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)? -- Russ __|~_ 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 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~