Restorative Justice in Education: A Personal and Reflective Examination

As educators, we constantly seek methods to cultivate environments where students feel valued, respected, and supported. Over the years, restorative justice has emerged as an approach that addresses disciplinary issues and promotes a culture of care, empathy, and mutual respect.

This article reflects on my experiences with restorative justice in education, highlighting its strengths, benefits, and connections to positive behaviour theories such as positive behaviour in schools (PBIS). I'll discuss the role of traditional disciplinary measures, like time-out, detention, and suspension, within a restorative framework. However, my stance is that these should be employed as a final option when there is no room for relationship coaching or the other strategies prove unsuccessful in achieving positive behavioural outcomes.

I am going to preface this article and state that it is informed by my Christian perspective. I am committed to fostering a learning environment where students are encouraged to embody compassion and mercy, approach situations with patience, and are filled with love for others and faithfulness. My vision is for all students to be supported within a safe, nurturing, and inclusive community where each individual is known, valued, and challenged.

The Essence of Restorative Justice

Restorative justice in education shifts the focus from punitive measures to healing and restoration (Zehr, 2002). Unlike traditional disciplinary approaches that often alienate and stigmatise students, restorative practices emphasise accountability, relationship-building, and community involvement. The core of this approach is the belief that when students are given the opportunity to understand the impact of their actions and actively participate in the resolution process, they are more likely to internalise positive behaviours.

My journey with restorative justice began when I observed the limitations of traditional disciplinary methods. I saw students who were suspended or removed from the classroom return with little understanding of the harm they had caused or how to prevent it in the future. This cyclical pattern is a common experience for many educators and as such has led me to explore alternative approaches.

It is crucial to clarify that restorative practices are not about avoiding punishment or allowing students to escape responsibility for their negative actions (Zehr, 1990). Rather, restorative justice seeks to integrate accountability within a process that prioritises understanding and healing (Evans and Vaandering, 2016). There are indeed places for time-out, detention, suspension, and even expulsion in a restorative framework, but these measures are seen as part of a broader process rather than the immediate or default response. The goal is to use these consequences as learning opportunities, reinforcing the importance of making amends and restoring relationships. Restorative justice emphasises  accountability, relationship-building, and community involvement, as outlined by Evans and Vaandering (2016).

Building a strong teacher-student relationship is essential for an effective restorative justice process, particularly when working with students who struggle with behaviour. Research suggests that positive relationships can significantly reduce discipline issues and other related problems (Marzano, Marzano & Pickering, 2003). This benefits both teachers and students.

Restorative Practices in Action

In implementing restorative justice, I found that it required a fundamental shift in perspective. Instead of asking, "What rule was broken?" and "What punishment is deserved?" the questions became, "Who has been harmed?" and "How can we make things right?" This change in questioning is at the heart of restorative practices and reflects a deep commitment to understanding and addressing the root causes of misbehaviour.

One of the most powerful tools in restorative justice is the restorative circle. In my experience, circles provide a safe space for students to express their feelings, share their perspectives, and listen to others (Hopkins, 2011). This process fosters empathy, as students begin to see the impact of their actions on others. Moreover, it allows those who have been harmed to voice their feelings and be actively involved in the resolution process.

Likewise, the restorative process gives space to show empathy and understand the underlying reasons for challenging behaviours for the child who exhibits challenging behaviours. It focuses on collaborative problem-solving, proactive strategies, and empathy. The approach, in a similar manner to the Collaborative & Proactive Solutions (CPS) model (Greene & Winkler, 2019), seeks to address the unmet needs or lagging skills that can lead to challenging behaviours, fostering long-term positive outcomes. I have found that intentional teaching proactive strategies have helped to prevent challenging behaviours. This has allowed me, rather than simply reacting to them, to identify potential triggers and educate students before they escalate (Greene, 2008).

I recall a particular incident where a student a few years back. They were involved in a conflict with another peer. Instead of immediately resorting to punishment, we organised a restorative circle. During the circle, the students had the opportunity to hear how their actions had affected their peers, leading to a sincere apology and a commitment to change. The peer, in turn, felt heard and valued, which significantly contributed to the healing process. This experience underscored the power of restorative practices in fostering accountability and reconciliation.

However, there are situations where restorative practices alone are not sufficient, and traditional disciplinary actions may be necessary (Stahl, Schulz, Baak, & Adams, 2023). In cases where a student's behaviour poses a significant risk to others or where repeated restorative interventions have failed to bring about change, consequences such as suspension or expulsion might be warranted. The key difference in a restorative approach is that these consequences are not the first step but are part of a thoughtful, deliberate process aimed at protecting the community while still offering opportunities for reflection and growth.

Benefits and Strengths of Restorative Justice

The benefits of restorative justice extend beyond individual cases of conflict resolution. One of the most significant strengths of this approach is its ability to build and strengthen the school community (Hopkins, 2011). By fostering open communication and encouraging mutual respect, restorative practices contribute to a positive school climate where students feel connected and supported (Greene, 2016).

Research has consistently shown that restorative justice leads to a reduction in disciplinary incidents, suspensions, and expulsions (González, 2012). In my experience, I have seen a marked decrease in repeat offences among students who have participated in restorative processes. This reduction in recidivism can be attributed to the fact that students are not merely punished for their actions; they are given the tools and support to make better choices in the future.

Restorative justice also aligns with social-emotional learning (SEL) principles, which emphasise the development of self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision-making (CASEL, 2020). By integrating restorative practices into the school culture, we provide students with opportunities to practise and enhance these SEL competencies. For instance, the restorative circle allows students to develop empathy (social awareness) and engage in constructive dialogue (relationship skills), both of which are critical components of SEL.

