Laura DeJoseph McArdle, Syracuse University
A positive perspective is essential to a student’s ability to thrive in college (Schreiner, 2013). Thus it is upon advisors to model and facilitate positive perspective-taking. Part of positive perspective taking involves intentional focus on strengths and achievement. Shaun Harper’s (2010) anti-deficit achievement framework has applications to academic advising practice. Through Harper’s anti-deficit approach, advisors center student achievement in resistance to deficit-focused narratives that may permeate advising interactions and policies.
Through an anti-deficit approach to advising, advisors can intentionally center student achievement and support student thriving. Advisors can draw on students’ strengths and facilitate positive perspective taking while also acknowledging deficit narratives that students face and that exist at the intrapersonal, interpersonal, and systemic levels.
Understanding Deficit Thinking
In order to adopt an anti-deficit approach to advising, an understanding of “deficit” must first be reached. What comes to mind when one hears the word deficit? Lacking. Insufficient. Inadequate. Not enough.
According to Valencia (2010), deficit thinking suggests one fails because of deficiencies due to matters such as “limited intellectual abilities, linguistic shortcomings, lack of motivation to learn, or immoral behavior” (p. 7). While generally deficit thinking has evolved within educational systems, and is held in low esteem within scholarship today, its historical impact on current educational thoughts and practices is relevant (p. 9).
Where are deficit narratives about college students seen and heard? Examples that come to mind may include narratives about students in academic recovery. Other examples may include narratives about first-generation college students. Narratives and stereotypes may focus on what these populations lack in order to be successful in college. International students, students of low socio-economic status, students of color, all may have deficit narratives associated with them. The term “at-risk,” for example, assigns a list of implied deficits to the student group it is applied to.
Consider policies and practices in higher education or advising that are built on a deficit narrative. Academic standing policies, mid-semester progress reports, early intervention systems, predictive retention metrics. Policies that are intended to serve an important purpose of proactively and reactively integrating support measures for students can be built on the assumption of deficits and the need for remediation.
According to Amador (2018),
A review of literature suggests one reason for the gap in achievement and/or opportunity for students from systematically underrepresented cultural and ethnic backgrounds as well as lower socio-economic backgrounds is the presence of an often unrecognized deficit-based model of academic advising.
Without proper training and awareness, advisors can take a deficit approach to advising and perpetuate stereotypes. This can have often unintended influence on students’ internal narrative as well as a larger systemic narrative.
Anti-Deficit Achievement Framework
With the recognition that despite good intentions, implicit bias (Greenwald & Banaji, 1995) exists and deficit narratives can be easily perpetuated, advisors should adopt an anti-deficit approach to advising. An anti-deficit approach is not simply an approach that emphasizes strengths. Strengths-based advising is a well-known advising approach that purposefully focuses on students’ inherent talents, motivations, and strengths (Schreiner & Anderson, 2005). An anti-deficit approach also emphasizes strengths but differs in its active resistance to deficit narratives that persist about marginalized populations.
The anti-deficit achievement framework was developed as a way to reframe deficit-focused research that Harper recognized in scholarship about Black male students in STEM fields. A survey of scholarship about Black men in STEM led Harper to the recognition that not just the content, but the questions that guided scholars’ research, reflected a deficit approach. Instead of underrepresentation, low achievement, and failure, the anti-deficit achievement framework challenges scholars to “deliberately . . . discover” what contributes to students’ success (Harper, 2014). While this study was focused on Black males in STEM, Harper introduces this lens more broadly to students of color in future scholarship.
A key phrase in applying the anti-deficit achievement framework is “instead of.” To draw further from Harper, instead of asking: “Why do so few Black male students enroll in college,” how about: “How were college aspirations cultivated among Black male undergraduates who are currently enrolled?” Or instead of “Why are Black male students’ GPAs often the lowest among both sexes and all racial/ethnic groups on many campuses,” how about: “What resources proved most effective in helping Black male achievers earn GPAs above 3.0 in a variety of majors, including STEM fields?” (Harper, 2014). These examples highlight the anti-deficit reframe approach to centering student achievement.
