How Perspective Directs Outcomes: The Structure and Function of Deficit and Anti-deficit Framing and Their Relevance to Chemistry Education

The existence of differential educational outcomes as a function of students’ background is well-established and especially severe in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Differential educational outcomes adversely impact chemistry education and training as well as education and training in other STEM disciplines that employ chemistry. This has motivated intensive efforts to improve chemistry teaching and learning. However, one particularly powerful approach for improving educational outcomes has been largely neglected in postsecondary chemistry education: the ability to recognize and resist the pervasive deficit framed perspectives held by and about chemistry education stakeholders (e.g., students, educators, institutions, etc.). In this integrative systematic literature review, we formulate a comprehensive description of the structure and function of deficit framing and its alternative─anti-deficit framing. In particular: deficit framed perspectives prompt actions and patterns of thought that reduce stakeholder expectations and achievement, while anti-deficit framed perspectives promote higher expectations and improved achievement. However, the pervasive, tacit, and self-reinforcing nature of deficit framing means that anti-deficit perspectives require conscious intentionality and self-reflection to maintain. These findings have implications for chemistry education research and can inform the rational design of solutions for approaching chemistry education and training in ways that maintain rigorous standards and support stakeholders’ achievement.