Restorative Practices in Classrooms

Belinda Hopkins, Margaret Thorsborne, David Vinegrad

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• eBook ISBN: 9781351704076
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

This work helps in rethinking behaviour management through the use of restorative justice methods in the classroom. This clearly presented manual takes practitioners in gradual stages through the harsh realities of confronting wrong-doing and injustice in school. The traditional approach seeks simply to apportion blame and punish the wrongdoer. There is now strong evidence that restorative justice can be effective in reducing problem behaviour, and in engendering a sense of fairness and justice among all stakeholders in the school community. The book provides: an explanation of restorative justice and behaviour management; a wide range of restorative practice measures; step-by-step instructions for planning and facilitating individual, small group and whole class conferences; frequently asked questions and answers; key master documents that can be adapted; and, case studies. It is full of practical suggestions and techniques for dealing with problem behaviour, whether trivial or serious. It is suitable for ages 7-16.

Chapter 1
Rethinking our approaches to managing behaviour

It is likely that you already know some basic truths about the management of behaviour as it applies in the classroom setting. When students are actively engaged in the learning process with carefully planned lessons, when their learning needs are met, when curriculum is relevant, when transitions are managed effectively, when the relationships that exist between teachers and students are healthy and based on trust, tolerance and respect, when the classroom rules are explicit, fair and enforced, then class disruption rarely creates more than a blip on the radar screen of the teacher or classmates.

Life is never so simple of course, especially when the classroom environment is a complex dynamic of personalities, backgrounds, intelligences and experiences. What will also have an impact on how "business is done" between everyone in the classroom, and in the wider school, will be the explicit or implicit values of the school itself, its sense of purpose about education, its beliefs about young people and about how behaviour is best managed.

Current practice

When teachers and school management are asked, in our training programmes, about how they engage young people in the curriculum and, more broadly, the life of the school community, most are quick to 'define a set of values that underpin their beliefs about the importance of lifelong learning, responsible citizenship and the importance of community. When these groups are asked about the philosophy that underpins the way they manage discipline and wrongdoing, they generally reach the conclusion that their practices are based largely on punishment. How can professionals who value such concepts as community and citizenship also value inflicting pain/inconvenience as the most effective way to change behaviour? The answer is usually "because we've always done it this way" or "because we are responding to what we think are the needs of the system or the local community".

These more punitive discipline practices often do not deliver the kinds of outcomes we are seeking: more young people doing the right thing most of the time; young people who are thoughtful about the impact of their own behaviour on others; young people who take responsibility for their actions; the development of a sense of community and connectedness. Neither do they take into account what research is beginning to show us about the development of the adolescent brain – research that indicates that during this period of development, the adolescent brain is enjoying a growth spurt, is low on serotonin levels and could be said to be extremely vulnerable to the variety of influences which young people are exposed to at this time of their lives.

It is appropriate here, then, to examine our traditional approaches to the management of wrongdoing in schools. Traditional approaches usually follow a logic based on quasi-judicial arguments: What happened? Who’s to blame? What rule/law has been broken? What punishment should be applied? In a school, wrongdoing is often regarded as an offence against the institution and its rules, modelled on a philosophy of retributive justice that seeks to inflict pain on the wrongdoer.

Discipline (usually in the form of punishment) is dispensed by a designated officer in the school, such as an assistant principal, a year coordinator or a head of house, sometimes the class teacher. The sanctions, usually some sort of temporary incapacitation such as time-out, detention, the removal of privileges or suspension, are intended to teach young people, by way of deterrence, that the behaviour was inappropriate, and that there are consequences for doing the wrong thing, while protecting the safety and rights of others to learn. For most young people, who are well connected to their families and the school community, this is enough to make them think twice about doing “it” again. Occasionally, an offence is deemed so serious that a student will be permanently excluded.

This punitive approach to managing behaviour, though, focuses on the individual, rather than the context in which the behaviour occurred, and the complex dynamics that operate in schools and families that may have contributed to the incident. The focus of the pathology is on the student, rather than the system. Neither does the punishment concern itself with the impact of the behaviour on relationships, or the emotional harm done to others, or the possibility of support needed to change behaviour. A punitive approach to wrongdoing is often in stark contrast to the values and beliefs that drive much of the curriculum and pedagogical practice in the school. These place a high value on the development and maintenance of positive, healthy and respectful relationships and a supportive school environment. If we were to redefine discipline and behaviour management as relationship management, we might find a different pathway for our problem-solving. Such a path might be found in restorative justice and its range of processes and approaches.

