This paper presents a research-based, theoretically-informed contribution to the debate on "impact" in educational research, and specifically a response to Gardner's 2011 presidential address to the British Educational Research Association. It begins by discussing the development of the research "impact" agenda as a global phenomenon, and reviews the current state of debate about "impact" in the UK's Research Excellence Framework. It goes on to argue that a radical alternative perspective on this agenda is needed, and outlines Bourdieu's sociology--including his much-neglected concept of "illusio"--as offering potential for generating critical insights into demands for "impact". The term "illusio" in particular calls us to examine the "stakes" that matter in the field of educational research: the objects of value that elicit commitment from players and are "worth the candle". This framework is then applied first to analyse an account of how an ESRC-funded project that I led was received by different research "users" as we sought to generate impact for our findings. Second, it is used to show that the field of educational research has changed; that it has bifurcated between the field of research production and that of research reception; and that the former is being subordinated to the latter. The paper concludes by arguing that, despite many educational researchers' commitments to "make a difference" in wider society, the research "impact" imperative is one that encroaches on academic freedom; and that academics need to find collective ways in which to resist it.