Thinking about the examples discussed in the blog post, do you see similar examples of deficit model-based programs at Foothill or in your workplace?
Recall from our debrief of Dr. Natalia’s case study that the teacher – and everyone involved – initially made the assumption that the lower scoring student lacked sufficient preparation for and effort in the concept mapping test. Of course, we now know both students involved demonstrated similar understanding and exerted equal effort. The lower scoring student simply had fewer resources and less confidence to break perceived “rules” during the activity.
Unfortunately, this sort of thing happens all the time in school and at work (and in life in general). If we see something or someone that does not meet our expectations, we might assume that is due to deficiencies in the individuals involved. We might then seek to “fix” the situation and create equity by “fixing” the deficiencies we perceive in the individuals.
We defined this type of thinking as having a Student or Colleague Deficit Model (i.e., perceiving deficits in students or in our colleagues). We could contrast that with a Classroom or Workplace Deficit Model, in which we would look for deficiencies in our classrooms or work environments and try to fix our classes and workplaces to make them more inclusive.
“The programs are designed to fix the students, but the real problem is us.”
This is a quote from a blog post we will look at. The post describes what the author views as a classic example of a STEM diversity program that is based on the Student Deficit Model. The blog post eloquently describes how this extremely well-meaning, and arguably quite successful, program is rooted in concepts of students being deficient because they don’t fit expectations for who scientists are.
Click here to read the post titled “Play The Game, or Change The Rules?” (Links to an external site.)
Once you have finished reviewing the blog post, write 250 words or more here on any of the following (your choice!):
⦁ What was most interesting or stood out most to you in this blog post?
⦁ How did you see the Student Deficit Model reflected in this post?
⦁ Have you ever felt like your teachers, supervisors, or peers assumed you were lacking in motivation or interest or a skill when in reality the environment was lacking in support or structure for you to succeed? When or how so?
⦁ Do you think you’ve ever assumed someone else was “lacking” when in reality the environment was lacking in support for them?
⦁ Thinking about the examples discussed in the blog post, do you see similar examples of deficit model-based programs at Foothill or in your workplace?
(Note: This is not meant to shame the Meyerhoff Scholars program or other programs that might adopt a deficit-model. Such programs have good intentions and are often still extremely helpful to those involved. But maybe we need to also think about changing the system and not just the students.)
