Getting More Out of Restorative Practice in Schools

Practical Approaches to Improve School Wellbeing and Strengthen Community Engagement

Margaret Thorsborne, Nancy Riestenberg, Gillean McCluskey

• Publisher: Jessica Kingsley Publishers
• Year: 2018
• Print ISBN:
  9781785927768
• eBook ISBN:
  9781784506926
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Behavioural Management

Restorative practice (RP) has been successfully implemented in schools for decades and is primarily associated with improving behaviour and relationships, by changing the culture of problem solving in the school. However, it has huge untapped potential to support initiatives in other areas, and this book provides examples of how RP can enhance the effectiveness of these other practices.

Split into three sections, the book first looks at implementation, readiness and evaluation. It then covers integrating RP with, and linking RP into, other issues relevant to schools such as trauma, poverty, and mindfulness, and finally shows how to work well with parents and families. The book gives proven strategies for measuring success and evaluating effectiveness. Overall, it provides insight into a variety of issues RP can help schools with, and addresses them in practical ways to help schools implement restorative practice to its full potential.

PART 1

Implementation

Chapter 1

Assessing Readiness
for Restorative Practice
Implementation

Sue Attrill, Margaret Thorsborne and Beverley Turner

Developing a restorative culture in a school, as educators and consultants alike have discovered, is no mean feat. Thorsborne and Blood (2013) point out that some schools, already deeply committed to a belief about the importance of quality relationships to teaching and learning, find the shift manageable. In such schools, it will be a matter of tweaking policy and practice to align with restorative principles and practice (first-order change). Other schools, with culture built on notions of authoritarian problem-solving, compliance and retribution, may likely experience significant barriers to the development of a more relational approach to both pedagogy and problem-solving (second-order change). Thorsborne and Blood (2013) offer schools a simple survey to assess whether or not they consider their own anticipated change process as first or second order. This has been a useful first step. We have come to realize, though, that the issue of readiness is much more complex and significant.

In this chapter, we have drawn from our collective experience as both internal and external consultants in helping schools implement restorative practice. We note some of the barriers we have bumped up against and propose some processes that have helped schools in their decision-making about whether or not to proceed with plans for implementation.

Readiness is important to consider or assess because we want the energies and hopes invested in implementation to have an optimal effect and the changes to be sustained. We need to be careful that the following do not derail the process.

• Past initiatives: it may be that initiatives in the past have been imposed (either by senior leadership or by system imperatives) and staff are both exhausted and/or angry and cynical about this next “shiny” thing.

• Other issues: there may be other issues in the school that will impact negatively on efforts (e.g. high conflict within a senior leadership team, legal action playing out around treatment of a student, other crises such as significant trauma to the school community, senior leadership style).

• Authoritarian culture: there may be a highly retributive culture that exists based on a command-and-control approach, which may impede transformation efforts.

• Poor understanding of the complexity and processes of culture change results in a “failure to launch.”

Our efforts to better understand readiness have also helped us discover and understand processes that can improve engagement in implementation efforts. Sustainability over the long term may well rest on the success of these early efforts to ascertain readiness.

It would seem that a key component of a successful change process is the issue of engagement—engagement being the degree to which all members of the school community participate in the work of the implementation process—with dialogue, debate, trying new skills, decision-making, feedback. We believe that even in the business of identifying the state of readiness of a school, that engagement of key stakeholders is fundamental to the process of implementation and its success.

Thorsborne and Blood (2013) describe in detail an adapted Kotter model to help schools understand the big picture (see Figure 1.1) of a useful change process, and it should be noted that significant efforts are needed to prepare for change (getting ready for change).

To strengthen the understanding about the importance of engagement, we have found that Jeff Hiatt’s ADKAR model (2006) gives us useful insight into an often-overlooked issue with the change process. That is, those driving the change process often assume that members of the school community share the same desire/enthusiasm for change. The ADKAR model identifies how individuals move through the change process and the five key milestones required for an individual to engage successfully with the change (new behaviors):

• Awareness of the need for change.

• Desire to support and engage with the change.

• Knowledge to understand how to change.

• Ability to demonstrate the new skills and behaviors.

• Reinforcement for successful implementation.

