In this article, the author begins by describing an important present moment in curriculum studies. He then rethinks this moment and briefly explores the implications of this new line of thought for leadership development. At the 2007 American Association for the Advancement of Curriculum Studies' (AAACS) business meeting, Pinar (2007a) presented a paper arguing that the field of curriculum studies does not have a disciplinary structure but does contain key disciplinary features which he calls "curriculum disciplinarities." He identifies two key disciplinarities and examines how these disciplinarities can be used to create a curriculum studies canon, which, in turn, can be used to advance curriculum studies. AAACS members unanimously decide to organize a Canon Task Force based on Pinar's argument, and the task force has been examining this topic over the past 3 years. The task force confronted a perplexing problem, which is explored in a dialogical exchange (Henderson & Kesson, 2009a, 2009b; Schubert, 2009a, 2009b). This problem can be summarized as a critical question: "Who identifies and conceptualizes the key curriculum disciplinarities?" This question has not yet been resolved; and, in fact, it may not have a solution. As a way out of this quandary, this author rethinks the question as follows: "Are there key curriculum disciplinarities that can be used to advance democratic educational leadership?" He takes the position that there is an open set of curriculum disciplinarities and that, therefore, the problem that curriculum theorists face is to decide which disciplinarities address which educational purposes.