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)