The invitation to contribute to this series is curiously timely for me since it was exactly thirty years ago that Routledge published my first book (‘The Divided School’, 1979). Perhaps this year’s book will be the last – but I have wondered that about every book that I’ve produced!

The 1970s was a time of great excitement in the world of sociology of education when researchers were beginning to explore the finer detail of what was actually happening inside schools after a long period of concentrating almost exclusively on macro, quantitative aspects. There was talk, perhaps rather presumptuous, of a ‘New Sociology of Education’. There was much debate, at times very heated, about the appropriate focus of study for a social science, and about the ways of studying it. ‘The Divided School’ was my first attempt to unravel some of the ‘realities’ of secondary school life, some of them mysteries that had perplexed me when I was a teacher myself. For me, research has always had this reflexive quality – it is as much about discovering myself as it is the social world.

My tools were the theoretical insights offered by symbolic interactionism and the research methods of ethnography. Armed with these, I explored teacher and pupil cultures, how they create meaning through perspectives, how these are linked to action through strategies, and how all are situated within the lives of teachers and pupils through their subjective careers and identities. ‘Sociology and the School’ (Routledge, 1983) sought to bring together existing research in this field; ‘Teacher Careers: Crises and Continuities’ (with P.Sikes and L.Measor) (Falmer, 1985) took an in-depth look at the life histories of a group of secondary school teachers; ‘Teacher Skills and Strategies’ examined teacher success and difficulty within the context of a model of opportunities to teach and learn; and ‘The Happiest Days? How Pupils Cope with School’ (both Falmer, 1990) took a pupils’ eye view of school.

Parallel to my own research, I began a series of annual conferences held at St Hilda’s College, Oxford, where prominent ethnographers in education from the UK and abroad gathered to present and discuss their work. These led to a series of edited books, several of them published by Routledge, or their associates. They include ‘The Process of Schooling’ (with M. Hammersley) (Routledge, 1976); ‘School Experience’ (with M. Hammersley) (Croom Helm 1977); ‘Teacher Strategies’ (Croom Helm, 1988); and ‘Pupil Strategies’ (Croom Helm 1988). Over thirty years later, these conferences are still going strong, though of course under new management, and they are still producing a stream of books on educational ethnography.

Over time, my researches took me to earlier stages in the pupil’s career as I sought underpinnings of what came later, until eventually I came to look at the transition between primary and secondary school (‘Changing Schools’ with L. Measor, Open University Press 1988). The insights into primary education that this afforded provided a new source of inspiration. After the stagnation of much of the secondary school education I had witnessed, I marvelled at the freedom and invention of primary schools. I celebrated this in a book on ‘Critical Events in Teaching and Learning’ (Falmer, 1993) – outstanding events that had enhanced pupils’ learning in rapid and uncommon ways. I had a political motive in doing this also, as the late 1980s marked the end of the liberal Plowden era and the beginning of the heavily directive Thatcher one. ‘Critical Events’ documented examples of the best of what had gone before, and which now seemed under severe threat.

But it was not entirely lost. I became fascinated by how creative teachers adapted to the constraints of the new order. After the initial shock of the first wave of Ofsted inspections (see below), some began to find spaces where they could, at least to some extent, promote their own values. I and my colleagues explored these and recorded them in several books produced through the 1990s – ‘Creative Teachers in Primary Schools’ (Open University Press, 1995); ‘Teachable Moments: The Art of Teaching in Primary Schools’ (with Bob Jeffrey) (Open University Press, 1996); ‘Restructuring Schools; Reconstructing Teachers: Responding to Change in the Primary School’ (with B. Jeffrey, G. Troman and M. Boyle) (Open University Press, 1997).

Meanwhile, Multiculturalism and Gender had become strong issues in education. We addressed the first specifically, though not exclusively, in ‘Educating All; Multicultural Perspectives in the Primary School’ (with E. Grugeon) (Routledge, 1990) and in ‘Multicultural Children in the Early Years; Creative Teaching and Meaningful Learning’ (with M. Boyle and N. Hubbard) (Multilingual Matters, 1999). We considered the impact of ethnographic methods on both these issues in an edited book ‘Gender and Ethnicity; Ethnographic Accounts’ (with M. Hammersley) (Routledge, 1993).

At the same time, we had become aware of how stress had intensified and escalated among teachers, and the degree to which negative emotions were compromising any notion of raising educational standards from whatever direction. Ofsted inspections were our first object of study, our findings recorded in ‘Testing Teachers: The Impact of School Inspections on Primary Teachers’ (with Bob Jeffey) (Falmer, 1998). This was followed by ‘Primary Teachers’ Stress’ (with G. Troman) (Routledge, 2001); and ‘Emotions of Teacher Stress’ (with D. Carlyle) (Trentham, 2002).

Gradually however, creativity was reasserting itself in primary schools, and it received a considerable boost at the turn of the century by the government’s own sudden realization of its value. Without loosening its hold on schools, the government and its agencies (including Ofsted) began singing its praises. There was now an interesting anomaly in primary schools – the existence of two official, fundamentally opposing ideologies, which teachers had to reconcile. There was one school that had featured in earlier researches where we knew this was being done extremely well – Coombes School in Berkshire. We researched it more thoroughly and wrote up our findings in ‘The Creative School: a Framework for Success, Quality and Effectiveness’ (with Bob Jeffrey) (Routledge, 2003)

Sociological research has oftentimes been criticised for having no clear purport for enhancing what actually goes on in schools. Having been a teacher myself, I have always sought to bring out the relevance of my research for practice and policy. Two books were specifically aimed at this: ‘Sociology and Teaching: a New Challenge for the Sociology of Education’ (with A. Pollard) (Croom Helm, 1988), and ‘Working for Teacher Development’ (Peter Francis, 1989). But it has been a prominent feature running through most of my books – How are teachers to understand and deal with disruptive pupils? How are they to understand the contradictions in their own practice? How can teachers avoid or copewith stress? How can they possibly do any creative teaching under such constraints? What can sociology add to their understanding of their teaching and of their own life histories?

Bob Jeffrey’s and my latest book, ‘Creative Learning in the Primary School’ (Routledge 2008) follows the pattern of sociological analysis together with policy and practical implications. In previous studies we had concentrated on creative teaching. Here, we turn our focus on the students. We consider creative teaching and learning along the lines of four main properties: ownership of knowledge, control over pedagogy, relevance to pupils’ interests, and innovation. The second half of the book gives actual examples of these in action, including the wonderful example of Hackleton School, charting its career over a number of years from frustrating constraint to generally celebrated creativity, including the Ofsted accolade of ‘Particularly Successful School’. If Coombes and Hackleton and other schools featuring in these books can do it – fulfil their own creative dreams and be held out as models by government agencies - why not others? This is not to support or even excuse the whole of Government policy, and we have been keen to draw out the implications for that also.

Side by side with actual research studies, I have examined qualitative research methods, and particularly ethnography, in their application to education. ‘Inside Schools: Ethnography in Educational Research’ (Routledge, 1986) abstracted the principles of ethnography from the first wave of such research in the 1970s and 80s. ‘Researching the Art of Teaching: Ethnography for Educational Use’ (Routledge, 1996) had two main aims: first, to consider how both teaching, and, of necessity, its fine study, are both a science and an art; and secondly, in the spirit mentioned above, to draw out ethnography’s benefits for educational practice. Finally, in ‘Successful Writing for Qualitative Researchers’ (Routledge, 2nd edition, 2005) I discuss the pitfalls and hazards of academic writing as I and others have experienced them, and ways round them, from initiation through to successful publication.