The Sloyd Training School, an early twentieth-century private school for teachers in Boston, attempted to legitimize the Sloyd method of handiwork. Specifically, its Alumni Association's publication Sloyd Record brought together educators across the country to make a case for Sloyd's relevancy and impact on the academic and professional development of students, particularly students who were working poor or receiving educations in non-traditional settings. Its contributors painted Sloyd as a form of knowledge and a resource, as a literacy, and their rhetorical effectiveness was predicated upon Sloyd's ability to be painted as such in its far-reaching effects and comprehensiveness.

Abstract Notes 1The 2007 Survey of Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric and Composition was approved by the New Mexico State University Institutional Review Board on April 18, 2007, Human Subject Application #219 (Exempt Pre). 2Consistent with earlier surveys, we use the term rhetoric and composition as a commonplace to signify the variety of programs profiled, including those that emphasize technical and professional communication or those that offer an English degree with emphasis in rhetoric and composition. 3The 1994 survey included two Canadian programs (Simon Fraser University and University of Waterloo). Neither appear in the 2000 nor the 2007 surveys.

This paper builds on the calls and responses of the last two decades to methodological interdisciplinarity. It proposes that as we set goals for the next decade's research, we ask ourselves who benefits from our work. Scholars motivated by their desire to contribute to the study of rhetoric and to its pedagogy are certainly beneficiaries. And researchers interested in building bridges between their schools and neighborhoods are as well. But in addition to those who belong to professional organizations, attend academic conferences, and read journals, who benefits? I hope here to suggest that those members of our communities who participate in our research projects are some of the most important beneficiaries, or users, of the information our projects offer. I propose ways to work toward a more reciprocal research methodology by including project participants in discussions about the purpose and design of our research before we launch it and as we navigate it. To demonstrate how reciprocity like this might work, I describe human factors, usability, and participatory design theory and explain how they have been useful in my own work. Combining these principles from professional communication offers a new approach to research, which I call "user-centered" and which can be valuable to rhetorical studies for a variety of practical and philosophical reasons.

In Rescuing Discourse of Community, Gregory Clark hinted that pedagogy based on theory of discourse was in a state of crisis. In this article Clark put forward a theory of ethical participation that he believed would rescue attempts characterize writing classrooms as discourse communities. But even as he did so, he acknowledged that pedagogical practices based on rhetoric of discourse can put into motion processes that tend minimize or exclude participation of some people as they establish dominance of others (61). Others shared same concern. Joseph Harris had argued, goals as teachers need not be initiate our students into values and practices of some new community, but offer them chance reflect critically on those discourses (19). Marilyn Cooper warned that discourse may develop static standards, which are then used to determine who is and who is not a member of (204). Mary Louise Pratt characterized them as imaginary utopian communities that do not accurately represent fractured reality (50-51). Carolyn Miller said the domination of communal is a political and rhetorical problem because it seems restrict and control what can be said, what can ever be found persuasive (Rhetoric and Community 86). And Jim W. Corder, who likened discourse tribes, said that being part of such tribes represses individual's own capacities for observation, thus violating private virtues (306). These critics did not actually deny that discourse exist. Most accepted that discourse communities, like Dell Hymes' communities, exist and that they are that share rules for conduct and interpretation of speech (Hymes 54). But assumption that writing classroom constitutes such a community soon became untenable. Meanwhile, study of discourse flourished on another front as researchers investigated disciplinary and professional discourse. As Charlotte Thralls and Nancy Roundy Blyler say, the concept of a discourse community has given researchers a way talk about workplace writing in both industrial and academic settings (8). Among those doing such work, Greg Myers analyzed

(1988). On the outside looking in: Students' analyses of professional discourse communities. Rhetoric Review: Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 130-149.