While Harper’s research originally draws from research on Black male students in STEM, he broadens the application of the framework to students of color. When applied to advising, the anti-deficit achievement framework can be applied to students of color as well as a variety of student populations that a deficit narrative may follow.
An anti-deficit approach is not necessarily appropriate for mass application, like some advising approaches. One cannot exercise an anti-deficit approach to advising with a student population that does not confront a deficit narrative. Advisors can focus on strengths and a positive perspective for all students, but an anti-deficit approach centers the experiences of historically marginalized populations. An anti-deficit approach acknowledges the existing deficit narrative and deliberately focuses on achievement. Focusing on achievement does not ignore challenge and adversity, but instead it recenters the importance of success, often in the face of adversity, instead of primarily failures.
Developing an Anti-Deficit Mindset
Advising is heavily rooted in interpersonal interactions between advisor and student. While conversation and language can be one clear place to recognize and confront deficit narratives, it is not the only place. This framework is applicable at a variety of levels, beginning with intrapersonal communication. Coupled with the acknowledgement of implicit bias, one might begin with recognizing their own thoughts. What assumptions are made prior to student appointments? What is the advisor’s internal dialogue about a student before, during, and after an appointment? Are they centering deficits? These thoughts can guide the direction of an appointment, and unintentionally perpetuate deficit-focused thoughts within the advisor and also within the student.
This leads to the next level to disrupt deficit narratives: interpersonal communication or conversation. This may happen in the actual student appointment. Is the conversation focused on what isn’t happening? What could be better? What is lacking? Either advisor or student could be perpetuating a deficit narrative. Instead, there may be opportunity to validate challenge, while drawing out achievement despite that challenge. Deficit language can be disrupted in conversation with colleagues as well. Conversations may often focus on what students “should” be doing, versus what they are doing, achieving, and succeeding at.
And finally, deficit narratives can be disrupted more systematically by looking to office and campus policies. What are the rules and policies that perpetuate deficit narratives? What is the language in these policies? Could the same goal be achieved using an anti-deficit approach?
Part of what comes with an anti-deficit achievement framework is the expansion of our understanding of success and achievement. Grades, persistence, and employability are important metrics to higher education, but students are more than these metrics. Students carry many strengths and wealths. Achievement can be successfully navigating something new, making community contributions, and much more. Yosso’s (2005) concept of community cultural wealth is a strong example of the capital, skills, and knowledge of communities of color that typically go unacknowledged. Examples include aspirational, navigational, social, linguistic, familial, and resistant capital.
Applications for Anti-Deficit Advising
In order to move forward toward an anti-deficit approach, recognition of where deficit focuses exist must come first. This then allows advisors and administrators to turn on their “instead of” switch:
Part of recognizing these is also understanding that implicit bias exists in everyone, and even well-intentioned thoughts, practices, and policies may be grounded in a deficit mindset that is worth acknowledging and disrupting. An opportunity exists in advisors asking themselves:
Through adopting Harper’s anti-deficit approach, advisors and administrators can disrupt their practice at the intrapersonal, interpersonal, and systemic level. Asking questions, reframing narratives, and considering anti-deficit approaches are all tools that can be applied to advising, “instead of” approaches that may perpetuate deficit narratives. Through an anti-deficit approach to advising, advisors can intentionally center student achievement and support student thriving.
References
Amador, L. (2018). Strength within: Addressing structural opportunity gaps for menof color at 4-year universities through a strengths-based approach (Order No. 10825323) [Doctoral dissertation, California State University, Long Beach]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102(1), 4–27. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.102.1.4
Harper, S. R. (2010). An anti-deficit achievement framework for research on students of color in STEM. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2010(148), 63–74. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.362
Schreiner, L. A. (2013). Thriving in college. New Directions for Student Services, 2013(143),41–52. https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.20059
Schreiner, L. A, & Anderson, E. (2005). Strengths-based advising: A new lens for highereducation. NACADA Journal, 25(2), 20–29. https://doi.org/10.12930/0271-9517-25.2.20
Valencia, R. R. (2010). Dismantling contemporary deficit thinking: Educational thought and practice. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203853214
Yosso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/1361332052000341006
