by Rebecca Thomas
In the world of education, the narratives we choose to believe and perpetuate have a profound impact on the lives of students and the structure of our schools. The research paper The Reproduction of Deficit Thinking in Times of Contestation: The Case of Higher Education provides a critical lens through which we can examine how these narratives play out in educational settings - and what we can do to prevent them from taking root in New Zealand’s new assessment regime and structured literacy approach.
This paper published in the British Journal of Sociology of Education in 2022, also highlights that those in positions of power within education systems - policymakers, administrators, and often educators from dominant cultural backgrounds - tend to have a stronger voice in shaping narratives about education. This power dynamic often favours deficit thinking, as it aligns with existing structures and doesn't challenge the status quo.
Those benefiting from current power structures may actively resist changes that could lead to more equitable outcomes, as these might be perceived as threatening their position.
Understanding Deficit Thinking
Deficit thinking is the belief that students, particularly those from marginalised communities, fail in school because of inherent deficiencies - whether they be intellectual, cultural, or inherited This perspective places the burden of change on the students themselves rather than on the educational system that fails to support them.
The research paper, authored by J. Mampaey and J. Huisman, highlights how deficit thinking has persisted in Flemish higher education, despite ongoing debates and disputes. It highlights the dangers of deficit narratives, which often shift the blame for educational inequities onto students rather than addressing the systemic issues at play.
Key Themes from the Research
Systemic Discrimination: The paper identifies how educational tracking, segregation, and institutional racism in Flemish settings perpetuate inequality. These practices reinforce the notion that students from marginalised backgrounds are less capable, rather than recognising the structural barriers they face.
Deficit vs. Anti-Deficit Narratives: The research contrasts deficit narratives, which blame students for their lack of success, with anti-deficit narratives, which call for systemic change. Anti-deficit narratives look at the bigger picture. They say, "Let's change how our schools work so that all students have a fair chance to succeed." This way of thinking wants to fix the system, not blame the students.
Public Discourse and Policy: When people in charge talk about making schools fair for everyone, they often use vague words that don't really mean much. The paper says we need to be more specific. We should clearly say what needs to change in our society and our schools to give all students an equal chance to succeed.
Foreshadowing in New Zealand’s Education System
As New Zealand implements a new approach to collecting data and tracking students from school entry throughout their lives, along with a mandated structured literacy approach, we must critically examine the potential for these initiatives to reinforce deficit thinking.
Data-Driven Tracking and Deficit Thinking: While tracking student progress is intended to ensure that all children are making progress, there is a danger that this data could be used to label students based on their perceived deficiencies. If not carefully managed, this could lead to a situation where students, particularly those from marginalised communities, are reduced to numbers and data points rather than seen as whole individuals with diverse needs and strengths.
Structured Literacy and Eurocentrism: The structured literacy approach, which emphasises phonics and decoding, is rooted in a Eurocentric model of literacy. While it may benefit some students, its one-size-fits-all application risks marginalising those whose cultural and linguistic backgrounds do not align with this model. If this approach is mandated without flexibility, it could exacerbate existing inequalities and reinforce deficit thinking about students’ abilities.
Deficit thinking could infiltrate our approaches over time subconsciously too, from situations where teachers might feel pressured to "fix" students who don't meet standardised benchmarks, rather than adapting teaching methods to suit diverse learners; to potentially labelling those who don't fit the prescribed norms as "deficient" rather than recognising diverse learning styles and cultural knowledge.
Using Critical Discourse Analysis to Challenge Deficit Thinking
To prevent the reproduction of deficit thinking in New Zealand, we can turn to the methods highlighted in the research paper - specifically, Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). CDA involves examining the language, narratives, and power structures within education to uncover and challenge the underlying assumptions that perpetuate inequality.
Here’s how we can apply these principles:
Question the Narrative: We must critically examine the narratives that emerge from data and assessment systems. Are they framed in a way that blames students for their struggles, or do they highlight the need for systemic support and change? By questioning these narratives, we can shift the focus from individual deficiencies to the broader context of educational inequality.
Promote Anti-Deficit Narratives: It’s crucial to elevate stories and perspectives that challenge deficit thinking. This includes highlighting the successes of students from marginalised backgrounds, advocating for culturally responsive teaching practices, and pushing for policies that address the root causes of educational disparities.
Engage in Inclusive Policy-Making: Policymakers must include diverse voices -particularly those of educators, students, and communities most affected by educational policies - in the decision-making process. This ensures that the policies enacted are responsive to the needs of all students and do not inadvertently reinforce systemic biases.
Embrace Flexibility in Teaching Approaches: Instead of rigidly adhering to a single literacy approach, educators should be encouraged to adapt their methods to the diverse needs of their students. This flexibility allows for a more inclusive and effective educational experience that respects and incorporates different cultural and linguistic backgrounds.
The insights from The Reproduction of Deficit Thinking in Times of Contestation serve as a powerful warning for New Zealand’s education system. As we move forward with new assessment and literacy initiatives, we must be vigilant against the dangers of deficit thinking and institutional racism.
Image Chris Slane Cartoons
References:
Jelle Mampaey & Jeroen Huisman (2022) The reproduction of deficit thinking in times of contestation: the case of higher education, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 43:8, 1233-1249, DOI: 10.1080/01425692.2022.2122941
Comentários