Episode Description
In this episode, we explore one of the most important mindset shifts in bilingual education: moving from deficit thinking to asset-based thinking.
What do we actually mean when we call a child an “EAL learner”? Are we seeing what they lack – or what they bring?
Key Concepts
Deficit Thinking
- Viewing bilingual learners through a lens of what they appear not to have
• Named and examined by Richard Valencia (1997)
• Extended by Paul Gorski to include unconscious educator assumptions
• Places blame for underachievement within the child or family rather than examining systems
Asset-Based Thinking
- Seeing bilingual learners through a lens of what they bring
• Building on existing knowledge, language, and cultural resources
• Maintaining high expectations
• Designing assessment and pedagogy to reveal understanding, not just English proficiency
Common Underlying Proficiency (Cummins)
Cummins’ “dual iceberg” model shows that languages share underlying cognitive and academic resources.
- Proficiency in L1 supports L2 development.
- A child who reads fluently in Arabic and is acquiring English has more linguistic resources than a monolingual peer, not fewer.
- Assessment in L2 often measures language proficiency rather than conceptual understanding – systematically undercounting what bilingual learners know.
Funds of Knowledge (Moll et al.)
Research by Luis Moll, Cathy Amanti, Deborah Neff, and Norma González (1992) showed that families from minoritised communities hold rich bodies of cultural, linguistic, and practical knowledge.
- Schools rarely tap into this knowledge.
- Teachers who visited students’ homes and learned about their families’ knowledge were able to bring that into the classroom.
- The problem is not with families – it is with systems that do not know how to see what families offer.
Translanguaging (García & Wei)
Multilingual speakers draw on their whole linguistic repertoire – not switching between two separate systems, but using all their resources fluidly and purposefully.
- Allowing children to think, discuss, and draft in L1 before producing work in English is sound pedagogy, not a shortcut.
- Children naturally translanguage – classroom practice can build on this capacity.
- Challenges rigid “English-only” approaches.
Practical Implications for Teachers
Notice when your thinking slides into deficit mode – and ask whether it is grounded in evidence or in anxiety
Treat children’s L1 as a resource, not an obstacle
Design assessments that reveal understanding, not just English proficiency
Ask “What would make it possible for families to engage?” rather than “Why aren’t they engaging?”
Allow flexible language use for thinking and learning
Consult your EAL coordinator and, where possible, ask the child
Maintain high expectations – one of the most powerful things we can offer any learner
Coming Next
Episode 6: Bringing it all together – the final episode of the series.
References & Resources
Cummins, J. (2000). Language, Power and Pedagogy: Bilingual Children in the Crossfire. Multilingual Matters.
García, O., & Wei, L. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education. Palgrave Macmillan.
García, O., Johnson, S. I., & Seltzer, K. (2022). The Translanguaging Classroom (2nd ed.). Caslon.
Gorski, P. (2018). Reaching and Teaching Students in Poverty: Strategies for Erasing the Opportunity Gap (2nd ed.). Teachers College Press.
Moll, L., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & González, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory Into Practice, 31(2), 132–141.
Valencia, R. (Ed.). (1997). The Evolution of Deficit Thinking: Educational Thought and Practice. Falmer Press.
Connect with the Series
Have questions or topic suggestions? Get in touch! I’d love to hear from you.