we think other people are" (Danielewicz, 2001, p. 10). By understanding their status as a collaborator, they will participate actively in collaborative writing.
However, people's participation in a collaborative project is inseparable from their culture. Regarding this, Schultz (2008), for instance, introduced learner-centered pedagogy to the teachers in Aceh, Indonesia, during the post-earthquake and tsunami disasters in Aceh in 2004. She trained a group of Acehnese teachers about how to teach writing using the inquiry method. During the training process, she observed that the teachers positioned her as the authority or 'expert' that should provide the best knowledge rather than construct it together, as suggested in the learner-centered pedagogy. A similar thing was observed by Robertson et al. (2018) when conducting a collaborative professional development program in Papua, Indonesia. They found that participants expected that program delivery would be transmissive and directive in nature. They believed that the Australian academics possessed the knowledge to be transferred and implemented without questioning. For the many reasons outlined previously, this belief had to be explicitly and implicitly countered for the program to be effective.

Stories of Experiences from Metaphorical Lens
According to Kövecses (2017), metaphors emanate from various sources, ranging from televisions, radio broadcasts, magazines, and classroom processes to reflections. This study focuses on the metaphors from the stories of experiences. According to Clandinin (2005, as cited in Craig, 2018), a story is "a portal through which a person enters the world and by which their experience of the world is interpreted and made meaningful" (p. 477). Craig (2018) stated that a story is useful for capturing and communicating raw experience and it conveys narrative knowing. Literature indicates that stories during the teaching and learning process interactions are instrumental in exploring experiences through a metaphorical lens. Harré and van Langenhove (1999, as cited by Erickson & Pinnegar, 2016) argued that the interactants position themselves and are positioned in interactions. This study explores how the identities of the lecturer-collaborators and teacher-collaborators are constructed and disclosed in the collaborative project.
Their interactions in a social context, such as a collaborative project, can be understood through the metaphorical lens. In this regard, Craig (2018) stated that people have utilized "metaphors to story and make sense of their lived experiences for themselves and to carry across their meaning interactively to others" (p. 301). As Johnson (1980, as cited in Zhu et al., 2019, p. 5) stated, "metaphor…not just in language but in thought and action. Our ordinary conceptual system, in terms of which we both think and act, is fundamentally metaphorical in nature". In the same vein, Kövecses (2002) stated that metaphors are used both to speak about particular aspects of the world and to think about them. Saban (2006) reviewed previous studies on the variety of functions of metaphors in teaching and learning. It functions as a tool for reflecting the teacher's teaching experience and developing an awareness of the demands and pressures of the work, a method for students to describe their learning experiences and evaluate the program, a medium to enhance understanding of teachers' under-cover perceptions, and an opportunity for teachers to demonstrate how they perceive themselves and their professional identity (Chan et al., 2018). Chan et al. (2018) used experiences to generate metaphors from essays on the training experiences.
In the context of learning, several metaphors have been popular over the last three decades. Sfard (1998, as cited in Wegner & Nückles, 2015 summarized learning in two main metaphors, including the acquisition metaphor versus the participation metaphor. Elmholdt (2003) uses cognitive 'acquisition' and 'social participation'. According to Wegner and Nückles (2015), the difference is because of different epistemological orientations. Proponents of the acquisition metaphor conceptualize knowledge as entities, and learners receive knowledge, whereas proponents of the participation metaphor understand knowing as an activity. Knowledge is not something one has within this metaphor, but something one does. Knowing is a situated, culturally embedded, and socially mediated practice. Learners actively construct knowledge. Consequently, the teacher aids students in constructing knowledge; unlike in the acquisition metaphor, the teacher serves as the provider of knowledge. Expressions like 'knowledge transfer' are commonly known in acquiring knowledge (Wegner & Nückles, 2015). However, both metaphors are entangled rather than separated, sometimes folded, coexisting peacefully and loudly, contested and negotiated (Elmholdt, 2003).

METHODS
This study used a qualitative approach because of its relevance to understanding the phenomenon during collaborative working with the primary school teachers teaching English in a district in Aceh province, Indonesia.

Participant
Fifteen primary school teachers teaching English at their schools took part as the teacher-collaborators in the project of developing a CAR textbook in collaboration with two lecturer-collaborators. The experienced teachers, averagely aged over fifty years, were selected based on their consent to participate throughout the project. Most of them have heard of and used CAR during their careers as school teachers. However, the data for this study were stories by the two collaborator-researchers at the end of the collaborative project with the English teachers.

Instruments
This study used stories or narratives (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000) of the university English collaborator-researchers during the collaborative writing project of the CAR textbook with the English teachers as the instrument. Connelly (2000, as cited in Usman, 2020, p. 24), narrative inquiry refers to "a strategy of inquiry in which the researcher studies the lives of individuals and asks one or more individuals to provide stories about their lives". The university English collaboratorresearchers were invited to narrate the process of the collaborative writing project and made sense of what happened during the collaborative work, such as how the English trainee-teachers participated in the teachers' collaborative training development of the textbooks.