Figure 1.1 Steps for transformational change (Adapted from Kotter (1995) and reproduced with permission from Thorsborne and Blood (2013))

Both the ADKAR model and Kotter’s model can be used to identify the possible barriers faced by individuals impacted by the change and to identify strategies that may offset the risk of a lack of engagement in the change process and ultimate change failure.

We need to recognize that people do not move through change in a linear fashion (despite what Kotter’s model might look like). In schools, we may raise awareness with staff around the need for implementing the change. However, if staff do not have the desire to engage or see the process as worthwhile, the initiative will not gain traction. Often schools jump from awareness raising to developing the knowledge on how to implement the change, without providing ongoing coaching to develop their ability to demonstrate the new skills and behaviors effectively. To ensure sustainability of the change practice, there needs to be regular feedback to staff around what is working, what isn’t and progress made, using stories and measurable data. This reinforcement of effort promotes ongoing motivation.

In our work so far in exploring ways to improve a school’s readiness, we have discovered some factors that indicate whether or not preliminary work might need to be done before the launch into restorative practice (RP). These factors can include:

• low levels of response—the extent to which staff (and wider community) actually engage in the readiness instruments

• staff reporting that change has been poorly managed in the past

• adequate preparation of survey participants so they are very clear about definitions and meanings of terms to ensure data validity.

What follows is a summary of the process and the instruments we have developed to enhance the likelihood that efforts to introduce RP will not stumble at the first hurdle. Is the school ready or not, or ready enough? The journey begins with an assessment about whether or not the school knows what it’s getting itself into. We provide here an overview of the three survey instruments that we have developed and then go on to explore in more detail when and how to use each one.

Process overview

Schools need to consider their individual contexts and know how to engage their own school community in order to develop an RP implementation plan that is likely to bring about success, i.e. not just what needs to be done, but also how we go about it. Aspects to consider include:

• the extent and quality of the interconnections within and between staff faculties/teams and more generally with other sections of the school community

• the identity of the school (who we are and what we want to be known for)

• the beliefs held by staff about the best ways to change behavior, and their understanding of the meaning of behavior

• the extent to which accurate information about the changes are communicated, and the extent to which staff, students and parents are engaged in dialogue and feedback about what’s working and what isn’t. (Thorsborne and Blood 2013)

The Readiness for Implementation process begins with the senior leadership team (SLT) and other key interested parties. The SLT, in the initial stages, is likely to determine whether RP is a good fit for the school, whether the timing is right and whether it has available resources to support long-term change.

The process has the following steps:

1. Consult with key SLT and other interested stakeholders.

2. Conduct the Change Readiness Survey.

3. Analyze results to assess category of readiness.

4. Choose the appropriate category of readiness for next steps: High/Moderate Opportunity (green light), Caution (orange light) or High/Moderate Risk (red light).

Instruments1

Change Readiness Survey

The Change Readiness Survey, completed by all school staff, assesses the effectiveness of past change efforts. Information gathered about past change efforts can be a predictor of the effectiveness of school implementation of RP in the future. This survey identifies the extent to which:

• the right conditions and resources are in place

• there is likely to be a clear vision and objectives

• the school community has the appropriate motivation and enabling attitudes.

Relationship Survey

The Relationship Survey, completed by all members of the school community, analyzes the extent to which there are existing relational processes and practices within the school that support the development, maintenance and repair of relationships for the whole school community (staff, parents, students and leadership team).

Organizational Climate Survey

The Organizational Climate Survey, completed by school staff, assesses “how things are really done around here.” Data collected from this survey will indicate the extent to which clear direction is given by leaders, the extent to which staff feel respected and supported and the extent to which there is consistency in expectations around respectful relationships.

Process detail

We have developed a flowchart to explain the process of assessing readiness for beginning the RP implementation process—see Figure 1.2.

Tables 1.1–1.4 provide schools with further details around the RP Change Readiness process. At the end of each stage, we have provided a brief case study to illustrate the decision-making process around whether or not to proceed with implementation. The tabl...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Contents
• Foreword by Fania E. Davis
• Introduction
• Part 1: Implementation
• Part 2: Aligning Approaches and Knowledge with Restorative Practice
• The Contributors
• Subject Index
• Author Index
• Join Our Mailing List
• Acknowledgements
• Dedication
• Copyright
• By The Same Author