In this article, Marygold Walsh-Dilley supports the notion that research in honors is a lot less common than it would appear to a casual observer and that such analyses will help administrators demonstrate the significant benefits of honors education for both honors students and the larger colleges and universities they serve. She also supports a renewed focus on research within the broader honors community. She is struck, though, by what she thinks is misplaced preposition in both George Mariz's essay where he writes "Research in honors has become a priority for the National Collegiate Honors Council" and in the broader discussions at the National Collegiate Honors Council (NCHC). While usually tagged with the phrase "research in honors," these conversations are usually about research "on" honors. Walsh-Dilley asserts this needs to be clarified--that there is--and should be--a great deal of research in honors that is not on honors. To suggest that what qualifies as research in honors is strictly research about what happens in honors is to ignore some of the most creative, innovative, unique, and honors-like research that honors teachers and their students do. Following a review of Mariz's essay, Walsh-Dilley describes a task force recently created at the University of New Mexico Honors College with the aim of discussing and making recommendations about how to better integrate methodological instruction into the honors curriculum. The task force's discussions focus on questions about (1) what courses can be offered that will prepare students for a senior capstone experience and for lifelong critical, interdisciplinary engagement and (2) what elements are crucial to interdisciplinary, community-engaged research. Finally, Walsh-Dilley considers what makes research within honors unique.