The Collaboration Paradigm in Mentality Deficit

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Defining “Deficit Mentality”
Professional and Ethical Standards
Partnership with Families
Conclusion
References

Introduction

The approaches towards education and perception of the education process evolved and changed over time as different ideas, concepts, and theories emerged. However, one aspect that continues to affect this domain is the personal mindset or mental paradigm of an educator, which has a direct impact on his or her decisions. This element is especially evident in contemporary society where children come from diverse families and collaboration with parents is vital. Deficit mentality can severely impair an educators ability for objective evaluation and should be mitigated by applying the collaboration paradigm to foster communication and cooperation with diverse families in early childhood education.

Defining “Deficit Mentality”

Unarguably, the environment within a classroom is influenced by a specific mindset that a teacher has, which defines the general practices and approaches to building a cooperation with families of the schoolchildren. This issue can be reflected in a teacher’s willingness or lack of desire to invite parents to observe the classroom and share ideas that help understand a child’s cultural and social background better. Amatea (2013) refers to this concept as a mental model and argues that each individual, including educators and family members, base their decisions on a specific mental map.

Due to the fact that people are raised in different conditions that incorporate specific cultural or person-specific influences, it is common for teachers and parents to have different views of a child’s education process. Hence, when developing a strategy for working with students or introducing a new practice, it is necessary to consider the implications of these mental models because it will help explain the underlying ideas and ensure that the chosen approach is appropriate within a particular context.

Considering this, it is not surprising that some educators or parents only approve of conventional educational strategies and overlook the benefits of new approaches. Deficit mentality can be defined as a failure to recognise specific factors or see beyond a particular mental paradigm (Lombardi, 2016). Thus, it is possible that a teacher subjected to deficit mentality will be unable to communicate with families in modern society because of the differences in the cultural backgrounds, race, gender, or specific beliefs.

Communication within the Deficit Mentality

Considering that collaboration with family members is key to building a successful education process, it is necessary to define and explain the implications of deficit mentality as it may seriously obstruct the educator’s ability to implement novel approaches to teaching. Issues and cases where deficit mentality can be severe because failure to recognise other views, opinions and ideas can impair a teachers ability to work with diverse families, which is a necessity for contemporary early childhood education. One major issue of this approach is connected to the specifics of the mental paradigms, which implies that an individual believes that his or her view of the situation is correct (Amatea, 2013). This approach results in an individual seeing the support for the chosen approach and failing to account for ideas and suggestions offered by others.

Within the context of deficit mentality, the separation and remediation paradigms should be explained as these are the basic concepts explaining the family-school partnerships. According to Amatea (2013), an educator that uses a remediation paradigm focused on fixing a particular education issue or a social problem that a student may have.

Within this context, the inclusion of children in the process of designing an approach that would help reduce the identified problem is not considered, especially in early childhood and families are involved only when necessary. The separation paradigm implies that families and home environment should be used to prepare a child for school; however, the two are considered as separate aspect’s of a child’s life (Amatea, 2013). From this perspective, parents fully trust and reliability on a teacher’s expertise to guide and teach their children and no input from them is required.

The forms of communication that take place within the deficit mentality and remediation and separation paradigms are insufficient for fostering an adequate learning environment for early childhood education. For instance, within the remediation paradigm, the educators contact parents only to resolve a problem and suggest a particular resolution (Amatea, 2013). Within the context of the separation paradigm, communication and collaboration between the school and parents in unnecessary because the two entities are separate from each other. While these paradigms are used by some educators, it is necessary to recognise the value and impact of continuously including families in the education process, which is impossible in the context of these two approaches.

Alternative suggestions, which will be discussed more in-depth in the final part of this essay, include objectively evaluating personal mental paradigm and working towards applying ethical and professional principles when collaborating with families. A teacher should be aware of both his or her mental paradigm and that of others, including educators in the same school and parents to be able to interact with these people for the benefit of students.

Professional and Ethical Standards

The approach that educators can use to overcome the deficit mentality incorporates the application of ethical and professional standards. For instance, from an ethical perspective, mutual respect is imperative for ensuring that schools and parents can agree on a particular issue. Next, no assumptions that do not derive from factual information should be made about student’s families, since this approach is subjected to the bias of mental paradigms. Inclusivity and treating all families equality are other approaches to ensuring adequate cooperation with parents.

The professional code of ethics outlines the main principles of work that educators should follow; however, evidence suggests that most teachers interpret professionalism differently. Ward (2018) argues that early childhood practitioners define the notion of professionalism differently when considering the process of interacting with parents. This data was obtained by interviewing a number of early childhood teachers and parents and implies a need to dedicate additional attention towards promoting a unified approach to building a school-family relationship. Hostettler Schärer (2018) states that within the group of the examined teachers, the majority was concerned with their image as a professional.

More importantly, the perception of the professionalism as a concept affected the structural elements of the education process, which implies that more attention should be dedicated to emphasising a particular standard that incorporates collaboration and engagement of families.

Principle 1.6 and 1.7 declared by the Victorian Institute of Teaching (n.d.) implies that educators have to maintain a professional relationship with students’ parents and work in collaboration with families and communities. These principles involve recognising that students come from diverse backgrounds and environments as well as continuously communicating with parents to provide them with up to date information about their children and the educational process.

The Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (2014) provides similar suggestions with an emphasis on working with communities to promote successful early childhood education. This element is part of the professional practise lens focus, and unarguably requires a teacher to be able to respect and understand the perspectives of different people.