Restorative Justice

The philosophy and practice of restorative justice has much to offer those of us who are concerned with the development of well-rounded, socially and emotionally competent young people who are accountable for their behaviour and understand that there is nothing they do (or don’t do) which doesn’t impact on others in some way. So what do we mean by restorative justice, and what has it got to do with education?

Restorative justice requires a paradigm shift in thinking which, for some who have never questioned the effectiveness of punishment as a means to change behaviour, is a real challenge. But for others, it is a reassurance that what they’ve believed in and practised for years has a name, and indeed delivers outcomes that include high rates of school achievement, low rates of offending behaviour, a sense of belonging in a community and emotional literacy and competence. Put simply, restorative justice is a philosophy that has as its framework:

• ■ Crime (and misconduct) is a fundamental violation of people and interpersonal relationships
• ■ Violations create obligations and liabilities
• ■ Restorative justice seeks to heal and put right the wrongs

Restorative justice is a participatory and democratic justice that focuses on the incident and not solely on the wrongdoer’s behaviour. It is an approach to harmful behaviour and community conflict that sees wrongdoing as essentially a violation of people and/or property. The community conference, a wellknown restorative process, formalises the bringing together of all those responsible and accountable for, and most affected by, wrongful conduct. Individually and collectively, people address the causes of the harm, the impact of the harm, on those most affected and investigate ways to make amends and to put right the wrong done. It is not new. This type of problem-solving formed the basis of AngloSaxon law long before the arrival of the Normans. It was part of earlier legal traditions, including Roman law. Most traditional forms of justice were based around notions of reparation and restoration. It embraces a wide range of human attributes -healing, compassion, forgiveness and mercy, as well as mediation and reconciliation – and includes sanctions where appropriate.

Restorative Justice and behaviour management

So, what has this got to do with classrooms and the way we might manage the behaviour of learners? The teacher’s response to problem behaviour in a classroom is usually a reflection of school policy and its underlying beliefs, as well as his/her own personal beliefs and skills about how best to challenge and change behaviour. What are the usual “problem behaviours” committed by young people in classrooms?

• ■ Coming late to class
• ■ Failure to complete homework
• ■ Failure to bring appropriate materials
• ■ Failure to complete tasks in class
• ■ Disruption by talking/fooling around/ calling out/throwing things
• ■ Abusing the teacher
• ■ Swearing
• ■ Abusing/fighting with fellow students
• ■ Withdrawal from the learning process
• ■ Making a mess and failing to clean up
• ■ Theft and property damage
• ■ Bullying and harassment of others
• ■ Rudeness, insolence and contempt

And what are the traditional responses to these problem behaviours? Some schools will have adopted a whole-of-school practice reflecting a ‘get tough’ or ‘zero tolerance’ approach, while other schools may be in a state of constant change as ‘flash in the pan’ initiatives take their interest in an effort to bring about some improvement. There will sometimes be a clear set of in-class responses that will escalate to out-of-class procedures if the behaviour persists. And we all know that some teachers rely rather heavily on this latter response to minimise classroom disruption and maintain control. Typically, it becomes someone else’s responsibility to fix the problem!

If these “programme” practices are consistent across classrooms, are clearly understood by all and are delivered with respect, support and fairness, likely outcomes will be, at least in the short term, positive. But again, we need to ask if the sanction has delivered an outcome for the individual and the group. Is it characterised by the building of empathy and thoughtfulness and accountability for one’s actions to those most affected by them? In what ways does traditional punishment create an opportunity to have the kind of conversations needed to explore harm done, the impact on relationships and how to make things right?

A restorative classroom, on the other hand, will be characterised by high levels of support as well as clear boundaries, where problem solving around issues is done with students.† The kinds of conversations that can be heard in these classrooms are about what happened, what was the thinking behind the behaviour, who had been affected and in what way. These conversations focus on fair process, responsibility and accountability, and the repair of relationships that have been damaged. We know that to change behaviour we need to provide a process to engage students in meaningful dialogue about what they are doing or not doing. This kind of meaningful dialogue always involves discussions around feelings. Our traditional sanctions are not concerned with feelings, although at a deep and often unconscious level our sanctions are sometimes driven by revenge – the need to retaliate when our authority has been challenged – which is indeed an emotional response.

We have come to understand that significant cultural change is possible within schools when they choose to work restoratively with young people.

We know all too well that students spend most of their school day in groups of two or more. It is not uncommon for some teachers to believe (and fear) that students in their classes have the potential to come together in a mass to challenge or even attack them. A great deal of literature has been written on how to manage students using an individual approach, yet we mostly work with students in classes, groups and teams. Practitioners in restorative classrooms will tell you that addressing the behaviour of one or more students within the classroom community has proved to be far more effective than removing and sending the wrongdoer to the office or time-out facility to be "dealt with" by others.

