It points to a body of thought that is, in my view, invaluable for educational theorists; it also exemplifies a body of work that both demonstrates and simultaneously calls for the necessity of ongoing critique, one in which the claims of any theory must be confronted with the distinction between the world it examines and portrays, and the world as it actually exists.
여기서 one 다음부터가 해석이 안되네요ㅜ
one을 어떻게 해석해야할지;;;
알려주세요ㅜㅜ