In England, two concurrent but largely disconnected discourses have emerged whose representatives have promulgated initiatives relevant to students' extended historical writing: genre theorists and the history teachers' 'extended writing movement'. Despite certain goals held in common, the two discourses have tended to talk past one another resulting in wastage, incoordination and replication in resourcing. One reason for these divergent discourses is that inter-discursive communication is difficult owing to epistemic differences regarding what the curricular goals regarding students' extended historical writing should be. Using Bernstein's model for the production of pedagogic knowledge as an interpretative framework, first I explain these discourses' differing curricular conceptions by characterizing it as a tension between contrasting emphases on 'recontextualization' and 'reproduction' of academic knowledge. Second, as a representative of the extended writing movement, I offer a theoretical critique of genre theorists' greater concentration on the field of reproduction. Third, I situate these developments in England in an international context by briefly comparing them to trends in the United States. Finally, I argue that these epistemic tensions regarding curricular goals matter and need to be resolved. Otherwise, the recommendations of the representatives of both discourses are destined to appeal to only limited audiences.