Asset-Based Learning

Lauren Wright, PharmD
Baltimore Washington Medical Center
PGY-1 Pharmacy Resident

In very simple terms, asset-based teaching focuses on the strengths of the learner instead of focusing on the learner’s deficits.1 Asset-based teaching aims to unlock a learner’s full potential by focusing on and maximizing the learner’s talents. In contrast, “deficit-based teaching” focuses on the learner’s inadequacies and develops ways to change a behavior or “fix” a knowledge deficit.1,2 Although these two teaching styles may initially seem like an argument based on semantics, the two teaching styles truly view the same situation in two different focuses.

Before discussing the arguments for and against asset-based teaching, I would like to demonstrate the differences between these teaching styles with a simple example. Imagine attending your very first undergraduate class and your professor tells you that the first activity you will participate in is a competency exam. After completing your exam, you immediately receive the results. You learn that you scored above average in calculus and chemistry but you scored below average in writing and grammar. If your professor practiced asset-based teaching, he/she would acknowledge your results and develop lessons plans that aimed to improve your calculus and chemistry skills.2,3 In contrast, a professor who adopted a deficit-based teaching style would focus on ways to improve your writing and grammar skills.2,3 This very simple example helps demonstrate the fundamental difference between teaching styles.

The most obvious difference between asset-based and deficit-based teaching styles is simply the connotation of the words. One of the arguments against deficit-based teaching is the continual focus on the learner’s deficit and problems. Critics of this teaching style claim that repeatedly identifying and focusing on the learner’s deficits, transforms learning into a negative experience for the student. In complete opposition, asset-based teaching begins by identifying areas of strength and accomplishment the learner already has. Through identifying the learner’s natural or foundational abilities, asset-based teaching is able to maximize the learner’s strengths. In comparison to deficit-based teaching, asset-based teaching celebrates the talents of an individual learner instead of focusing on areas where a learner may struggle to grasp basic concepts.

One of the weaknesses of the asset-based teaching style is the thought that identifying areas that have room for improvement is a negative experience for the learner. By focusing on the strengths of an individual learner, you also have the risk of developing learners who are not well-rounded students. Asset-based learning, in theory, has the ability to develop learners who are exceedingly competent in a few areas, but fail to meet basic competencies in other areas. I find it very easy to imagine how specialized learners who excel at three subjects may be at a disadvantage when compared to learners who meet basic competencies in majority of areas but only excel in one given area. I fail to think of a job where a person who is only competent in a few areas can be extremely successful; most jobs require basic competencies in most areas.

Applying an asset-based teaching style to a pharmacy school curriculum is difficult for me to imagine. As pharmacists, we are expected to understand basic concepts in all fundamental areas of pharmacy in order to be a successful pharmacist. Throughout pharmacy school you must meet basic competencies in subjects such as infectious disease, pharmacokinetics, oncology and so on. The expectation of understanding multiple subjects is also demonstrated by the material tested on the NAPLEX. Throughout the didactic portion of pharmacy school, I believe that deficit-based teaching is the predominate teaching style. However, during the fourth year/experiential year the asset-based teaching style is the primary teaching style. Throughout a pharmacy student’s fourth year, they are able to choose rotation types that appeal to the interests. Additionally, the objectives of most rotations are purposefully vague which allows preceptors to tailor the rotation to the student’s ability/talent.

Therefore, I believe it is important to understand the concepts of asset-based and deficit-based teaching styles in order to develop well-rounded students. If teachers focus solely on one of these learning styles they may produce students who will find it very difficult be successful in the “real-world” where it is often a requirement to possess “basic knowledge” of a subject. Instead, I believe it would be most beneficial for teachers to understand these teaching styles and realize that each student may require a different balance between the teaching styles in order to thrive. For example, a student might be motivated by identifying areas for improvement while their classmate may shutdown when areas they struggle with are identified.


1. Zacarian D, Alvarez-Ortiz L, Haynes J. Chapter 1. The Urgent Need for a Strengths-Based Approach. Teaching to Strengths. 2017
2. The University of Memphis. 2018. “Module 4 – Asset Based Community Engagement” Engaged Scholarship Online Modules. Last modified January 5, 2018. http://www.mephis.edu/edd/module4/index.php
3. Raish V. How asset-based teaching can improve classroom behavior. Class Craft. 2019