TO CITE THIS ARTICLE PLEASE INCLUDE ALL OF THE FOLLOWING DETAILS: Lopes, Alice Casimiro (2015). Elusive Curriculum for an Internationalized Field. Transnational Curriculum Inquiry volume (1) http://nitinat.library.ubc.ca/ojs/index.php/tci Internationalization of Curriculum Studies through an Elusive Curriculum Alice Casimiro Lopes1 State University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil TCI, as the journal of the International Association for the Advancement of Curriculum Studies (IAACS), supports a worldwide - not uniform nor homogenized - field of curriculum studies. Different conceptions, different frameworks, different languages (even in English), different discourses allow to construct an elusive curriculum. Portelli (1987) presented this expression in an old paper that discusses the definitions about curriculum. In his words, simplistic answers to the question “What is curriculum?” will be misleading, the answers cannot represent the complexity of curriculum, the different possibilities of understanding curriculum. Nowadays, it is possible to consider that this process is deeper, especially with the internationalization of the field. The field is bigger, more complex and plural, with a diversity of countries, universities, theories, influences and subjects. However, if we consider the curriculum as discourse, such elusiveness does not refer to a plurality or a broadening of the field. The curriculum is elusive, because it has no ground to define once and all what curriculum is. Curriculum is a sign that succumbs to the language games. Because of the incessant translation, curriculum discourse has no origin, no end. Translate, iterate, as Derrida points out, is not an option, when we speak, write, produce knowledge. We cannot escape of it. We are always immersed (maybe constituted) in translation [I might add that the writing of the so-called ‘original’, in return, has continually been transformed by translation: a case of parasitic feedback, including this parenthesis (Derrida, p. 101)]. If we read, the translation happens. If we are read, we are translated, and this process allows us to exist as producers of texts and as the authors of curriculum field. In this perspective of an elusive curriculum, a curriculum without ground, I understand the internationalization of the curriculum field. In this same perspective, TCI stands as a vehicle for curriculum papers and insert them in the field. In this perspective, 2015.1 TCI presents four papers and a review. In the text, Freire and the US Reconceptualization: Remembering Curriculum as International Conversation, Daniel Johnson-Mardones draws on the internationalization of Curriculum Studies as a process since the very beginning of the reconceptualization of the field in the United States. He argues that Paulo Freire´s work, from Brazil, strongly influenced the US reconceptualization of the field. He also argues that, instead the Marxist framework of this author, post-critical authors quoted his books more than critical authors. As Johnson-Mardones presents, Freire’s curricular influence came from humanities fields rather that from those more oriented to social sciences. Lopes. Internationalization of Curriculum Studies through an Elusive Curriculum 2 Transnational Curriculum Inquiry volume (1) 2015 http://nitinat.library.ubc.ca/ojs/index.php/tci Hui-Chuan Liao, in the text What Are Course Syllabi Telling Students?, works with critical discourse analysis (CDA), especially Fairclough, Van Dijk, Wodak and Meyer, to investigate classroom power relationships. His study analyzes course materials, specifically course syllabi, in an English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) program. In the author´s words, the objective of the study was to determine what the syllabi reveal about the curriculum and the power relationships between language teachers and learners. Samira Thomas, in an autobiographical framework, wrote the paper Cosmopolitanism: a Journey of Suffering and Forgiveness. Samira analyses the cosmopolitanism as a deficit model. In her paper, she tries to understand the cosmopolitanism as a way not only to admit to our responsibilities to one another, but to realize our intersubjectivity, stemming from the depths of ourselves and shining through not only in our thought, but in our actions. Her intention is to discuss humanity, freedom, forgiveness, optimism, misery, hope and curriculum in a different way. In the fourth text Teacher Education in Canada and Denmark in an Era of ‘Neutrality’, Dion Rüsselbæk Hansen, Anne M. Phelan and Ane Qvortrup analyze the rise of welfarism and neo-liberalism in Canada and in Denmark. They intend to present the entanglements of teacher education (i.e. teacher subjectification) with the currently hegemonic rule of neo- liberalism. Based on theory of discourse, especially Laclau and Mouffe, they argue in favor of a radical democracy. In their words, we must abandon the idea of a neutral and finalized society from which all conflicts, antagonisms, and disagreements have disappeared. Finally, we present the review of the book Ethnographies of Schooling in Contemporary India, edited by Meenakshi Thapan. This review was written by José Cossa and presents the different papers of this interesting book. The four texts and the review open possibilities of translations, different theoretical approaches of understanding curriculum. They also build another language, internationalized, which highlights what I name as an elusive curriculum. For the issues of 2015, we would ask you to send your manuscripts. We would strongly like to encourage our readers to submit papers related to Curriculum Studies. Especially for those who attended Ottawa´s Conference of the 2015 IAACS, I consider that the Journal can be an excellent opportunity to deepen our conversations... and translations. Notes 1 alicecasimirolopes@gmail.com References Derrida, J. (1988). Limited Inc. a, b, c. Limited Inc. Evanston, IL, Northwestern University Press. p. 29-110. Portelli, J. (1987). On defining curriculum. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision. V. 2, n. 4, p. 354-367. mailto:alicecasimirolopes@gmail.com