INTEGRITY IN EDUCATION: BUILDING A RESTORATIVE CULTURE AND CLIMATE

A VISION FOR A RESTORATIVE SCHOOL CULTURE

“Schools have become an important place for restorative practices” (Zehr, 2002).  Are you interested in creating a culture of community and connection on your K-12 campus?  What tools can be used to express the mission and core values of your school daily? How can you engage students in addressing decisions they make as opportunities to learn?  What is Restorative Justice (RJ) and how can you bring the principles and tools of RJ to your school? This manual was developed to help you answer these questions and give you a framework to build a restorative climate in your K-12 school.  The goal of this manual is to provide you with the rationale and a framework for restorative growth, while giving the flexibility of innovation in implementation according to the personality of your learning community.  As a reminder, restorative justice is not a program to implement but rather a paradigm shift in thinking; a “sensitizing theory” (Zehr, 1990 p.227).  It is a new lens through which to build a restorative culture in a twenty-first century learning community. 

The creation of this manual is based on my belief in the power of restorative justice.  I have experienced it first hand as a teacher implementing restorative practices in my school and classroom, as a character program coordinator (prevention), as a participant and facilitator of restorative discipline, as a coach of peer mediation, as a facilitator in a community based juvenile victim-offender reconciliation program (intervention), and as a facilitator in a faith-based setting (prevention and intervention).  This manual extends to my observations and insights over the past twenty-five years in education (most recently in the charter movement).  It attempts to begin to answer what makes for good schools that produce citizens of integrity in a civil and peaceful society (ICG 2013). 

A MODEL: DISCIPLINE THAT RESTORES

 I first learned about RJ principles in the summer of 2011 at Fresno Pacific University.  I attended an institute for teachers called School Conflict Resolution / Discipline That Restores / Peer Mediation Training. After the institute, I decided, as I had been searching for a graduate emphasis that fit my passion in education for social-emotional learning, to get my masters degree in Peace and Conflict Studies. 

Our school, connected with Dr. Ron Claassen and his wife, Roxanne, the developers of Discipline That Restores (2008), for continued training and implementation.   As the Character Program Coordinator (Certificate/USD, 2013) of my school, responsible for social-emotional learning, we began to see transformative change, as students were empowered through the process.  Respect Agreements in the classroom provided a consensus for mutual respect throughout the year.  Teachers and students together wrote and agreed to these points of agreement.  The ability to listen and be heard increased the respect between parties and provides some amazing success stories.  Our school goal was to decrease the number of student that needed administrative interventions and to decrease suspensions and expulsions (APA 2008).  The goal was also to give students the skill set needed to begin to resolve their own conflicts without the necessity of third party intervention, and to standardize the process throughout the school.  As these restorative practices took root our next goal was to build stakeholder “buy in” by writing the process in the student handbook.  Parent training was also an important goal as part of the process.  We began to see students taking the ideas home for their families.  We began to hear from parents that they were picking up on these new ideas and trying them out.   

A RESTORATIVE “TOP-DOWN, BOTTOM UP, MIDDLE OUT" MODEL: A NEW NORM

As a final phase, my hope was to see restorative justice integrated not only in the student handbook but also in the teacher handbook.  As my school was a charter school, I saw the opportunity for that possibility to become a reality.  In the first year of implementation, we were successful in crafting a respect agreement between teachers, staff, and director.  This was done during one of our initial staff meetings.  A future goal would be to use Respect Agreements and The Peacemaking Model not only to initiate a school year but as a normative practice when needed as a form of problem solving.  This could extend to all stakeholders: school board, administration, faculty, staff, parents, and community and could become the norm for problem solving and conflict resolution.  This would allow many problems to be resolved at the lowest possible level, between the affected parties, as they learned The Peacemaking Model for resolving conflict.  This model would also create a norm of seeking a facilitator to help mediate if necessary.  Most issues could be resolved at this level before employing other more official measures.  In effect, the steps used in Discipline That Restores would become the adaptive protocol for a peaceful work environment including employer-employee relationships.  This protocol would embody the phrase, “Trust grows when agreements are made and kept (Claassen, 2008, p. 100).    
                                                                                                                                    
LINKS TO HIGHER EDUCATION AND EDUCATIONAL REFORM               

 I have been fortunate to have been guided by experts (theorists and practitioners) in the field of restorative justice.  This manual has been developed to help those who may desire to implement restorative principles and tools, but need a toolkit to get started. This study focuses on exploratory research and the interface with overarching themes that exist within the implementation of restorative justice in higher education (Darling, 2011), schools who have successful implemented rj, and current research emphasizing the need for reform in discipline.   
  
