 |
Repaired with gold. The kintsugi method of pottery repair seeks to
mend damage to create something new and beautiful (Image: Wikipedia).
|
School discipline in North America has often been automatic and punitive. School administrators look at the harm done, and dole out punishment that fits the crime. For a number of years in Ontario schools, this was the way of things. The Safe Schools Act drew ire from human rights groups and disability advocates who pointed out the failings of punishment based discipline and the inequitable application of mandatory suspensions and expulsions as it related to exceptional students.
Currently, things are different. Progressive discipline approaches Ontario schools seek to include ‘mitigating factors’ when applying disciplinary outcomes for students but may do little about the environments and relationships that led to the behaviour. Restorative Justice may provide a framework that not only reduces harm in schools, but reinforces, positive, inclusive learning environments, and the understanding of the individual characteristics of each student.
Restorative Justice (RJ) frameworks hinge on the idea that being part of the community is a more powerful tool for motivating positive behaviour, than rules and control from the school. Building positive relationships and being inclusive of all, including those who have done wrong, drives the process.
It can be difficult as educators to give up what we see as the reins of discipline, but RJ is characterized by support and accountability. Both are provided and expected in the process of resolving situations that aren't working in the school. In an RJ approach, emotions and actions are considered responses that we should all try to understand better and find reasons for. Most importantly the power to rebuild damaged relationships and environments, and find resolutions to problems in the school, is given back to the students. Like all skills in school, it needs practice and guidance to develop. The process might involve community conferences, peacemaking circles, and peer mediation with teacher support gradually withdrawn over time.
Restorative Justice is not unlike character education programs or anti-bullying initiatives as it works best when it is a whole-school approach with all staff on board and implementing it in classrooms and at an administration level. Schools that adopt RJ as a way for managing harm, create more positive spaces. These schools see values of respect, honesty, trust, humility, sharing, inclusivity, empathy, courage, forgiveness, and love, more present in students and staff as they shift from being rule-based, to relationship-based institutions. Successful schools report a reduction in office referrals, suspensions, and expulsions, as well as a reduction in repeat offending behaviour.
Safe Schools are only safe when they can be so without the need for external control. With past Safe Schools legislation, automatic suspensions and expulsions sat as deterrents, but usually only served to remove individuals from the school community and the places where they could practice pro-social and problem solving skills. More recent progressive discipline policies have helped more Ontario students remain in the school community, but these approaches are often reactive, and still do little to address the damaged relationships in the classroom when harm occurs. Safe Schools can not just be buildings where well defined rules and regulations will protect students from harm, they must be places where offending behaviour is known by the entire community as unacceptable, and the entire community is capable of managing that harm in a way that makes them more whole.
Restorative Justice schools rely on the power of student relationships. These practices move us closer to providing equitable education to all students. These communities are capable of internally addressing many of the issues and concerns that we as teachers have for our students safety and well-being, with sensitivity, resiliency, and creativity, all while teaching students skills for self-management, self-efficacy, and self-esteem. Restorative Justice responds more equitably to harm, and is an ideal community for the exceptional student.
References:
Morrison, B.E., and Vaandering, D. 2012. “Restorative Justice: Pedagogy, Praxis, and Discipline.” Journal of School Violence, 11(2), 138-155.
Ontario Human Rights Commission. 2003. The Ontario Safe Schools Act: School Discipline and Discrimination. Retrieved fromhttp://www.ohrc.on.ca/sites/default/files/attachments/The_Ontario_Safe_Schools_Act%3A_School_discipline_and_discrimination.pdf
Ontario. Legislative Assembly. “An Act to increase respect and responsibility, to set standards for safe learning and safe teaching in schools and to amend the Teaching Profession Act (The Safe Schools Act).” Bill 81, 37th Legislature, 1st Session, 2000. [Toronto]: The Assembly, 2000. (Assented to Jun. 23, 2000).
Ontario. Legislative Assembly. “An Act to amend the Education Act in respect of behaviour, discipline and safety.” Bill 212, 38th Legislature, 2nd Session, 2007. [Toronto]: The Assembly, 2007. (Assented to Jun. 4, 2007).
Ontario Ministry of Education. 2010. Caring and Safe Schools in Ontario: Supporting Students with Special Education Needs Through Progressive Discipline, Kindergarten to Grade 12. Retrieved fromhttp://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/general/elemsec/speced/caring_safe_school.pdf