The author proposes a concept of ethics for the writing course, one derived from a moral theory that is both old and new and one that engages us when we teach such practices as making claims, providing evidence, and choosing metaphors in corollary discussions of honesty, accountability, generosity, intellectual courage, and other qualities. These and similar qualities are what Aristotle called “virtues,” and they are the subject of that branch of moral philosophy known as “virtue ethics” today. While the word virtue may sound strange to us today, Duffy argues that the tradition of the virtues has much to offer teachers and students and can clarify what it means, in an ethical sense, to be a “good writer” in a skeptical, postmodern moment.

This article examines the uses of oral testimony in writing about literacy in historical context, especially about the literacy traditions of populations “hidden from history”-immigrants, refugees, and undocumented persons-who are entering U.S. schools and workplaces, and whose literacy histories may be unknown or lost. Drawing on testimonies collected from Laotian Hmong refugees, I offer the following propositions: First, that oral testimonies provide information about literacy that may be unavailable in documentary records. Second, that oral testimonies may reveal deeply held values and attitudes about literacy that cannot be derived from the documentary evidence. Third, that oral testimonies disclose the full range of human experience, rational and emotional, and that this may lead to new understandings of literacy. Finally, that oral histories invite collaboration between researcher and informant in writing new histories of literacy-though not always in ways commonly assumed.

This article suggests that literacy development in immigrant, refugee, and other historically marginalized communities can be understood as a response to rhetorical struggles in contexts of civic life. To illustrate this “rhetorical conception of literacy,” the article examines a collection of anti-immigrant letters published in a Midwestern newspaper between 1985 and 1995 and the responses to these by a group of Southeast Asian Hmong refugee writers. The essay explores the relationships of content, form, language, and audience in the two sets of letters to show how the anti-immigrant rhetoric became the basis for new forms of public writing in the Hmong community.

The category of preliterate has been applied to cultures in which reading and writing practices are said to be nonexistent or restricted. This article argues that preliterate can be understood as a rhetoric or a socially constructive narrative (a) that devalues the cultures and peoples to whom it is applied by situating them within a 19th-century narrative of primitiveness and (b) that mystifies understandings of how literacy develops by representing the absence of literacy as an expression of inherent cultural values rather than an outcome of relationships among cultures of unequal power. This article considers the case of the Hmong of Laos, a people commonly described as preliterate, to illustrate that the widespread absence of written language in Hmong culture is not an expression of cultural values but an outcome of Hmong relationships with the Chinese, French, and Laotian governments and the United States Central Intelligence Agency during the Vietnam War.