Abstract
Bourdieu argued that his research was biographical: he sought to reflexively understand the social production of many of his life experiences without resorting to the illusion that they were unique, a-historical and transparent. To this end he systematically developed and applied a methodological toolkit, built around the concepts of field, capitals and habitus. Following Bourdieu's argument about the social-personal, I seek in this paper to focus in on the position of the headteacher. I argue that post-WW2, headteachers in England and Australia have pushed for more and more freedom and autonomy arguing ‘I/we know what's best for my/our school. They [local authority, central office, politicians and policymakers] don't. If only they would give me/us the resources, stop interfering and leave me/us alone, we could just get on with it.’ Mobilising Bourdieu, I sketch an argument that the quest for freedom is (re)produced as a disposition necessary for headteacher/principal practice in a de- and re-centralising schooling field. I offer this as a possible agenda for further research.
Acknowledgments
Thanks to Jill Blackmore, Barbara Harold and Bob Lingard for helpful input on aspects of this argument.
Notes
1. When strategies in the field stagnate and the settlement in the field begins to run out of capacity, new strategies are introduced in part by appropriating the tactics of critics in the field. Thus at present in England there are moves to re-professionalise and re-localise curriculum development, to re-involve higher education in professional development and to allow more innovation. This will create potentials for agents with contrary ideas to act to change the order of what counts in the field and undo hierarchies - unless there are moves to maintain hierarchies that hold firm or that can be invented (see Ball [Citation2008] and Jones and Thomson [Citation2008] for two takes on new games in the field).