The purpose of this study was to determine the topics being studied, theoretical perspectives being used, and methods being implemented in current literacy research. A research team completed a content analysis of nine journals from 2009 to 2014 to gather data. In the 1,238 articles analyzed, the topics, theoretical perspectives, research designs, and data sources were recorded. Frequency counts of these findings are presented for each journal. Chi-square tests of independence revealed statistically significant differences among the topics, theoretical perspectives, designs, and data sources across the nine journals. These results suggest that the field of literacy research may be fragmented, which has been a concern for literacy researchers since the paradigm wars of the 1980s and 1990s. We urge the literacy research community to continue to demand rigorous research, but to do so in a way that appreciates the power in viewing and studying teaching and learning from diverse perspectives, using diverse methods, and with recognition that a foundational aspect of rigorous research is the match between research questions asked and research methods used. [This article was written with the assistance of the George Mason University Content Analysis Team: Jan Ainger, Mary Carmen Bartolini, Alicia K. Bruyning, Ellen Clark, Sarah Crain, Nisreen Daoud, Karen Sutter Doheney, Stacey Duff, Susan V. Groundwater, Jacqueline Heller, Amber Jensen, Lesley A. King, Jennifer Lindenauer, Joanna Newton, Allison Ward Parsons, Erin M. Ramirez, Jayne Sherman, and Peet Smith.]