Challenging Deficit Thinking in Our Schools: It Starts During Educator Preparation

Introduction

The solution to the challenge seems simple--deficit thinking by educators is a barrier to student success. If educator preparation programs can work toward ensuring future teachers are focused on students strengths, assets, and growth rather than deficits, higher student achievement should follow. Challenge solved. But, one look at the achievement gap (Ladson-Billings, 2006), failing schools (Liou & Rotheram-Fuller, 2019), or the wide-spread inequities spotlighted during the COVID-19 pandemic (Hall et al., 2020) and the solution to deficit thinking does not seem as simple. Even though the solution is not a simple one, educator preparation programs should continue to produce forward-thinking, inclusive educators who are focused on students’ strengths. It means educator preparation programs must do more to fully prepare future teachers for the realities of the classroom.

Shume (2020) states that special education as a field is often grounded within exclusive and deficit mindsets and practices. The very nature of disability identification and eligibility for special education services is deficit-driven. Even with the emergence of identification methods such as Response to Intervention (RtI) and Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS), the initial driving factor for intervention is deficit performance--not meeting benchmarks for development and/or academic achievement. Further complicating the identification and eligibility process is the disproportionate identification of Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC) students. Once identified and eligible for special education services, BIPOC students are often placed into more restrictive learning environments than their White peers (Morgan, 2020). Finally, due to the nature of the field, special educators may not focus enough on asset-based approaches when compared to models steeped in deficit thinking.

Because RtI and MTSS models are currently used in schools by all educators, deficit thinking cannot be addressed as a concern applied only to special education. RtI and MTSS are utilized initially by general education teachers, which means educator preparation programs need to address issues surrounding how students are supported, interventions are delivered, and eligibility is determined regardless of which license a future teacher will hold. Fortunately, educator preparation programs are positioned to combat this focus on deficit thinking through intentional coursework and supportive field experiences for special and general educators. To be as effective as possible, educator preparation programs will need to address deficit thinking at multiple points during an educator’s preparation, not in a single course or experience (Ukpokodu, 2007).

For one small, liberal arts university in the Midwest United States, challenging deficit thinking is a priority for their educator preparation programs. In direct response to inequities spotlighted by COVID-19 and the antiracist summer protests of 2020, this education department sought to ensure they were doing more than just reaffirming their mission statement, but were working to actively prepare future teachers to teach all students. As a starting point, the education department conducted an audit of their education coursework in an effort to ensure that their graduates are prepared to interrogate their deficit thinking and utilize proactive, inclusive, and strengths-based approaches in their classrooms. The mission of this education department is to contribute to education reform through equity and antiracist education, which must include addressing ableism toward the goal of inclusive education for all students.

This chapter will highlight what the research literature says about countering deficit thinking in educator preparation, both in general terms, but also by using specific program components. Next, the results of a coursework audit conducted by one education department will be shared, including identifying what their licensure programs are doing well to combat deficit thinking and where there is room for improvement. The chapter will conclude with suggested areas for research and future action plans. Overall, this chapter seeks to provide an example of a coursework audit for other education departments who may wish to conduct similar audits of their educator preparation programs in an effort to challenge deficit thinking in schools and classrooms.