Criticizes the response by William Pinar as not addressing points raised in Wraga's essay on reconceptualized curriculum studies. Pinar's vision of hopelessness for reforming the curriculum field continues the insulation of curriculum theorists from the complex problems of school practice. (SLD)

Reviews reasons educational practice is less influenced by curriculum theories than in the past and responds to the criticism by William Wraga that theory and practice have split. Notes the gendered nature of the relationship between theory and practice in curriculum, in that more theorists are male and more practitioners are female. (SLD)

Suggests that the articles in the book cover many of the aspects of discussion in the early years education debate. Notes that the articles are well-written, well-researched, and successfully link theoretical issues with practical implementation. Discusses some criticism related to the epistemological and conceptual framework presented. (AA)

These books are, in many ways, companion volumes addressed to educators working on curricular issues and educational reform. Both consider how postmodernism, feminism, and cultural studies contribute to contemporary educational theory and social criticism. The authors make a convincing case for critical "border pedagogy" that examines…