Just for the hell of it, I decided to check the evidence to the MPs' inquiry into science communication. I looked for referenecs to "deficit model". 

It seems that some people think the deficit model is still pervasive while others think it is fading away. 

Here is what I found, in no particular order:

"Twenty five years of research on science communication and public engagement has found many flaws in what we describe as the 'deficit model': the idea that the problems of science communication can be solved simply by providing more and/or better information to public audiences."
Joint written evidence submitted by AsSIST-UK; Science in Public; Public Communication of Science and Technology Network (PCST) (COM0030)

"We would urge the Committee to not frame its inquiry using the 'knowledge deficit' model of the relationship between 'the public' and the research process. This model focuses on research dissemination (or science communication), is inherently one-way and one-sided, and is an outmoded as a way of understanding the relationship between science (aka research), the public and public policy making in democratic societies (see e.g. Nowotny et al, 2001 Rethinking science) and, hence, inadequate to the public engagement with research task."
Written evidence submitted by the University of Oxford (COM0043)

"one of the big facilitators of this change has been the change in universities' attitudes to public engagement with STEM, from the 'deficit model' of the mid to late 80s, through the years where many STEM academics would have carried out STEM enrichment activity in addition to their 'proper' jobs and without any credit for this work (and often the opposite), through to today, where the impact of research on society, which includes the  communication of that research with wider publics, is a key part of the Research Excellence Framework"
Written evidence submitted by Techniquest science centre, Cardiff (COM0075

"The 'deficit model' – that assumes problems of science communication are due primarily to a lack of public knowledge or understanding – has been effectively challenged by social science research as recognised in the House of Lords Science and Society Report, 2000.  Instead, the move has been towards one of public engagement and dialogue, which we welcome." 
Written evidence submitted by the Academy of Social Sciences and its Campaign for Social Science (COM0080)

"A problem which needs addressing is the pervasive 'deficit model' of communication, which frames the public as empty vessels to be filled with knowledge, and assumes that opposition to scientific advances is based on ignorance." 
Written evidence submitted by the British Science Association (COM0085

"Communication is still too often the ‘deficit model’ in different clothing – ie ‘if only the public knew more about x then everything would be OK’." 
Written evidence submitted by Genomics England (COM0088)



MK

**********************************************************************

psci-com how-to:
Once subscribed, send emails for the list to [log in to unmask] If not subscribed, either subscribe here https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=psci-com or send reqests for items to be posted on your behalf to [log in to unmask]

To unsubscribe (or silence messages while away) send an email (any subject) to [log in to unmask] with one of the following messages (ignoring text in brackets)

• signoff psci-com (to leave the list)
• set psci-com nomail (to stop receiving messages while on holiday)
• set psci-com mail (to resume getting messages)

Contact list owner at [log in to unmask]
Small print and JISCMail acceptable use policy https://sites.google.com/site/pscicomjiscmail/the-small-print

**********************************************************************