Deficit discourse
Deficit discourse refers to a narrative framework that characterizes specific groups through the lens of deficiencies and failures, often attributing societal problems solely to the affected groups rather than considering broader socio-economic contexts. This discourse is rooted in historical dynamics between majority and minority groups, where the achievements of minorities are frequently measured against the standards of the majority, leading to a narrative that emphasizes negativity and disempowerment. It has persisted for centuries, evolving from colonial times when European settlers used it to define marginalized populations, such as Native Americans and African Americans. In contemporary society, deficit discourse continues to impact identity formation and can contribute to both externalized and internalized racism, affecting various aspects of life, including health and educational outcomes. The application of deficit discourse in statistical evaluations often overlooks the complex causes of disparities, painting an incomplete picture that can perpetuate stereotypes. Educational institutions, especially Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), actively work to counteract this narrative. By challenging deficit discourse, these institutions aim to promote a more nuanced understanding of the strengths and challenges faced by marginalized communities. Overall, recognizing and addressing deficit discourse is crucial for fostering a more equitable dialogue about diverse groups and their experiences.
Deficit discourse
Deficit discourse is a type of discourse that applies terms of deficiencies and failures to the thoughts, languages, and practices that represent a specific group of people. This type of discourse is known for its victim-blaming pattern in which the problems affecting a group are considered the responsibility of that group rather than a product of larger socioeconomic structures that may disadvantage the group. This discourse stems from the relationship between majority and minority groups, and often arises from a majority group’s need to measure the success and achievements of a minority group against its own ideas of success and achievement. It often involves framing minority identity in a narrative of negativity, disempowerment, and deficiency. Deficit discourse dates back many centuries. While it was most often found in the writings of nineteenth-century colonizers, such discourse patterns have persisted for many years after the end of widespread colonialism. Modern deficit discourse is rooted in the dated opinions of various groups, and oftentimes is committed unknowingly by people who are unaware of the social constructs from which they draw their conclusions. Deficit discourse overlooks the complex reasons for a group’s struggles and fails to address a solution to these problems.
Overview
Research shows that the discourse surrounding a given topic has a huge influence on the way people understand said topic, and impacts how people behave in regard to it. In this way, discourse can be a major source of power inequalities. Research also shows that deficit discourse can influence identity formation among a group at which the discourse is directed, impacting social aspects of the group, such as health, well-being, and educational outcomes. In this way, deficit discourse not only contributes to externalized racism but also internalized racism.
Deficit discourse has been applied to many minority groups throughout history. In the United States, deficit discourse was used by European settlers during colonial times and continues to be used to give inferior characteristics to minority groups such as Native Americans and African Americans. The Aboriginal peoples of Australia were also subjected to deficit discourse when viewed from the lens of a European perspective. Deficit discourse was featured in writings of all types, from historical records to scientific literature to newspaper articles. As a result, deficit discourse shaped the way many people viewed minority groups for centuries, and in some cases, the discourse impacted the way those groups viewed themselves.
Deficit discourse remains an issue in contemporary times. One modern example of how deficit discourse is reproduced is deficit statistics, such as reports detailing the various levels of education different groups attain over a period of time. Such statistical indicators may show the status of a minority group falling short of national norms, but such statistics fail to account for the reasons for such shortcomings. They may evaluate disadvantaged populations against a measure of “normality” that does not apply to them or does not properly measure the student’s knowledge of the construct in question. This can be detrimental for students whose teachers fail to recognize their academic potential and strengths. If a teacher attributes the student’s underachievement to their race, native language, or socioeconomic status, their expectations for that student will be lower. This creates an environment that limits educational opportunities and the student’s drive to succeed.
To counter deficit discourse in education, one may use an asset-based approach, which emphasizes the importance of highlighting students’ strengths and community resources to support learning. Culturally responsive teaching techniques, which incorporate the student’s cultural background into the curriculum, are also helpful in limiting deficit discourse. A culturally relevant curriculum for young learners aids in the learning process and allows for better information retention.
Bibliography
Alford, Jennifer. “Undoing Discourses of Deficit with EAL Learners: The Centrality of Social Relations in Teachers’ Curriculum Work.” The Curriculum Journal, vol. 35, no. 1, 2024, pp. 73–90, doi.org/10.1002/curj.244. Accessed 26 Dec. 2024.
Allam, Lorena. “For Indigenous Australians, the Concept of a ‘Fair Go’ Is Meaningless.” Guardian, 26 Apr. 2019, www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/apr/27/for-indigenous-australians-the-concept-of-a-fair-go-is-meaningless. Accessed 26 Dec. 2024.
Chittleborough, Emma, et al. “Challenging Deficit Discourse in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Nutrition and Dietetics Research: A Critical Discourse Analysis.” Qualitative Research in Health, vol. 4, 2023, p. 100323, doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmqr.2023.100323. Accessed 26 Dec. 2024.
“Deficit Discourse and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Policy.” The Lowitja Institute, May 2018, www.lowitja.org.au/content/Document/PDF/deficit-discourse-summary-report.pdf. Accessed 26 Dec. 2024.
“Deficit Discourse in Indigenous Education.” Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, 21 Mar. 2017, aiatsis.gov.au/publication/116755. Accessed 26 Dec. 2024.
Fforde, Cressida, et al. “Discourse, Deficit and Identity: Aboriginality, the Race Paradigm and the Language of Representation in Contemporary Australia.” Media International Australia, vol. 149, no. 1, Nov. 2013, pp. 162–73.
Gorringe, Scott. “Aboriginal Culture Is Not a Problem. The Way We Talk about It Is.” Guardian, 14 May 2015, www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/15/aboriginal-culture-is-not-a-problem-the-way-we-talk-about-it-is. Accessed 26 Dec. 2024.
Vass, Greg. “‘So, What Is Wrong with Indigenous Education?’ Perspective, Position and Power beyond a Deficit Discourse.” Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, vol. 41, no. 2, Dec. 2012, pp. 85–96, doi.org/10.1017/jie.2012.25. Accessed 26 Dec. 2024.