(1991). “Revision/re‐vision”: A feminist writing class. Rhetoric Review: Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 258-273.

neither my stories of teaching nor those of many of my feminist colleagues. These practitioners, along with many women and men writing about composition studies today, urge us to design curricula to empower women and other students marginalized in relation to the dominant discourse. In their stories we see them empowering those women, who experience life and the academy from a marginal perspective, to write. Moving away from the developmental theories of William H. Perry and Jean Piaget, these researchers cite studies by women about the different ways women know and write to justify the ways they encourage their female students' literacy.2 But these feminists do not describe the nonmarginalized students many of the rest of us meet in our classes-those men, women, and culturally different ones who already belong in the academy. How many of those of us who are feminists and composition teachers interact only with students eager to be transformed by the political agendas of feminist, or for that matter, even composition pedagogy? The affirmation in the first part of my title gives away the ending of my story,

(1990). Rhetoric in a new key: Women and collaboration. Rhetoric Review: Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 234-241.

(1990). Feminist responses to Rogerian argument. Rhetoric Review: Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 220-232.