June 3, 2026
Contributing Author: Washington B. Collado, Ph.D.
As educators, we all want our students to be socio-emotionally and academically successful. This provocative article by Dr. Teresa D. Hill asks whether educators make false assumptions about students’ academic abilities. These faulty assumptions prompt educators to pursue lower levels of academic interaction with students. The conclusions may stem from well-intentioned efforts to meet students where they are perceived to be academically and to “save” them from “stress” and frustration by teaching them above their capabilities. When educators approach the task of tending to students’ needs with this frame of mind, they lower expectations based on assumptions and faulty conclusions. All students can learn.
The article posits that educators form this perspective on ability based on a range of indicators: previous academic achievement, socioeconomic status, native languages, the student’s personality, among other criteria. Educators may even draw conclusions about cognitive abilities based on unrelated characteristics, such as being an introvert, and begin to develop vocabulary to describe their conclusions and to create a narrative about the students. Educators pass these narratives or descriptions on to other educators: low-level, shy, struggling, etc.
These conclusions lead to actions and teaching practices that fulfill this prophecy by reflecting our perceptions of students, thereby avoiding students’ frustration and, in the process, reinforcing our assumptions about their low abilities. Dr. Reeves masterfully captures this practice as follows: “These low expectations often occur in high-poverty schools, where teachers (and leaders) who are understandably sympathetic to the difficult home environment of their students offer a steady stream of affirmation for the most inadequate student performance and necessary affirmation of the students as a person with inappropriate and destructive affirmation of inadequate student work.” (Reeves, 2023). This is known in Spanish as the “Pobrecito” approach. In English, it would be “God love him,” meaning to define someone who is in a situation far above their capabilities or cognitive ability.
The points made by these researchers lead us to be more deliberate in how we reach these assumptions, which, in turn, inform our practices as educators. According to Dr. Hill, these low perceptions of students’ abilities inform educators to do the following:
- Plan lessons and instructional practices that are less effective.
- Expose students to fewer high-quality learning tasks.
- Expect and accept lower quality work.
- Focus the curriculum on below-grade-level skills.
Conversely, when educators conclude that students are bright or high functioning, sometimes based on faulty conclusions, the following tends to occur with these students:
- Set high expectations and provide formative feedback to achieve at a high level.
- Design lessons to maximize critical thinking.
- Provides a supportive structure based on differentiation.
- Provides open-ended activities accompanied by a set of rubrics that lead to high-order thinking.
These tendencies are neutralized by high quality and greater depth of knowledge when educators (departments and grade levels) plan strategically and develop lessons with the mindset that all students have the capability to achieve at a high level of rigor.
- Implementation of higher levels of thinking and coaching the students with formative practices to improve students’ proficiency through feedback and coaching.
- Implementation of rubrics with a clearly defined path toward proficiency.
- Setting up the classroom to be a supportive atmosphere with support and differentiation.
Link: https://ascd.org/el/articles/lets-teach-to-potential-not-perception
References
Hill, Teresa D. (2025). Let’s Teach to Potential, Not Perception. ASCD. May 1, 2025. Vol. 82. No. 8
Reeves, Douglas (2023). Fearless grading: How to improve achievement, discipline, and culture through accurate and fair grading. p. 22. Archway Publishing.