ABSTRACT
This chapter examines the implications of policy rhetoric emphasising autonomy for these schools, who ostensibly work more independently while still being part of a wider public schooling system governed by policy emphasising improvement on measurable student achievement. It outlines the theoretical devices being applied to the research, presents the policy conditions that were present in the case study context, and explores the initiative that narrowed the focus of curriculum at the school. The changing policy landscape for principals in Queensland’s independent public schools (IPS) is complex, comprising of the aforementioned policies designed to facilitate rapid school improvement coupled with formalised autonomy. The IPS programme represents a formalised neoliberal responsibilisation of schools where schools take responsibility for the improvement of student results from the traditionally responsible Department of Education. Eacott Scott’s autonomy prior to joining the IPS programme school is clear. He developed an idea that something different was needed at Mount Pleasant.
