From "What's Wrong?" to "What's Strong?"

Shannon Renkly and Katherine Bertolini argue that school leaders must intentionally shift from deficit oriented thinking to asset based models by recognizing and building on the strengths of students, families, and communities in order to create more equitable and transformative schools.

In Shifting the Paradigm from Deficit Oriented Schools to Asset Based Models: Why Leaders Need to Promote an Asset Orientation in Our Schools, Renkly and Bertolini push readers to really rethink how schools talk about and respond to students. Instead of focusing on what students supposedly lack academically, socially, culturally, or economically, they encourage leaders to start with what students already bring to the table. The article makes it clear that this is not just about changing a few words in staff meetings. It is about changing mindsets, systems, and everyday leadership practices.

At the beginning of the text, the authors describe deficit thinking as a framework that treats students and families as “problems to be fixed.” That line really stood out to me because it feels uncomfortably accurate. Schools often use labels like “at risk,” “low performing,” or “behind,” and those labels quietly shape expectations. When that happens, the conversation becomes about remediation instead of possibility. It made me think about how common practices like tracking or grouping students by perceived ability might unintentionally (or intentionally) reinforce these deficit narratives.

In the middle of the article, the authors explain that an asset based approach requires leaders to intentionally identify and leverage the cultural wealth and strengths within their school communities. I liked that they emphasized the word intentionally because this kind of shift does not happen automatically. It takes effort and reflection. An asset orientation does not ignore challenges, but it starts from a different place. It starts by asking what students know, what they value, and what experiences they bring. That idea connects to the concept of funds of knowledge, where families and communities are seen as sources of expertise instead of obstacles.

By the end of the text, the focus turns strongly to leadership. The authors argue that leaders have to model asset based language and decision making if they want the culture of the school to change. If principals and district leaders still talk about students through a deficit lens during data meetings or policy discussions, then the broader culture will stay the same. 

Coloring Inside the Corporate Lines

Sal Khan argues that the traditional school system is broken because it values efficiency, standardization, and testing over real understanding, creativity, and individual student growth.

In Part 2, The Broken Model, of The One World Schoolhouse, Sal Khan explains how the modern education system was designed to handle large numbers of students, not to support how people actually learn. In addition, the Prussian model that school in the US is based off of was created to create a political and employee hive mind, resulting in waves of young people ready to enter the workforce without questioning "the powers that be." At the beginning of this section, Khan describes how schools ended up operating like factories, moving students along at the same pace regardless of whether they are ready. One comment that stood out to me early on was his comparison of students to products on an assembly line, because it made the system feel impersonal and more focused on output than learning.

In the middle of the reading, Khan shifts his focus to grades, testing, and tracking. He explains how students are often grouped or labeled based on early performance, which can limit their opportunities later on. This part made me wonder whether these labels reflect ability or just timing. If a student struggles early, the system tends to treat that struggle as permanent, even though they might thrive with more time or a different approach. This section of the text made me think about the oft debated different learning styles and their effectiveness when it comes to teaching. Sometimes when information is taught one way, it is difficult to grasp for certain students, and a different approach is needed to help the information be understood. 

Toward the end of the assigned reading, Khan discusses the “Tracking Creativity” subsection and how the system often measures only what is easy to test. He points out that creativity, curiosity, and problem-solving are pushed aside because they are harder to quantify. This stood out to me because it explains why many students who think differently or creatively feel out of place in school. Ending the section this way reinforces Khan’s idea that the broken model does not just fail academically, but also discourages creativity and independent thinking.

Are HUE Kidding Me?!: Why the Solution of Colorblindness Falls Short

Claiming to be “colorblind” has always struck me as a way some people avoid facing the realities of race. As a young Black woman, I’ve had countless interactions with people who say they don’t see color, as if that somehow makes the world fairer. In those moments, it often feels like my experiences, my challenges, and the biases I navigate every day are being dismissed. Mellody Hobson speaks directly to this in her TED Talk “Colorblind or Colorbrave?” She argues that pretending not to see race does not make inequality go away. It allows it to persist. Her call to be colorbrave is about courage, having honest, sometimes uncomfortable conversations about race, whether in schools, workplaces, or everyday life. It made me reflect on how often colorblindness is used to avoid guilt or responsibility and how damaging that can be.

Armstrong and Wildman, in “Colorblindness is the New Racism,” reinforce this point. They argue that claiming to be colorblind is not neutral or harmless. When organizations ignore race, they often maintain structures that favor dominant groups, even unintentionally. I have seen this in workplaces I have been part of, where discussions about race were avoided in the name of fairness, yet policies and practices continued to benefit others disproportionately. Colorblindness, they explain, prevents honest recognition of systemic racism and blocks meaningful action toward equity. Reading their work made me realize that pretending race does not exist often creates more harm than good.

True equity requires acknowledging racial differences, not pretending they do not exist. For me, being colorbrave means speaking up when my experiences are minimized, questioning assumptions, and pushing others to confront their own biases. It means creating spaces where people of all backgrounds can be seen and heard. Moving beyond colorblindness is not easy, but it is necessary. By facing these realities head-on, we can work toward a society that is genuinely just, inclusive, and equitable.

America... You in Danger, Gurl!

This author, Alan G. Johnson, argues that inequality is created and maintained by interconnected systems of privilege and power rather than individual intentions, and that real change starts with recognizing and challenging those systems.

In the first three chapters of Privilege, Power, and Difference, Johnson makes it clear that inequality is not just about individual people being prejudiced or unfair. Instead, he focuses on how larger systems shape our behavior and experiences, whether we realize it or not. What I liked about his approach is that he does not frame the issue as blaming individuals, but as understanding how society works. As I read, a few moments from the beginning, middle, and end of the text really stood out to me and helped me better understand his overall point.

At the beginning of the book, Johnson talks about how issues like racism and sexism are often treated as personal problems instead of systemic ones. One idea that stuck with me was his claim that you can be a good, well-meaning person and still benefit from an unfair system. That helped explain why conversations about privilege can feel so uncomfortable. People tend to hear criticism of the system as criticism of themselves. 

In the middle of the reading, Johnson’s discussion of privilege being invisible really stood out. He explains that privilege feels normal to the people who have it, which is why it often goes unnoticed. That made a lot of sense to me, because it is hard to question something that feels like “just the way things are.” I also kept thinking about responsibility. If privilege is something people are born into, what are they actually expected to do about it? Johnson seems to argue that simply being aware is not enough, but awareness is still an important place to start.

Toward the end of the reading, Johnson connects privilege to bigger systems like capitalism and social class, and talks about how different forms of inequality overlap. His idea of a matrix of domination helped me understand that people do not fall neatly into categories of either privileged or oppressed. Someone can experience both at the same time depending on their situation. Overall, this reading made me disheartened, because it made me focus on what an undertaking getting people to recognize their privilege and act to neutralize it is. I know we can't quit trying to do what is right, but reading this reminded me of how tiring it is to keep "fighting the good fight."