Data Collection
In this study, the collaborator-researchers were invited to narrate their experiences on the training and collaborative writing at the end of the collaborative project and write their expressions or linguistic expressions. They narrated their experiences with the English teachers-collaborators' participation, seriousness, and ability to use CAR. Their linguistic expressions were then recorded and translated into English.

Data Analysis
The analysis of the metaphorical linguistic expressions as the two collaborating lecturers narrated their experiences from the five-day collaborative writing project. Lakoff and Johnson (1980) stated that metaphors are grounded on the people's experiences and depend on their personal interpretation of the phenomena. In analyzing the data in this study, the researchers closely read the linguistic expressions of the lecturer-collaborators, especially their respective roles, in the CAR textbook writing project and then analyzed them through the lens of metaphors. In analyzing the linguistic expressions that were sought to generate the metaphors, Lakoff and Johnson's (1980) approach was used by which the conceptual domains were sought (Kövecses, 2010). In analyzing the metaphors, this study identified the metaphors from several linguistic expressions from the respondents' narratives. Then the metaphors were categorized into meta-categories. In this research, the meta-categories of the metaphors are two, including the acquisition metaphor versus the participation metaphor (Sfard, 1998, as cited in Elmholdt, 2003Wegner & Nückles, 2015).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This study has attempted to analyze the narratives of the lecturer-collaborators' experiences of collaborative projects with the English teachers from a metaphorical lens. As Saban (2006, p. 299) stated, "metaphors structure our perception, thought, and action". This study has collected the lecturer-collaborators' expressions on the collaboration process in which they worked together with the English teachercollaborators to develop the textbook. In this stage, the concepts behind the expressions are crucial to the findings (Kövecses, 2002). Through their linguistic expressions, the researchers extracted four main metaphors that reflect the process of the collaborative project. They include 'collaborative writing is listening to the university collaborators', 'collaborating teachers as the trainees', 'a collaborator is an expert', and 'product is more important than process'. These metaphors generated representations of their roles, researcher-facilitators' roles, and their identities during days of the collaborative writing of the textbook.

Lecturer-Collaborator as an Expert
The conceptual metaphor 'lecturer-collaborator as an expert' is implicit in the linguistic expressions that the respondents expressed after collaborating with the teachers. The comments or linguistic expressions are the responses to the roles of the lecturer-collaborators in that collaborative project: (1) I remember when several teacher-collaborators asked questions only to the lecturer-collaborators.
(2) All the questions were only answered by the teacher educator--collaborators.
Examples (1), (2), and (3) show that each uses the phrases from the domain of learning as an acquisition. The 'teacher-collaborators' played passive roles during the project. This indicates that in those interactions, the university lecturer-collaborators were regarded as the experts rather than as collaborators. If the teachers positioned themselves as collaborators, they would have worked collaboratively with the university lecturers as the collaborators, and relied much on them as the experts during the collaborative working for the textbook development. Their agency, which is an important factor in collaborative working (Goller, 2017;Mercer, 2011;Widodo, 2017), was not enacted as expected. They just followed what the collaborator-lecturers said. From the teachers' roles, the "facilitator as an expert" metaphor is implied in the experiences reflected in the collaborative writing of the textbook.
Reflecting upon their own experiences in the collaborative writing project through the metaphorical lens, the 'collaborator as an expert' metaphor has several entities. The entities include trainers as the instructor, trainees, trained, and training. In this way of learning, the lecturer-collaborators served as the transmitters of knowledge and knowledge source, which reflects the instructivist learning (de Leon-Carillo, 2007) of the top-down learning paradigm. In the Indonesian learning culture, the teacher or facilitator is highly respected (Zulfikar, 2009), which creates collaboration like an instruction. This finding corroborates Schultz's (2008) and Robertson et al.'s (2018) research findings that Indonesian teachers tend to rely much on the facilitators in training.

Collaborative Writing as Listening to the Lecturer-Facilitator
The metaphor 'collaborative writing experiences is listening to the lecturercollaborators' emerges due to the positions the teachers took during the collaborative project. The linguistic expressions in (4) and (5) convey the conceptual domain of the teacher collaborators as the recipients of knowledge rather than as active collaborators. Even though the training emphasizes 'collaboration with all participants', what happens, in reality, did not reflect that way. The reality was that the teachers as the participants in the collaborative writing just listened to what the trainer-researchers said. They just followed what the lecturer-collaborators said.
(4) The teacher-collaborators just join the project to listen attentively to what the teacher educators said.
(5) The teachers sat quietly while teacher educator-collaborators talked.
Accordingly, their poor participation violates the common rules of collaboration that requires every participant to work together in doing a project. Essentially, collaborative writing requires the active participation of everyone (Vähäsantanen et al., 2017), which in this research were the school teachers and the university lecturers. They should willingly share their opinions, agreement, and disagreement in a democratic atmosphere. In other words, the finding reflects bottom-up metaphors, which is contrasted with Blau et al.'s (2018) research findings, which reveal such metaphors of general learning as acquisition, participation, and knowledge creation.

