Historically marginalized students are often the subject of problematic labeling. These include terms such as at risk and struggling. When students don't respond to mainstream instruction--teaching practices based on white, middle class, monolingual values and norms--they may receive additional institutional labels such as tier 3, low, or in the red group. (Muhammad, 2020).
In addition to labeling students, deficit thinking also permeates how the home and community experiences of children (particularly children of color and children from low income households) are characterized by teachers and other school personnel. Gorski (2011) refers to this as the "scornful gaze" directed at children and families who do not fit mainstream white middle class norms. Common characterizations include phrases like"they don't care" and"those kids have no support at home."
Consider the following scenarios and how they are often characterized at school. Click on each one to compare typical school responses for low income, immigrant, and students of color and those directed toward white and higher income students:
A common area of deficit thinking in schools pertains to students' and families' language practices. A seminal research study published in 2005 by researchers Hart and Risley coined the term "word gap." They counted the kinds and numbers of words spoken by parents to children in different socioeconomic groups, and determined that by age four, children in families receiving public assistance heard over 30 million fewer words than children whose parents were from a professional or upper income group. Although their study has been shown to be flawed with regard to research methodology, the myth of the word gap persists, and is grounded in deficit thinking.
The following two blog posts, written by researchers in educational linguistics and bilingual education, offer detailed and thoughtful critiques to help reframe deficit-based assumptions regarding language and literacy.
The following chart can help you identify and disrupt deficit discourses. Scroll through and think about how you might shift your own language about students and families.
"Justin is a third grader who has reading and writing deficits. He also still can't spell grade 3 words correctly, and is a real behavior problem in class. During independent reading, he spends most of his time talking to and bothering those around him. I have had trouble getting in touch with his mother. I have tried calling after school, but have not reached her, and she has not returned my calls. Justin says his mom doesn’t read to him, and his dad doesn’t live at home. His at-risk home environment is detrimental to his learning. His parents just don’t seem to care."
"Justin is a third grader who has not yet found power in reading and writing. Although his spelling is unconventional, he represents all of the sounds in words (e.g., nashun instead of nation). During independent reading, he likes to interact with those around him. While this social interaction is important, it may be a strategy to avoid a task (reading) that he finds challenging. I will try placing some engaging and supportive texts on topics he loves into his book basket, and perhaps engage him and a friend in partner reading. I have had trouble getting in touch with his mother. I have tried calling after school, but have not reached her. My assumption is that she is working when I reach out, so I will explore other ways to get in touch with her. Justin says his mom doesn’t read to him, and his dad doesn’t live at home. But I wonder what other kinds of literacy practices occur in the home other than book reading. His mother is clearly working hard to make ends meet and provide for Justin."
The task above might not have been easy for you, particularly if you are new to identifying deficit thinking and reframing your language. But it also can be difficult to shift to a strengths-based discourse if you don't know your students.