Good point. I feel like what I’m trying to get at is partly a labor claim—my larger project is in the humanities and writing instruction and rhetoric, but I’m coming at it from from a political economy perspective and orientation. I think what I want to get at is the way my field persistently mixes epistemological claims with process claims. Epistemological claims are hard and messy, but I feel like composition studies sometimes has a bad habit of treating material questions like epistemological questions. Folks like Ahrens don’t really get considered much in my field, even though I feel like the practical applications of their ideas could do a lot for student writers—but composition studies is sometimes wary of technical solutions, or maybe just wary of technological “solutionism.” I think we sometimes forget the very important aspects of how writing itself is a technology, and has technological constraints and consequences that are not always best answered with epistemological solutions. Thank you for the questions!