Collaborating Teachers as the Trainees
The metaphor, 'collaborating teachers as the trainees' is reflected in the linguistic expressions by the educator-collaborators as in (6) and (7). The teachers were reluctant to actively participate in developing every chapter of the textbook even though they were invited to do so. It seemed that they were walking in an unknown world. They did not do anything related to the textbook writing, except wait for the educator-collaborators to do it wholly. In this way, dialogic learning, co-construction of knowledge, or negotiation (Widodo, 2015) in developing the textbook was absent. Accordingly, their identities as the writing collaborators in the collaborative project become trainees.
(6) The collaborative project was no more than training because the teacher-collaborators only followed what the teacher educators said.
(7) We cannot expect much from the teacher-collaborators to collaborate because they passively received what we said and did.
In this way, the facilitators had no choice except to implant everything during the collaborative writing. The change of the way of learning, as Schultz (2008) did, was done to align with the teachers' participation ways. This finding is more or less aligned with de Leon-Carillo's (2007) research finding on Filipino pre-service teachers' preconceptions of the roles of teachers through the lens of metaphors, which generated such metaphors as a teacher as a knowledge source and teacher as directionsetter.

Product is More Important than the Process
The metaphor 'product is more important than the process' is generated by reflecting upon many images during the collaborative project. Among them were during the training, the teachers' attendance was very fluctuating; some attended the first day but missed the second day. This suggests that some of the teachers regarded the process as less important than the product.
(8) Most of the participating teachers did not attend the process of textbook development every day.
(9) Most of the teacher-collaborators did not actively engage in the CAR textbook writing process.
(10) One teacher kept talking with her friend about other things than the action research things during the collaborative project.
Essentially, collaboration to produce a product, like the textbook, needs to involve much in the process. All participants need to show their agency or self-initiated engagement to contribute to the writing process and product. Involved in the process, they will not only know the product but also learn theories underpinning the collaborative project (Widodo, 2017). In a collaborative project, the participants ideally work actively during the whole project through which every participant experiences every part of the process. Hence, the joint work metaphor is vivid in the process, such as through massive interactions ranging from analysis, design, and development to evaluation.
Nevertheless, it needs to understand that the construction of the teachers' identity is inseparable from their contextual contexts in the Indonesia's context. They have a high workload at school which makes them have little time to improve their professionalism. It makes them unfocused on such a collaborative project. Dealing with the impediments, some teachers often 'outsource' their tasks to a third party to provide their daily job needs, such as lesson plans, syllabi, and CAR reports. Vendors have provided everything they need to do their daily job. Moreover, in evaluating the teachers' CAR reports for the requirements for job promotion, the local governments rely only on the teachers' written reports, without involving an external independent party to continuously observe the development of the teachers' competencies in carrying out their classroom action research. Therefore, it is relevant to accommodate Cirocki and Farrell's (2019) recommendations to systematically evaluate the impact of the teachers' continuing professional development because it "contributes to a deeper understanding of activities and benefits, as well as their effect in the form of improved pedagogical practices or more successful learning experiences" (p. 2). Otherwise, this may seriously reduce their motivation to participate in the collaborative project, which negatively impacts their professionalism.
Moreover, a collaborative project involving school teachers must collaborate with the ministry that employs the teachers. In this way, teachers can get a permission letter to attend the training and focus on the collaborative process, and assign other teachers to replace their teaching work. In addition, teachers' basic understanding of CAR, for instance, needs to be continually supported through regular mentoring.

CONCLUSION
This research has analyzed the linguistic expressions of the university English lecturer-collaborators when they narrated their experiences of collaborative working with the primary school teachers who taught English in developing the textbook of classroom action research. The linguistic expressions have been conceptually thought of as the tool to generate metaphorical images. Four primary metaphorical images were generated on the trainer-trainees' interaction during the training and trainees' attendance. The images are 'collaborative writing is listening to the lecturercollaborators', 'collaborating teachers are the trainees', 'lecturer-collaborators are experts', and 'product is more important than process'. The emerging metaphors represent transmission or top-down, teacher-centered learning processes rather than social constructivist-based learning processes. Hence, it can be said that the metaphors that emerged violate the collaborative learning principles.
Nevertheless, this study is limited to the metaphors produced from the linguistic expressions of the two university English educators' reflections on their experiences of collaborative working with the primary school teachers who taught English in developing the textbook. Despite the limitations, the findings reflect the learning culture in Indonesia in which teachers as the knowledge producers and class controllers, while students as passive recipients of knowledge. Since the reflections emanate from the researchers only, the metaphors generated are not varied and tend to be one-sided. Therefore, further studies are beneficial to be conducted, involving reflections of all training stakeholders, including participants, trainers, and school principals. In this way, it can produce more and various types of metaphorical views on the collaborative project.