Presuming Incompetence from Preschool to the Professoriate - How Leadership Preparation Programs Perpetuate or Prevent Deficit Thinking

Oct 15, 2026

This article examines how deficit thinking operates through a presumption of incompetence aimed at people of color from preschool through university and into the professoriate. It critiques common education discussions framed around “closing the achievement gap” by focusing on outcomes while ignoring sociohistorical processes and systemic inequities. Through teaching and seminar examples, it shows how leadership preparation programs may normalize labeling and fixed mindsets, shaping leaders’ perceptions to perpetuate or prevent deficit thinking.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages6

Reading Time15 min

AccessFree to download

Deficit thinking across educational stages

Presumptions of incompetence and fixed mindsets

Limits of outcome-focused “achievement gap” discussions

Underlying assumptions about students

Leadership preparation and deficit frameworks

Teacher seminar illustration

Marginalization and racism in schools

Experiences of faculty of color

Commitment to serving students and challenging inequity

Presuming Incompetence from Preschool to the Professoriate: How Leadership Preparation Programs Perpetuate or Prevent Deficit Thinking Rebeca Burciaga San Jose State University This article discusses how deficit thinking is manifested through a presumption of incompetence for people of color from preschool to university levels. Examples are presented as a way to demonstrate that leadership programs can support future leaders in curtailing deficit thinking in our schools and communities. I spend the bulk of my time as an Assistant Professor in the field of Educational Leadership challenging deficit thinking about people of color. Deficit thinking is the belief that people of color carry inadequacies (e.g. lack of motivation) that are often attributed to poverty and/or inadequate socialization from home (Valencia, 2010) . To this end, my research and teaching focuses on interrogating everyday forms of power and privilege that have become rigid standards by which people of color are judged in society and in schools – from preschool to the professoriate (Burciaga, 2007; Burciaga & Erbstein, 2013) . Deficit thinking is a cycle. How we – those in leadership preparation programs -‐ think about young students, for example, shapes our ability to see them as having potential for developing competencies as adults. I firmly believe we underestimate the important role we play in shaping mindsets that either perpetuate or prevent deficit thinking. “Closing the achievement gap” – namely, the unequal outcomes of educational attainment most often compared between White students and Latina/o and Black students – has become a common phrase in schools. Administrators and teachers are feeling increasing pressure to address this crisis. Their concerns are reflected in the most common questions from some of my students -‐ teachers who are earning their administrative credential: “How do we improve graduation rates?” “How do we transition English Language Learners to general education programs?” “How do we close the achievement gap?” To be clear, these questions are important. These inquiries raise issues about unequal outcomes. What concerns me is that many of our everyday discussions around educational inequities are about outcomes. We rarely discuss the cumulative sociohistorical processes that have contributed to unequal schooling conditions (López & Burciaga, 2014) . Moreover, what lurks beneath these questions are underlying assumptions that our educational systems are just fine – it is the students who are deficient. This logic blames the students who are not graduating, being mainstreamed, or achieving at the same rate as Educational Leadership and Administration: Teaching and Program Development Volume 26, March 2015 ISSN 1064-‐4474 © 2015 California Association of Professors of Educational Administration their White peers. Through this lens, a deficit narrative comes into focus – the achievement gap is not about White students – it is Black and Latina/o students who are not “keeping up.” These well intended but deficit-‐laden perspectives -‐ circulated among educators, policy makers, and researchers -‐ blame the students and/or their familial, cultural, and communal practices rather than analyzing how systemic inequities (Burciaga, Perez Huber,& Solorzano, 2010) and fixed mindsets (Arriaza, 2009; Dweck, 2006; Steele, 2011) are atthe core of these outcomes. Despite research demonstrating the importance of equity and social justice frameworks to address unequal schooling conditions, many programs preparing future leaders of Pk-‐12 schools center around generic leadership and managerial issues with little attention to addressing deficit frameworks that inform leadership actions and decision making strategies (Mendoza-‐Reis & Smith, 2013) . Here is an illustration how deficit thinking operates: I recently co-‐facilitated a seminar with a group of teachers from various schools throughout Northern California a

FAQs

What does the article mean by “presuming incompetence” for people of color?

It refers to a belief that people of color carry inadequacies, such as lack of motivation, and that these perceived deficits are often attributed to poverty or inadequate socialization.

Why does the article critique common approaches to “closing the achievement gap”?

It argues that many discussions focus on outcomes and assume the education system is fine, effectively blaming students rather than examining sociohistorical processes and systemic inequities.

How can leadership preparation programs perpetuate deficit thinking?

The article explains that leadership training can center generic managerial issues and provide little attention to the deficit frameworks that shape leadership decisions and mindsets.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by pixelkiddo