In 1995 Frances Borzello claimed that feminist art criticism had 'just touc
hed the national curriculum with its fingertips'. [1] Over the last five ye
ars constant challenges to curriculum provision have all but resulted in a
loss of contact as educators pull back into 'safe' places and away from the
edges where feminist art practices were just starting to take hold. Clingi
ng to 'safe' practices has meant the affirmation of formalist modernist ort
hodoxies which have fostered a restricted canonical patriarchal approach to
the subject. The recent publication of the 'Manifesto for Art' 1999 which
calls for a postmodern view of art with an emphasis on 'difference, plurali
ty and independence of mind' can, all too easily, be read as a panacea, 'a
postmodern solution to a postmodern situation'. [2] However, embracing post
modern pluralism creates as many problems as it solves. Postmodernism often
renders any feminist intervention superfluous in spite of new feminist art
criticisms' insistence that the politics of feminism remains a vital eleme
nt of both artistic practice and critical discourse. While agreeing that ar
t education urgently needs to review its complicity with high Modernist val
ues, we suggest that there are dangers in uncritically accepting a postmode
rn view of education. Surely postmodernism renders any blueprint for change
problematic. This paper does not provide answers, rather it raises questio
ns in order to encourage teachers to reflect upon existing practices with a
view to identifying what is still missing and why. It sets out to interrog
ated implications for pedagogy, educational policy and social transformatio
n of the contemporary academic preoccupation with postmodernism.