Within the context described above, proper communication with families becomes essential for adequate schoolchildren education, especially in early childhood where insights from parents can help build a better environment for studying. This communication should be done in an ethical and professional manner, and hence, the use of a collaborative paradigm is necessary. According to Amatea (2013), the collaborative paradigm is a result of the ecological system theory that implies that in early years education a child is influenced, either directly or indirectly, by the different levels of environments he or she is in. This includes both the classroom and home and using this perspective; one can argue that working in collaboration with families is necessary to ensure that different levels complement each other and aid the learning process.

Partnership with Families

One issue described in the reading materials that can provide a better insight into the topic of deficit mentality and family collaboration is a lack of recognition of the same ex marries that can subject children to a variety of issues. Amatea (2013) argues that one should not confuse family-school collaboration with involvement of family members into the process of education. The definition of a traditional family incorporates two individuals who are heterosexual, and it implies that other types of marriages seen in contemporary society do not correspond with this notion.

The impact of deficit mentality and paradigms of remediation and separation on diverse families is complex and affects the communication process between educators and families. Ethical partnerships that promote the collaborative paradigm described above can be reviewed using examples of R.J.E or same-sex marriages. The R.J.E. approach implies a shift from authoritative and restrictive practises within the school system towards democratic and permissive.

Varnham, Evers, Booth and Avgoustinos (2015) explain this approach by stating that most educators fail to engage students in the process of education, which is consistent with the remediation paradigm. As a result, most individuals feel disengaged from their education. While in the context of early childhood education the democratic practices advised by the authors may be challenging to carry out, it is possible to ensure that parents participate and provide their input into the process.

In essence, an ethical partnership incorporates the application of professional standards and moral principles. Additionally, viewing same-sex marriage through one lens can bias the teacher’s perception of this family. The example of same-sex families can be used to illustrate further the problems connected to the impairment of communication because of deficit mentality. A teacher using remediation or separation paradigm would exclude the parents from the process of education, failing to account for the need to incorporate the specific’s of a child’s background into the process of education. Parke (2013) argues that diverse contemporary families should be recognised by educators since according to the author’s survey, approximately 80% of respondents in Canada believe that a family constitutes of two heterosexual individuals.

Considering this information and the mental paradigms described above, an educator that works with same-sex families can encounter difficulties in communication, which can be combatted by adhering to professional and ethical standards of teaching. Hence, the deficit mentality impacts the positive relationship with diverse families by limiting the educators’ ability to recognise the different cultural and social backgrounds of a child.

Suggested Approaches

The literature that focuses on collaboration practices within the educational environment for quickly childhood age provides the following suggestion that helps promote communication and overcome the deficit mentality – using ethical principles when working with families, family-centred practice and strength-based approach. Gregg, Rug and Souto-Manning (2011) state that the family-centred practices that incorporate a strength-based approach can aid in resolving various issues. The idea behind this approach is that parents should have more control over the education process through constant involvement and an opportunity to express their child’s background.

Murray, Mcfarland-Piazza and Harrisson (2015) examined the implications of parent-education communication within the context of preschool education and found that families that were more engaged in helping their children study at home were more likely to collaborate with educators actively. However, as the child went from preschool education to school, the involvement decreased despite the variety of strategies reported by educators to promote engagement.

Using the example of same-sex marriages, which illustrated the issues with the deficit mentality, one can argue that children from these families can encounter difficulties in a society that focuses on the concept of a nuclear family. Crouch, McNair, and Waters (2017) argue that based on their observation, children raised in same-sex marriages develop well but are subject to stigma, which can affect their mental health and educational progress. This issue was previously discussed in this paper, and the recommendations provided by the authors imply the need to collaborate and focus on the needs of these children to ensure that they do not feel different in the school setting.

Conclusion

Overall, within the context of early childhood, a collaboration between educators and families is vital. However, proper communication between the two entities can be obstructed due to the mental paradigms of both parties, and a teacher should consider the implications of the deficit mentality when approaching the problem. The collaboration paradigm allows overcoming the issue by introducing strategies for cooperation when planning and designing educational activities.

References

Amatea, E. S. (2013). Building culturally responsive family-school relationships (2nd ed.). Melbourne, Australia: Pearson.

Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. (2014). Australian professional standard for principals. Web.

Crouch, S. R., McNair, R., & Waters, E. (2017). Parent perspectives on child health and well-being in same-sex families: Heteronormative conflict and resilience building. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 26, 22002-2214. Web.

Gregg, K., Rugg, M., & Souto-Manning, M. (2011). Fostering family-centred practices through a family-centred portfolio. The School Community Journal, 21(1), 53-70.

Hostettler Schärer, J. (2018). How educators define their role: Building ‘professional’ relationships with children and parents during transition to childcare: A case study. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 26(2), 246-257. Web.

Victorian Institute of Teaching. (n.d.). The Victorian teaching profession code of conduct. Web.

Lombardi, J. D. (2016). The deficit model is harming your students. Web.

Murray, A., Mcfarland-Piazza, L., & Harrisson, L. (2015). Changing patterns of parent-teacher communication and parent involvement from preschool to school. Early Childhood Development and Care, 185(7), 1031-1052. Web.

Parke, R. (2013). Future families diverse forms, rich possibilities. Chichester, United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons.

Varnham, S.; Evers, M., Booth, T., & Avgoustinos, C. (2015). Valuing voices: Restorative practices and student participation in decision making in seven Australian schools. Connect, 214/215, 3-15.

Ward, U. (2018). How do early childhood practitioners define professionalism in their interactions with parents? European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 26(2), 274-284. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!