Text Referenced
Shannon Renkly & Katherine Bertolini (2018). Shifting the Paradigm from Deficit-Oriented Schools to Asset-Based Models:
Why Leaders Need to Promote an Asset Orientation in Our Schools. Empowering Research for Educators, Volume 2, Issue
From Deficit Thinking to Asset-Based Perspectives. (2025). YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dv-egOaunj8
Asset-Based Teaching: Changing Perceptions to Increase Student Success. (2025). YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pe3RFmoKlA8
Edutopia. (2025). Supporting schoolwide culturally responsive practice [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztnwmVBMfd0
Digging Deeper: Asset-Based Learning & Equity-Driven Leadership. (2025). YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk5xk2LjGeQ
1. Three Things:
Renkly and Bertolini start by saying something that a lot of schools won't admit: deficit thinking isn't an accident. It is embedded. Schools often say they treat all students the same, but the conversation quickly turns to what students don't have. Not having enough words. Not having a structure. Not getting help at home. The authors quickly change the focus. They don't ask what's wrong with students; they want us to look at what's wrong with systems and leadership stories. That opening hit home for me as a Black teacher. I have been in rooms where people only cared about children's weaknesses and not their strengths.
Middle
The authors talk about asset orientation as a planned way of leading in the middle of the article. This isn't about being positive just for the sake of it. It is about understanding that students bring their culture, language, strength, and life experiences to the classroom. Those are good things. When leaders see diversity as an asset instead of a problem, it changes how teachers expect students to behave, how they discipline them, and how hard they work in school. The language of leadership is important. When leaders talk about students in a negative way (deficit lens) , teachers take that story to heart and internalize that perception and narrative. If leaders talk about their faith in their school culture, that faith spreads.
The end
The authors make it clear in the end: leadership is the first step toward sustainable equity. You have to have an asset orientation. It is the right thing to do. Schools can't say they are working for fairness while still focusing on what students don't have. Belief is not emotional. It is structural.
Statement of Argument
Renkly and Bertolini contend that deficit-oriented education perpetuates systemic inequality, asserting that educational leaders must deliberately exemplify and institutionalize asset-based thinking to cultivate genuinely equitable learning environments.
Links to the themes of the course
This reading goes along with what we've been talking about privilege and systems. Just as colorblindness keeps inequality going by not naming race, deficit thinking keeps inequality going by not naming institutional barriers. Both take the blame off of structures and put it on people. Asset orientation fits with the constructivist framework we use in class. Students are not blank slates. They carry knowledge. The question is if schools know and recognize that.
Personal Reflection:
Thinking about myself, this reading felt like it was for me. I have worked in schools where data meetings were mostly about what students couldn't do. We hardly ever started with strengths. We didn't often ask how decisions made by leaders affected the results. Instead, stories quietly spread about which students were "behind" and which teachers were "struggling." When I worked at a charter school, teachers of color often had their concerns turned into aggression or negativity. Students were characterized by adherence and inadequacy rather than capability. I came to understand that deficit orientation affects more than just students. It affects how people of color who teach are valued, heard, and helped. When leaders think in terms of lack, the culture becomes one of survival. When leaders think about assets, the culture becomes one that wants to grow. As a Black teacher, I won't take part in stories that make kids feel small. I've seen smart kids who were called "low." I have seen how changing the language around belief can change a building through leadership. Asset orientation does not entail disregarding challenges. It means not letting them define students.
What I have witnessed firsthand is that deficit thinking does not just describe behavior. It assigns identity. Once a child is labeled “the bad kid,” “the behavior student,” or “the liar,” that label begins to travel ahead of them. It follows them from classroom to classroom, shaping how adults interact with them before a relationship has even formed. Patience becomes thinner. Grace becomes limited. Surveillance increases. And over time, that child feels it.
The sociological impact of this is profound. Labels influence credibility. I have seen in my previous charter school how quickly reputation could be shaped by someone else’s narrative. If a coworker was described as “difficult” or “not credible,” that framing quietly altered how others received their voice. It stained their professional identity, especially when that person was a person of color. Once a reputation sticks, it takes tremendous effort to undo it. The same dynamic plays out with children.
When a student is labeled a liar, we begin to doubt their truth. When they are labeled disruptive, we interpret their energy as defiance. Even when they are telling the truth, their voice is filtered through suspicion. We rarely pause to consider the danger of that. To deem a child unworthy of being believed is to quietly remove their humanity. It sends the message that their perspective does not carry weight.
This is not accidental. It reflects broader systems of power that determine whose voice is trusted and whose is questioned. Deficit thinking disproportionately attaches to students outside the dominant culture, reinforcing racialized and class-based assumptions about behavior and intelligence. The white supremacist, compliance-driven framework that values order over context shows up in everyday interactions. Who gets the benefit of the doubt? Who must prove their innocence?
One of the reasons I chose to leave my former school environment was because I could see how deeply these narratives shaped the culture. Conversations centered around managing certain students rather than understanding them. Reputations hardened. Growth was overshadowed by past mistakes. That environment did not just affect student outcomes. It affected how adults of color were heard, supported, and believed.
