"The Journal of Educational Administration and History" has played an important role as a site for analyses that seek to expand both the academic and the ethical/political concerns of the field. A key word here is field. What counts as the field? What are its boundaries? Who is inside and who is outside? How has that changed over time? These are not simply "definitional" issues. They get to the core of what actually counts as debates (and debaters) in and over leadership. In this commentary, Michael Apple writes that answers to these question are also essential to uncovering the assumptive foundations that stand behind discussions like those represented in three papers contained within this issue of "Journal of Educational Administration and History" and adds his own views and concerns to the dialogue. The papers presented are: (1) "A new world order? Finding a local place for educational leadership" (Ira Bogotch); (2) "A social epistemology for educational administration and leadership" (Scott Eacott); and (3)" A little more madness in out methods: A snapshot of how the educational leadership, management and administration field conducts research" (Pat Thompson).