Yes, Rick, but another way to think about this is as two different
processes. One is the process of text creation; the other is the
dialogic process in which the text is a move. They're connected,
obviously, but when I said I thought product was a dangerous metaphor
it was because it lets us -- maybe even urges us to -- ignore the
second process. I think, by the way, that the process metaphor does
the same thing, by focusing on one process and not the other.
> Nonetheless, there is a crucial distinction (that I have, as Doug
> suggests, made various times in the past) between those who believe
> in process-for-process-sake, the value of which is largely in what
> students discover/learn in the process (i.e., a very valid and
> valuable kind of school writing, writing to learn), and
> process-for-product sake, where the value of working on writing
> process is that it leads to writing that works (i.e., to a
> completed piece of writing [a.k.a. "product"] that
> effects/influences readers).
Maybe we can call this process for the sake of another process?
Which happens to require a product (an utterance)?
Russell A. Hunt __|~_)_ __)_|~_ Learning and Teaching
Department of English )_ __)_|_)__ __) Development Office
St. Thomas University | )____) | EMAIL:[log in to unmask]
Fredericton, New Brunswick___|____|____|____/ FAX: (506) 450-9615
E3B 5G3 CANADA \ / PHONE: (506) 452-0644