Students in two college freshman composition classes (one American and one English as a second language) at a southern university researched the theory of contrastive rhetoric by exchanging pen pal letters and by progressing through a sequence of five formal assignments with revisions. These assignments led the students to consider their own experiences as members of "native" and "foreign" cultures. Students learned various research skills, as well as how to use a variety of data-gathering techniques. One assignment asked students to defend or criticize Robert Kaplan's article on contrasting rhetoric, "Cultural Thought Patterns in Intercultural Education." Results showed that about half the ESL students disagreed with Kaplan in some way, while over two-thirds of the American students disagreed. Many pointed out that Kaplan ignored writing's dynamic nature, and that there is not necessarily an equivalence between a language and a nationality. The paragraph and discourse structures of the students did not reflect cultural differences, but there were contrasts in how students from different cultures approached the assignment. Americans tended to be the most argumentative, followed by the Arab students. Japanese students were the most self-reflective and thoughtful. The project, beneficial for both teacher and students, indicates that contrastive rhetoric, despite its limitations, is a powerful and informative concept. (NKA)