8 Restorative Practices Concerns Addressed

My last post covered eight prominent concerns that can hold schools back from adopting restorative practices (RPS). Many of these concerns can be proactively addressed, making it easier for schools to implement RPS.

Starting suggestions, by concern:

1.) Schools are not ready for restorative practices

Although an administrator may have legitimate organizational preparedness concerns and consequently delay implementing RPS, there are unobtrusive ways to go about it. For example, one could make a disciplinary referral form that includes and encourages restorative reflection. Also, one could start using professional development days for learning to use nonviolent communication in the classroom. Separately, a leadership team could re-align their school’s mission and vision to reflect restorative principles.

2.) There isn’t conclusive evidence that restorative practices work

The dearth of evidence is partly due to the novelty and variation of RPS in schools. For now, we know that RPS align with well-vetted theories. For example, if we aim to develop better student learners, RPS can support every element of a non-cognitive factors learning framework (socio-cultural context, academic mindsets, academic perseverance, social skills, learning strategies, academic behaviors, academic performance, and awareness) to navigate struggles embedded in the students’ background (Farrington et al., 2012). Similarly, RPS overlap with well-researched social and emotional learning constructs and features of school-based universal interventions highlighted in a recent prominent research review (Durlak, Weissberg, Dymnicki, Taylor, and Schellinger, 2011. Although these are just two examples that demonstrate how RPS interrelate with well-vetted theories, RPS also interrelate with positive youth development, authoritative leadership, and a variety of other well-thought-out theoretical frameworks. (See full research citations below.)

3.) Restorative practices are complex

Experienced practitioners, training opportunities, and other such resources are becoming increasingly available.

4.) Conceptual and buy-in problems

Developing conceptual buy-in from school staff takes time, yet administrators would benefit from the steps mentioned in response 1 above.

5.) Consumer-driven program-based market ideology

Similarly, by starting from manageable steps, administrators might recognize that RPS can be implemented as a set of practices rather than a pre-packaged program.

6.) Concerns about extreme behavior

RPS offer effective means to handle such difficulties. First, RPS seek to address sources of behavior; second, RPS leverage support within germane contexts for sustainable change; third, RPS seek to understand before responding for more accurate and appropriate responses; and fourth, RPS assign responsibility.

And crucially, given that RPS are aligned with nonviolence, similar powerful practices have been used throughout history to engage with high-intensity conflicts and situations. (See Metta Center’s “Commonly Posed Objections” for related reading).

7.) Restorative practices (high structure, warmth, and support) don’t fit with some leadership styles and needs

There isn’t much, if any, research-based evidence of the association between leadership styles and RPS successes. RPS help school staff develop a stronger community to identify how best to support students, but again, little has been written on this topic.

8.) Contextual-based inequalities may prevent implementation of restorative practices

As noted in this blog post, additional practices may be complemented by community-or-broader-level social action-oriented programs. In fact, given that RPS address sources of problems inevitably linked to broader social concerns, concerted efforts like the map provided here are necessary for addressing social inequities among other problems.

Do you have restorative experiences with extreme behaviors? Or perhaps you have some views about restorative practices and leadership styles? If so, please share your stories in the comments below.

Research Citations

Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405–432. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01564.x

Farrington, C. A., Roderick, M., Allensworth, E., Nagaoka, J., Keyes, T. S., Johnson, D. W., & Beechum, N. O. (2012). Teaching Adolescents to Become Learners: The Role of Noncognitive Factors in Shaping School Performance–A Critical Literature Review. Consortium on Chicago School Research. 1313 East 60th Street, Chicago, IL 60637.