Language Science provides tools and perspectives for reframing “deficit” thinking around language.

Jeffrey Reaser and colleagues, in their book Dialects At School (Routledge, 2017, p. 3), report that “The deficit position is gradually being replaced by the difference position, which seeks to understand sociocultural difference – including language difference – without the need for evaluating the alternatives. Such approaches might ask how one group uses language and literacy in different ways from another group, without judging one way to be superior.”

This is indeed great news! And educators can help support the transition from a deficit model to a recognition and celebration of linguistic difference by reframing our understanding of a few key concepts.

The “vocabulary gap”: a big focus in early education right now is the word gap – the measurable disparity between young children from different ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds in standardized academic English vocabulary at the time they start school. BUT…are these children from diverse language backgrounds somehow “deficient” in vocabulary in general, or are they using different vocabularies than the limited variety considered to be of use in our schools? Research on language development suggests that if children are not using standardized school English vocabulary, they certainly are using plenty of vocabulary from their home dialects, which may be substantially different from academic English. What would happen if we reframed the idea that “children from nonwhite communities and lower socioeconomic strata start school with a vocabulary deficit” to the more equitable understanding that “children from white and middle-to-upper class backgrounds start school with the advantage of an early knowledge of academic English vocabulary?” How would that influence how our educational institutions engage with students of diverse backgrounds and abilities? We can create equity for students from diverse language backgrounds by recognizing that they are fluent in far more than what we’re measuring in school, and by acknowledging that our monolingual assessment instruments do not capture the knowledge or abilities of students in their home dialects.

“Behind” in reading: I’ve already written some about the hazards of decontextualizing reading from its fundamental function as a medium for engaging with our communities, and about the futility of trying to teach the transcription system for a form of language that a lot of our students aren’t fluent in, without getting them up to speed in how to speak it first. Current research findings bleakly suggest that students who aren’t reading at grade-level by 3rd grade are likely to be at a lifelong disadvantage – they’re much more likely than their grade-level-literate counterparts to drop out of high school, and even to end up in prison. This is certainly alarming! But what would happen if we reframed the idea that “children who are not reading at grade-level by 3rd grade are probably doomed” as “why the heck aren’t we as a society making sure all kids have what they need to read proficiently by 3rd grade?!” If there’s one thing the COVID pandemic has driven home to all of us, it’s that children are wherever they are – academically, socially and developmentally – for solid reasons that are beyond their control. When we stop centering students and their perceived lack of achievement as the problem, we can create equity by dealing with the reality that our education systems (and we as a society!) are woefully behind at meeting all students where they are and supporting them to get to where we want them to be. And our curriculum developers and researchers and teacher education programs are behind in supporting teachers with resources to help us meet all children where they are – I see you, fellow teachers. Respect and sympathy. I’m working on it.

“ESL/English Language Learners”: On the surface, these labels seem innocuous at worst, and probably even helpful – identifying students with the needs for support that come with not being fluent in the language of instruction is a good thing, right? Well, yes. Of course it is. But if we view fluency in academic English simply as something that students are lacking, we can fail to notice with an appropriate amount of awe how amazing it is for emergent multilingual students to be doing the very hard work of acquiring a foreign language through immersion. That takes guts! It takes chutzpah! And it takes a great deal of intellectual rigor, which it’s tempting to overlook when we define students by what they’re not, i.e. “not fluent in the language of instruction” as opposed to recognizing them as “already fluent in one or more languages AND also progressing admirably in the process of acquiring English.” I became acquainted with the phrase “emergent bilingual/multilingual” last year and now I say it regularly and recommend it as a re-frame for “ESL” or “ELL.” We can create equity for emergent multilingual students by recognizing and celebrating all that they have achieved and are achieving as they learn to use academic English, and by not defining them simply by what we think they lack.

“Learning disabilty” or “language/reading deficit”: I have a number of adult friends who have dyslexia, dysgraphia, hearing impairment and/or other situations that required specialized forms of academic support in their k-12 years. These friends have unanimously told me that their childhood school experiences left them convinced that they were stupid, and that they had to unlearn this early programming in order to see themselves as successful. This breaks my heart, because every one of these friends is very intelligent and articulate, and has ideas and talents that make the world a better, richer, more wonderful place. We do a great disservice to our students with diverse abilities and needs by labeling them as “deficient” or euphemistically calling them “special,” as in “special ed.” Creating and sustaining equity for our students with diverse abilities involves recognizing and supporting their strengths – especially around language – by decoupling their academic challenges from their intelligence or their potential and by supporting their needs with evidence-based tools and strategies that empower them to participate. We all have skills to learn in different areas, and some of us pick up those skills more quickly than others. We all struggle with things that are challenging for us. And, thankfully, there are a multitude of supports, from classroom aides to audiobooks to adaptive typing setups to dictation tools and much more, to help students of all abilities participate fully in the life and learning of their classroom communities.

<< Previous: Language Equity, Part 5: Changing Our View of Language