Shifting the Data Conversation: From Deficits to Assets

Published: February 19, 2026

Picture this: It's Monday morning, and you're opening the latest batch of computerized assessment results. The screen fills with percentile ranks, color-coded performance bands, and labels like "below basic" and "far below grade level." You feel that familiar knot in your stomach as you scan the names of students you know—students who light up during math talks, who ask meaningful questions, who collaborate thoughtfully with their peers. But according to these numbers, they're failing.

Here's the question we rarely ask: What does this data tell us to DO? More specifically, what does it tell us our students CAN do, and how do we build from there? Let’s explore how shifting to an asset-based lens—one that identifies and celebrates the foundational knowledge and partial understanding students have already developed—changes everything about what happens in our classrooms the very next day.

The Problem with Deficit-Based Assessment

Deficit-based assessments measure what students don't know yet, framing understanding through absence rather than presence. They arrive in language that emphasizes gaps. These assessments rarely illuminate the mathematical thinking students are actually using. They don't capture the student who uses an additive strategy to solve a multiplication problem or the child who draws elaborate visual models for fractions. The problem isn't that we shouldn't know what students struggle with—it's that deficit-based assessments make the gap the story, rather than the thinking.

The instructional cost is high. When data indicates "below grade level," we typically remediate—pulling students back to work on last year's content. But here's the question that should make us pause: When will these students access grade-level mathematics? Students grouped by deficit-based scores experience fundamentally different math classes: less discourse, less problem-solving, less grade-level content. They learn they're “not math people”. That's the real cost—not just lost instructional time, but lost mathematical identity.

The Asset-Based Alternative

Imagine receiving assessment information that told you where students are on a developmental progression instead of where they fall short of a benchmark. Instead of "below basic in fractions," you'd know: "This student understands fractions as parts of a whole and can compare unit fractions visually. They're ready to explore equivalence through visual models."

That's what High Leverage Concept (HLC) progressions offer—a map of how mathematical understanding develops over time. When we understand where students are on a progression, we can see their current thinking as a legitimate step in their mathematical journey, not as a deficit to be remediated. This shift changes everything. Instead of asking "What don't they know?" we ask "What foundational knowledge do they have right now, and what's the next step?" Developmental progressions help us identify and celebrate foundational knowledge and partial understanding. Every point on a progression represents real mathematical thinking worth recognizing and celebrating.

Asset-Based Assessment to Instruction

Consider a second grader, Thea, solving: 47+28

47+28 by counting on from 47: "48, 49, 50... 73, 74, 75."

A deficit lens sees: "Doesn't understand addition strategies."

An asset-based lens sees—and does—this:

1. Recognizes the foundational knowledge. This student understands that addition increases quantity and that you can find the total by continuing the count. They can keep track of how many they've counted. This is real mathematical thinking—foundational knowledge of quantity, counting, and combining—ready to be extended toward more efficient strategies.
   
   
2. Makes that knowledge visible. "I notice you're counting on to find the total. You're keeping track of your count really carefully—that shows strong foundational knowledge of number sense."
   
   
3. Connects to the next step. "You counted on by ones from 47 to get to 75. I wonder if there's another way you could count to help solve this problem?"
   
   
4. Uses partial understanding as a teaching tool. "Thea solved 47+28. Did anyone use Thea's idea of starting at 47, but count or add differently?" Provide experiences, like Number Strings, that extend understanding.
   7+3
   47+3
   47+10
   47+13
   
   
5. Uses models. Connect counting-on work to base-ten blocks or jumps on an articulated number line. Build on what they know, don't start over.

The critical insight: Thea doesn't need worksheets of single-digit addition facts. She needs experiences that help her see why decomposing numbers is more efficient than counting on by ones. We're building on the foundational knowledge she has to develop new understanding.

Mindset Shift

The most profound change is about mindset—training ourselves to automatically ask: "What foundational knowledge does this student have? What can they do?"

Try this: Take a piece of student work you would typically mark as "incorrect." Before marking anything, spend two minutes writing down everything the student DID do mathematically. Did they understand the problem context? Choose a reasonable operation? Show their thinking with a model? Use a strategy that makes mathematical sense, even if it's not efficient? You'll be amazed at how much foundational knowledge you find. And that's your starting point for instruction.

Practical Next Steps

For Teachers: 

1. Change your default question. Instead of "What don't they know?" ask "What foundational knowledge do they have?" Make this your automatic response to student work.
   
   
2. Sort student work by strategy, not correctness. Group papers by the mathematical thinking students used rather than right/wrong answers. This reveals patterns and helps you plan instruction that builds on existing strategies. 
   
   
3. Use developmental progressions. Seek out HLC progressions that help you understand how mathematical thinking develops. Recognize foundational knowledge and partial understanding as legitimate progress.
   
   
4. Plan instruction that builds on foundational knowledge. Before planning any intervention, name the assets students already have. Then ask: "How do I build on this?"
   
   
5. Create a classroom culture of asset-based thinking. Make "What do you notice?" and "What mathematical thinking do you see here?" regular parts of your classroom discourse.

For Leaders:

1. Examine your assessment tools through an asset-based lens. Do they provide information about student thinking and developmental progressions, or only scores and labels?
   
   
2. Model asset-based language. Instead of "below grade level," say "has foundational knowledge of additive strategies and is ready to explore more efficient approaches."
   
   
3. Create structures that support building on foundational knowledge. Use intervention time for small-group instruction that extends students' current thinking. Focus progress monitoring on movement along progressions.
   
   
4. Question systems that ignore foundational knowledge. Ability grouping and pull-out interventions assume students either "have it" or "don't have it." Challenge those assumptions.
   
   

What We Choose Next

When we identify and celebrate foundational knowledge and partial understanding, students hear: "You're a mathematical thinker. You're making sense of important ideas." They see themselves as sense-makers who are always learning. Access to grade-level content is a right, not a reward. When we recognize foundational knowledge, we keep students moving forward instead of cycling them backward through remediation. We give them access to grade-level concepts with appropriate scaffolds. We build on solid ground.

So what will you do differently tomorrow? Will you look at student work and ask "What foundational knowledge does this student have?" before asking "What don't they know?" The data doesn't make our decisions—we do. When we choose to see assets instead of deficits, we change everything. Every student has mathematical assets and foundational knowledge worth building on. Your job isn't to fix what's broken—it's to see the foundational knowledge that's there, celebrate it, and build on it. Tomorrow morning, when you look at that student work or assessment data, what will you see? I hope you'll see assets, foundational knowledge, partial understanding, and possibility.

What Now?

1. Check out this blog article: Maximizing Time in Math Class with Intentional Questions

2. Download the All Learners Network HLC Packet for FREE!

3. Dive into this piece of work: The Complexity of Assessment

All Learners Network is committed to supporting pedagogy so that all students can access quality math instruction. We do this through our online platform, free resources, events, and embedded professional development. Learn more about how we work with schools and districts here.