Scaffolding Instruction Where It Matters: Teachers’ Shift from Deficit Approach to Developmental Model of Learning

This paper revolves on the premise that teachers’ adoption of developmental model is more likely to improve student learning and performance as compared to the utilization of deficit approach. Deficit or clinical approach to learning has the tendency to focus on things that students cannot do, thus followed by teacher prescriptions of a ‘fix-it’ remedy.  There are a number of harmful effects of such approach on student learning particularly in creating the learning environment that appeals only to low-achieving students and one that unintentionally neglects the high-achievers - the results of teachers perceiving this group of students as facing no learning issues, thus requiring ‘no fixing’. In contrast, developmental model focuses on student readiness and builds on the existing knowledge bases of every student. Despite extensive research that looks at the effects of deficit approach on learning, very little discussion is documented on its alternative and model of teaching that could potentially improve the performance of every student.  Studies that look at teachers’ utilization of developmental model are limited, the findings of these studies indicate that the developmental model encourages learning of both high achieving and low achieving students, and significant improvement in student performance across all ability groups. We take the position that developmental model assists teachers to better target their teaching at group and individual levels.  Hence the discussion focuses on issues that surround deficit approach, the ‘how to’ with regards to the use of developmental model, as well as challenges and realistic expectations of its applicability. Keywords: developmental model, deficit approach, targeted instruction, scaffolding, evidence-based teaching,