production vs (plus?) consumption

Your all bringing up some wonderful personal connections in your blog posts, whether these originate from the way you were taught or the way your children were taught to read and write. We're often most comfortable sticking with the way that we were taught something, but as your posts reveal, this way isn't necessarily either the only nor the best choice -- it's simply a choice. It might also be interesting to note that textbook publishers are some of the biggest lobbyist in Washington, and many of the "new" programs developed for curriculums reflect the necessity to purchase books or prepackaged programs -- huge money makers. It's easy to see, therefore, where the "flavors of the month" come from (I borrow this term from a friend who's taught in public schools for over 20 years, and who's had to use dozens of different approaches to teaching reading and writing depending upon the "latest" research). As Rachael points out, though, the phonics vs whole language debate does seem to reflect the current traditional vs contemporary rhetoric ideologies.
Something else to think about as you ponder the issues raised in this chapter is the idea of production and consumption. As we guide individuals through the writing process and attempt to help them become stronger, clearer, and more confident writers, our ultimate goal is to help them produce writing. When we provide models of writing for student writers to examine or use as research support, we ask them to consume other people's writing (after all, the product of all writing is reading). But how do balance this? And, has the Web provided more authentic opportunites for the production of text by novice writers? If so, how might that impact the teaching of writing?