We have come to understand that significant cultural change is possible within schools when they choose to work restoratively with young people. Relationships between teachers and students improve when the ‘heat’ and ‘angst’ of daily human interactions is managed restoratively. Abstract lectures to invoke compliance are exchanged for concrete dialogue about behaviour, relationships and community. When students understand that restorative processes will be fair and non-punitive, they begin to cooperate with the school and take ownership and responsibility for their own behaviour. In comparison, when punitive methods are applied, students will sometimes withdraw their cooperation and admissions of involvement. It is well documented that punitive methods do not teach important lessons about pro-social behaviour. In fact, they remove the wrongdoer from the act, teach avoidance behaviours and label him/her. Students whose behaviour has been managed restoratively, however, have been observed to undergo meaningful attitudinal and behavioural change.

Discipline as fair process

“Fair” is a word that we’ve mentioned several times in this chapter, and it bears closer examination. Young people and their parents, as well as teachers, are far more likely to accept the umpire’s decision about how a matter has been dealt with, if they have experienced the process as fair. A great deal of energy is spent by school staff developing “fair” policy and practice, without realising what they are committing themselves to. In matters of discipline, “fair” in a restorative sense is when:

• ■ All affected parties (teachers, young people and parents, where appropriate) are engaged in the process of problem-solving and in determining what’s needed to put things right
• ■ Everyone (teachers, young people, parents) has a chance to tell their story and to be heard
• ■ If you’ve done wrong, you will be given a chance to make amends and put things right
• ■ If you are a victim, you will have a say in how to make things right
• ■ Opportunities will be created for all parties to understand, reflect on and learn from the experience in a respectful way
• ■ Dialogue is participative and voluntary
• ■ The repair of relationships and community is paramount and overrides institutional imperatives
• ■ There is a sense of collective accountability and responsibility

In summary, fair process is about engagement and empowerment. This is in direct contrast to current, traditional practice that sees discipline dispensed by a party unconnected to the incident, sanctions linked to school policy with a history and tradition underpinned by punishment, a focus on individual behaviour rather than the needs of the community affected, and processes which do not, in any way, take into account how people have been harmed, or how to repair that harm.

Review of school policy

Some schools spend inordinate amounts of time developing staff skills in curriculum and pedagogy but fail to balance this against time spent learning about and managing behaviour. If schools and teacher training institutions are to stimulate a move from authoritarianism and punishment to authoritative and restorative practice, a serious review of whole-of-school policies will be needed. A more balanced approach across these three areas has the potential to improve teaching and learning outcomes.

The following key questions could be part of regular critical review of the behaviour management component of school policy.

For the school:

• ■ What do we believe our job is?
• ■ What are our core values and beliefs about relationships and behaviour in our school?
• ■ What is the purpose of our discipline system? What outcomes does it seek to achieve?
• ■ Where do we stand on issues of justice and fairness?
• ■ How important to us is the development of social and emotional competencies?
• ■ Do our daily practices reflect our beliefs and values?
• ■ How do we articulate these values and beliefs in concrete and practical ways to our students, teachers and community?
• ■ In what ways do we evaluate our practices and measure our performance?

For the classroom teacher and student manager:

• ■ What are the outcomes that I want to achieve from my behaviour management plan a nd strategy?
• ■ What are my own values, attitudes and understandings about fairness and justice?
• ■ What are the things that my students appreciate about a ‘good’ teacher? Am I delivering?
• ■ How can I make sure that my students understand the expectations about behaviour and relationships in my class?
• ■ How can I best teach thoughtfulness and empathy?
• ■ Is what I do and how I respond supported by research and current best practice?
• ■ How do I know if what I do is effective and appropriate?

Schools wishing to promote responsible behaviour and develop student self-discipline would do well to adopt the full range of restorative processes available. Because these processes provide fairness and equity, the reward is the building of trust, optimism and satisfaction amongst students and teachers that in turn promotes positive behaviour and improves academic outcomes. From our experience, real compliance is achieved with students bec...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Acknowledgements
• Copyright
• Contents
• Foreword
• About this manual
• Chapter 1 Rethinking our approaches to managing behaviour
• Chapter 2 Restorative practices – a continuum
• Chapter 3 Working proadiveiy – classroom conferences and teaching and learning
• Chapter 4 Classroom conferences – responding to wrongdoing
• Chapter 5 Individual, small and medium group conferences
• Chapter 6 Facilitating conferences – understanding the script
• Chapter 7 What if?
• About the authors