Reflecting on the readings, specific terms like self-reflection, relevance, production of knowledge, observable behavior, theory and practice were prevalent for me. Ede’s chapter discussing the primacy of methodology and the relationship between theory and practice seemed directly related to the issue of relevance in Alverez’s classroom. The elitist ideology that drives curriculum’s privileging of the classical canon in secondary education is the same that prefers a set methodology in academic disciplines. For Alverez, the cause of disinterest in her students was centered in the canonical content of her course having no utilitarian interest for them. She then discusses how the relevance of content in the classroom drove her theory of research, which becomes her practice or pedagogy. This connected to Ede’s discussion of the relationship between theory and practice where she quotes Phelps as saying, “The practitioner must be ‘not the object of Theory, but a Subject who mediates between the systematic knowledge-creation of disciplinary communities and the reflection of learners.’”(322) The learners in Alverez’s classroom better benefit from curriculum that considers their needs as learners, once their reflections on their learning have been taken into account. These needs then inform the theory for practice within the discipline they are being taught. As Alverez is freed from the fetters of the dominant ideology through self-evaluation leading to theorizing and research, Ede discusses the same potential for freedom from strict disciplinary methodology through self-evaluation of her personal theoretical beliefs. Each comes to the conclusion, in methodology, theory and practice, that self-evaluation and the humanist approach illuminate the fluid nature of a discipline so closely connected with, as Lauer and Asher put it, “400 or so. . .basic dimensions of human behavior . . . (that) cannot be held constant” (Asher, Lauer 8). Therefore, the human element in disciplines such as composition and education argues against the ability of these disciplines to maintain a “core” methodology, theory, or practice. This fact then demands the disciplines’ practitioners and theorists to constantly perform self-evaluation in the creation of new theories and research for the benefit of knowledge production and its relevant practice by all.