By incorporating restorative practices, I have experienced teams address the underlying issues that may be driving negative behaviour, such as trauma or social challenges (Van der Kolk, 2014). This approach allows for a more comprehensive and compassionate response, one that acknowledges the complexities of student behaviour and provides avenues for healing and growth.

Connections to Positive Behaviour Theories

Restorative justice is deeply connected to several positive behaviour theories and practices, including Positive Behaviour Interventions and Supports (PBIS) and trauma-informed practices (Van der Kolk, 2014). PBIS focuses on promoting positive behaviour through proactive strategies rather than reactive measures (Sugai, Horner, Dunlap, Turnbull & Fox, 2016). In this sense, restorative justice can be seen as a complementary approach that provides the framework for addressing behavioural issues when they arise.

Incorporating restorative practices within a PBIS framework allows educators to reinforce positive behaviours while also addressing negative behaviours in a way that promotes growth and learning. This approach ensures that students are not merely compliant but are actively engaged in their behavioural development (Winn, 2013).

Furthermore, restorative justice is particularly effective when working with students who have experienced trauma. Trauma-informed practices recognise that students' behaviour is often a response to underlying trauma (Brummer, 2020). Restorative practices, with their emphasis on empathy, understanding, and healing, align perfectly with the principles of trauma-informed care. By creating a safe and supportive environment, restorative justice allows traumatised students to express their emotions and begin the healing process (Evans and Vaandering, 2016).

The Role of Traditional Disciplinary Actions

While restorative justice offers a compassionate and inclusive approach to discipline, it is essential to recognise that traditional disciplinary actions still have a place within this framework. Time-out, detention, suspension, and expulsion are not obsolete; rather, they are tools that can be used judiciously within a restorative process.

The difference lies in how these actions are framed and implemented. In a punitive system, these measures are often the first response to misbehaviour, aimed at removing the problem without addressing its root causes. In contrast, a restorative approach views these actions as part of a broader strategy that includes dialogue, reflection, and community involvement. For example, a student may be suspended not simply as a punishment but as a means to protect the community while allowing time for a restorative conference or circle to address the behaviour meaningfully.

In this way, restorative justice does not negate the need for consequences but rather redefines their role within the disciplinary process. It ensures that consequences are meaningful, educational, and aligned with the ultimate goal of restoring relationships and building a positive school culture.

Challenges and Considerations

While the benefits of restorative justice are numerous, it is important to acknowledge the challenges that come with its implementation. Restorative practices require time, training, and a commitment from all members of the school community. Moreover, restorative justice should not be seen as a one-size-fits-all recipe. It is most effective when integrated into a broader framework of positive behaviour support and social-emotional learning. Schools must be willing to invest in the necessary training and resources to ensure that restorative practices are implemented effectively. Establishing a learning community where students feel respected, safe, and empowered takes time and effort. Teachers must be willing to share control and give students a voice in decision-making to build trust, reliability, availability, and consistency (Riley, 2011).

Conclusion

Restorative justice represents a powerful shift in how we approach discipline and behaviour management in education with an intentional focus on relationship. By prioritising healing, accountability, and community, restorative practices offer a path toward a more compassionate and inclusive school environment. My experiences with restorative justice have shown me that when students are given the opportunity to make things right, they not only learn from their mistakes but also contribute to a more positive and supportive school culture.

As we continue to explore and refine restorative practices, it is crucial that we remain committed to the principles of empathy, understanding, and community-building. In doing so, we can create educational environments where every student feels valued and empowered to make positive choices. At the same time, we must recognise that restorative justice is not about avoiding responsibility or consequences but about integrating them within a process that supports growth, learning, and ultimately restoration. Therefore, creating better learners and also better people.

Stay the Course!

References:

• Brummer, J. (2020). Building a trauma-informed restorative school: Skills and approaches for improving culture and behavior. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

• Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL). (2019). CASEL framework for social-emotional learning https://casel.org/

• Evans, K., & Vaandering, D. (2016). The little book of restorative justice in education: Fostering responsibility, healing, and hope in schools. Lancaster, PA: Good Books.

• González, A. (2012). Restorative justice in schools: A review of the literature. International Journal of Educational Research, 51(1), 1-14.

• Greene, R. W. (2008). Lost at school: Why our kids with behavioral challenges are falling through the cracks and how we can help them. Simon and Schuster.

• Greene, R. W. (2016). Raising human beings: Creating a collaborative partnership with your child. Simon and Schuster.

• Greene, R., & Winkler, J. (2019). Collaborative & Proactive Solutions (CPS): A review of research findings in families, schools, and treatment facilities. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 22(4), 549-561.

• Hopkins, B. (2011). The restorative classroom: Using restorative approaches to foster effective learning. London: Teach to Inspire, Optimus Education.

• Marzano, R. J., Marzano, J.S., & Pickering, D.J. (2003). Classroom management that works research-based strategies for every teacher. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

• Riley, P. (2011). Attachment theory and the teacher-student relationship: A practical guide for teachers, teacher educators and school leaders (1st ed.). Routledge.

• Stahl, G., Schulz, S., Baak, M., & Adams, B. (2023). You fight your battles and you work out how you’re going to change: the implementation, embedding and limits of restorative practices in an Australian rural community school. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 52(1), 82–100.

• Sugai, G. M., Horner, R. D., Dunlap, M. L., & Sprague, J. R. (2008). Positive behavior interventions and supports: A framework for promoting positive outcomes for students with disabilities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

• Van der Kolk, B. (2014). The body keeps the score: Brain, mind, and body in the healing of trauma. New York: Penguin Press.

• Winn, M. M. (2013). Restorative justice and English language arts: A framework for teaching and learning. English Journal, 102(5), 34-41.

• Zehr, H. (1990). Justice is healing: Restorative justice in theory and practice. New York: Herald Press