<p>Basic Writing has failed to distinguish itself as a mature field of study since the researchers in the field do not seem to listen much to each other or to build on each others' findings. While those working in developmental writing demonstrate, far the most part, ideological agreement, we have significant conflict over what counts as valid evidence by which to build and advance knowledge. An analysis of methodologies used by those embroiled in the "mainstreaming debate" illustrates this methodological confusion, which leads to monologues going around in circles rather than constructive dialectic. While methodological conformity would be undesirable, researchers ought to consider the evidence and arguments of those using a variety of approaches to research.</p>