LAUSR

PurposeThe present study contributes to research that examines the meanings of achievement gaps, when enacting policy. Its findings are both hopeful and unsettling. The absence of equitable outcomes and democratic citizenship, as elements of closing the achievement gaps in our participants' definitions, are troubling, particularly within the context of neo-liberalism, where increases in inequities showcase the negative aspects of policy appropriation.Design/methodology/approachA qualitative case study methodology was used to identify the parameters of the research (Merriam and Simpson, 2000) because case studies are particularistic in nature in that case studies examine a specific instance but illuminate a general problem (Merriam, 1998). This case study is not based on generating generalizations, concepts or hypotheses grounded in systematically obtained data (Abercrombie et al., 1990) but goes beyond the limited notion of context employed in many case studies, as no researcher can enter a situation free from preconceptions but must fit existing perceptions into a pre-existing discourse. This study explores heads of schools' decisions with regards to increasing the number of students who meet standards, as set by the government and reducing achievement gaps among student subgroups.FindingsThe findings from this study are discussed in three broad categories; the achievement gap, aspirations and parental support and differentiated and targeted solutions.Research limitations/implicationsThese findings raise the question as to whether the education inspection framework (EIF) presents cause for concern. After all, the EIF was developed to hold schools accountable for high standards without consultation with the teachers' representatives, local communities, parents and colleges and universities. Nevertheless, the EIF, as a set of standards, is problematic.Practical implicationsThe leadership practices enacted by heads of schools to bridge the achievement gaps differ from those advocated by the State. This echoes previous findings demonstrating that the same leadership practices can be used to pursue different goals (Leithwood, 2006) and that individuals enact policies in ways that reflect the particularities of their own contexts (Ball et al., 2012).Social implicationsThe absence of equitable outcomes and democratic citizenship, as elements of closing the achievement gaps in our participants' definitions, are troubling, particularly within the context of neo-liberalism, where increases in inequities showcase the negative aspects of policy appropriation.Originality/valueThe present study contributes to research that examines the meanings of achievement gaps when enacting policy (Ball et al., 2012; Hardy, 2014; Winton, 2013). Its findings are both hopeful and unsettling. The heads of schools demonstrate that they can appropriate definitions of achievement for all students to support their academic learning and wellbeing (Hodgkinson, 1991; Winton, 2013).