TWO MODELS: CHARTER SCHOOL /  TRADITIONAL  ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

Restorative justice practices have been successful in family counseling and mediation, juvenile and family court (Gottlieb, 2013), community organizations, businesses, faith-based organizations, churches, and extends to national and global problem solving.  In this guide you will find the parallels in two local schools implementation.  They have at least one thing in common, which is the courage to begin   the process of bringing Restorative Justice to their campuses and to live out the principles of addressing harms and obligations to the community, taking responsibility for actions, learning how to respectfully voice opinions through constructive dialogue, and engaging the whole community in building relationships.      
                                                                                                                          
JUSTICE: HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE (RETRIBUTIVE V. RESTORATIVE)

Justine Darling, an rj advocate for higher education discusses a perspective that explains the history of the justice system in the U.S.  “The Traditional Retributive Justice System used in the United States was  inherited from the Criminal Code and Common Law practices of Monarchies in England. In a monarchical system, the king or queen owns all land and people and every crime committed is against the monarchy instead of against the community or victim that was harmed by the offense. In the U.S. the Government takes the role of the monarchy, which takes away all obligations offenders have to victims and removes them from the original consequences of their actions, to answer to the State (Potter, 1958). Although this system allows for a consistent administration of justice across the country and holds people accountable to the state, a new restorative form of justice is emerging, which holds people accountable to those they have harmed and focuses on building relationship in order to strengthen society” (Darling, 2011). 

Restorative Justice (RJ) ideas and practices have been used to resolve conflict in indigenous cultures, including the Maori people of New Zealand, Native American tribes in the U.S., and the Mayan people of Guatemala, for thousands of years (Pranis, 2005). Modern Western communities are beginning to call on these ancient practices as a new process to resolve conflict through face to face interactions. Restorative Justice is an alternative form of justice where victims and offenders are brought together and a contract is created by all parties to the offense to repair harm caused and reintegrate individuals back into the community. This process holds offenders responsible for their actions, asking them to make a commitment to not reoffend in the future and focuses on repairing harm experienced by victims and community members through a commitment to fulfill all obligations (Zehr, 2002). Restorative Justice looks at offenses not as single events, but contextual consequences to deeper systemic issues that must be addressed to decrease the likelihood of re-offenses.

The Student Discipline system of K-12 schools in many ways reflects the larger criminal justice system in the U.S. and is based on retributive justice.  Darling stated in her case for rj in higher education, “The general focus is on punishment for students. In 1822, Thomas Jefferson said, “The article of discipline is the most difficult in American education. Premature ideas of independence, too little repressed by parents, beget a spirit of insubordination, which is the greatest obstacle to science with us, and as a principal cause of its decay since the revolution. I look to it with dismay in our institution, as a breaker ahead, which I am far from being confident we shall be able to weather” (Holmes, 2002). From the beginning of education in the U.S. discipline was thought of as a barrier to successful learning, but Restorative Justice sees violations of school policy as an opportunity to learn and gain knowledge about one self, others, and how to function within a community” (Darling). 

Rapidly, restorative practices are finding their way into institutions of higher learning.  Darling’s research continues to confirm this trend.   “Like the larger society in which learning communities function, restorative justice is slowly infiltrating discipline systems around the country. There are over 2,000 public and not-for-profit colleges and universities in the United States and more than 30 have already implemented some form of Restorative Justice process and the number is constantly increasing (ed.gov). In fact, a recent Campus Climate Initiative for the University of California public school system is using restorative justice to address bias motivated incidents on all UC campuses (universityofcalifornia.edu). The principles of restorative justice are spreading rapidly because they embody Student Development Goals held by all institutions of higher education, including leadership and ethical development, interpersonal competence, cognitive complexity (critical and reflective thinking, creativity), and effective communication skills (cas.edu). Therefore, Restorative Justice is a helpful tool in addressing the purpose of going to an institution of higher education: deep learning, gaining knowledge and wisdom, and developing critical life skills” (Darling, 2011).  
  

A NEW PIPELINE

 

Our K-12 schools are hoping for a new pipeline that feeds into our institutions of higher learning.  Our ability to close learning gaps will be increased as restorative practices generate leadership and ethical development, interpersonal competence, cognitive complexity, and effective communication, K-12.  Moreover, imagine the next generation where conflict resolution skills and restorative justice practices are normative.  Imagine students coming to college with this toolkit of learned and accepted restorative practices.                                                                                                

                                                      References

APA. (2008). American Psychological Association. APA Zero Tolerance Task Force Report.  Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/pubs/info/reports/zero-tolerance.aspx#

Claassen, Ron & Claasen, Roxanne, (2008). Discipline That Restores. Charleston, SC: BookSurge Publishing.

Claassen, R. & Reimer, D. (2010). “Basic Institute in Conflict Management and Mediation-A Manual” Fresno: Center for Peacemaking, Fresno Pacific University.

Darling, Justine. (2011). Restorative Justice in Higher Education: A Compilation of Formats and Best

Practices. Retrieved from http://www.restorativejustice.org/10fulltext/darlingjustine/

Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid.

ICG. (2013). The Institute for Civility in Government. Retrieved from

http://www.instituteforcivility.org/ who-we-are/what-is-civility.aspx

RJI. (2013). Restorative Justice International. California Judge Supports Restorative Justice. Retrieved
from http://www.restorativejusticeinternational.com/california-judge-supports-restorative-justice/

USD. (2013). Character Development Center. Retrieved from http://www.sandiego.edu/soles/centers-
and-research/character-development-center/

Zehr, Howard, (2002). The Little Book of Restorative Justice. Intercourse, PA: Good Books.

Zehr, Howard, (1990). Changing Lenses: A New Focus on Crime and Justice. Scottsdale, PA: Herald
Press.

FOR INFORMATION ON THE MANUALS, PLEASE send request.

written by Rhonda Hearnsberger / Peace and Conflict Resolution (2013)