Asset orientation interrupts this cycle. It demands that we see students as whole human beings, not summaries of prior behavior. It requires leaders to protect credibility rather than erode it. It challenges us to ask what is happening beneath the surface instead of reacting to what is visible. Belief is not passive. It is a structural and moral choice.
Visual Representation
Final Thought :
Deficit thinking asks, "Why aren't they meeting the standard?"
Asset thinking asks, "What strengths are we missing?"
The students are not the problem. The difference is in who is in charge.
Update: some videos I found on youtube for further discussion:
This video, From Deficit Thinking to Asset-Based Perspectives (2025), explores how reframing mental models about student potential can transform educational practice by recognizing student strengths rather than focusing on what they lack, aligning closely with Renkly & Bertolini’s argument about asset orientation. From Deficit Thinking to Asset-Based Perspectives
This short video on Asset-Based Teaching: Changing Perceptions illustrates how valuing student strengths and reframing deficit narratives can build inclusive and effective learning environments, reinforcing the key concepts from Renkly & Bertolini.
Asset-Based Teaching: Changing Perceptions to Increase Student Success
This Supporting Schoolwide Culturally Responsive Practice video demonstrates equity-focused teaching strategies that encourage all students to contribute, reflecting the asset-based approach discussed by Renkly & Bertolini.Supporting Schoolwide Culturally Responsive Practice
In Digging Deeper: Asset-Based Learning & Equity-Driven Leadership, panelists describe asset-based learning and leadership practices that directly relate to Renkly & Bertolini’s emphasis on leadership language and belief shaping school culture.
Digging Deeper: Asset-Based Learning & Equity-Driven Leadership
Thank you, for sharing for elevating, for being vulnerable. In the beginning of this post you state, you have been in rooms where people only care about student weaknesses and not their strengths. The first thought I had after reading that point was simplistic in nature. How does she move in rooms as described? The room you described is the very reason I decided not to work in a traditional education setting. I could not see myself in those rooms. Mainly because rooms like that hurt my core. So I give you the most praise for having the courage to not only be in those rooms but do what is needed to enact change within them. Later on you so eloquently stated the leadership is the first step towards sustainable equity. Although I understand your train of thought here. I would say the first step to sustainable equity is reflection. As one reflects, they can see error thus enacting true change via action. Your reflection is truly touching and insightful. I have been forced to reflect on my own path as a result of this post. So again, humbly and gracefully thank you.
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely agree! Accountability is a core attribute of a leader !
DeleteHi Andrea,
ReplyDeleteYour post was incredibly powerful and reflective. The line about how “stories quietly spread” about which students were “behind” and which teachers were “struggling” really stood out to me because it shows how normalized deficit thinking can become within a school culture. Your final comparison of the two questions really reframes accountability and pushes us to think about who holds power in schools. Thank you for sharing your experiences so honestly, your perspective adds so much depth to this conversation.
Andrea,
ReplyDeleteYour personal reflections really struck me, especially when you said: "Students were characterized by adherence and inadequacy rather than capability."... woah. As someone who currently works in a charter school where the majority of my students are students of color and the majority of the administration is white, students are absolutely being characterized by their adherence. It seems like the administration, especially our dean of special services, focuses on students and their test scores, the "whole" or "person" is removed from the student and they are reduced to their scores. I think that while this has a strong relationship with asset/deficit based thinking, it also has to do with racial and internal bias.
wow. so much going on here. As I have noted for others, it is like this text just gives names to thing you have known for always. Your personal and professional life gives evidence to this phenomena. And you note so powerfully how youth OST (out of school time) spaces often counter this deficit lens with relationships, assets, and care. Thanks for this.
ReplyDeleteThis post really hit. I appreciate how you named that deficit thinking is not random, it is built into the system. That part about schools saying they treat everyone the same but then immediately focusing on what students lack feels way too familiar. I love that Renkly and Bertolini push the conversation toward systems and leadership instead of putting everything on kids.
ReplyDeleteWhat stood out most to me is how you connected this to your experience as a Black teacher. The way you described being in rooms where only weaknesses were discussed is powerful. That is exhausting. And you are right, when leaders speak about students through a deficit lens, that language spreads. It becomes the story teachers carry. If leadership shifts the story, the culture shifts too.
I also really liked how you broke down labeling. Calling a child “low” or “the bad kid” is not just describing behavior, it becomes identity. Once that label travels ahead of them, everything they do gets filtered through it. That line about how quickly credibility can be shaped by someone else’s narrative really stuck with me. The same thing happens to adults, especially educators of color. That parallel was strong.
Your point that belief is structural, not emotional, is huge. Asset orientation is not about pretending challenges do not exist. It is about refusing to let those challenges define a child’s worth or potential. It is about protecting students’ humanity and credibility. That is leadership work.
I respect that you have drawn a clear line about not participating in stories that make kids feel small. That is real advocacy.