1 SWPBIS and Restorative Practices in Schools: Challenges and Opportunities Jeffrey Sprague, Ph.D. ([email protected]) 7/7/2016 School-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports and Restorative Discipline in Schools: Challenges and Opportunities Jeffrey R. Sprague, Ph.D. The University of Oregon Institute on Violence and Destructive Behavior Teacher Support: Your thoughts School to Prison Pipeline: Your thoughts Reflection • What are the challenges you face with discipline procedures in your school? – Inconsistent teacher responses? – Lack of resources and alternatives? – Pressure from parents to deal with disruptive students? – Other? • What are successes you have achieved in implementing alternatives to exclusionary discipline? Teaching with Poverty and Stress in Mind • Given the information about supporting students under stress, how does this affect the way we are the “doing business” of behavior support?
Transcript
1
SWPBIS and Restorative Practices in Schools: Challenges and Opportunities Jeffrey Sprague, Ph.D. ([email protected]) 7/7/2016
School-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports and Restorative Discipline in Schools: Challenges and Opportunities Jeffrey R. Sprague, Ph.D.
The University of Oregon Institute on Violence and Destructive Behavior
Teacher Support: Your thoughts School to Prison Pipeline: Your thoughts Reflection
• What are the challenges you face with discipline procedures in your school?
– Inconsistent teacher responses? – Lack of resources and alternatives? – Pressure from parents to deal with disruptive students? – Other?
• What are successes you have achieved in implementing alternatives to exclusionary discipline?
Teaching with Poverty and Stress in Mind
• Given the information about supporting students under stress, how does this affect the way we are the “doing business” of behavior support?
SWPBIS and Restorative Practices in Schools: Challenges and Opportunities Jeffrey Sprague, Ph.D. ([email protected]) 7/7/2016
• Types of Data Summaries for Time Out: – Effects on target behavior – Use of time-out procedure – Frequency – Duration
• Documentation elements: – Date – When time-out occurred – Start/stop/duration – Student’s name – Target behavior that resulted in time-out – Type of time-out used – Who gave time-out – Student’s behavior and any emotional reactions during or after time out
SWPBIS and Restorative Practices in Schools: Challenges and Opportunities Jeffrey Sprague, Ph.D. ([email protected]) 7/7/2016
Restorative processes should be conducted in a student-friendly space with both students and staff trained to mediate the discussion. In response to disciplinary infractions or conflict, schools shall use a continuum of strategies that are restorative rather than punitive.
• The continuum of strategies includes but are not limited to: – Restorative Chat – One-on-one informal conversations that are held as an immediate response or follow up to an action that has
somehow caused harm to help the student correct the behavior in the present and future. – Restorative Circles – Spaces in which participants take turns speaking to a topic, guided by at least one circle keeper, using a
talking piece and going around to ensure that everyone has an equal opportunity to speak. There are many different types of circles that can be used to promote a positive learning environment and deal with issues as they arise (for circles used in classroom teaching see D.2 above). Some of the main circles that schools can utilize for discipline include:
• Discipline Circles to address what occurred, repair the harm and develop solutions to prevent reoccurrence, involving relevant parties and support people if helpful; and Proactive Behavior Management circles used to role-play and work with students to develop positive behavioral models.
– Fairness Committees – A Fairness Committee is made up of students, teachers and other school staff who have been trained in restorative practices to work with students or staff who have violated core community norms and values to create appropriate consequences through dialogue and by consensus. The committee takes referrals from staff or students to 1) inspire empathic and critical self-reflections by confronting a member of the community with his or her actions and how they have affected others; 2) collectively determine how best to restore and mend the community in the wake of actions inconsistent with its values; and 3) determine how to reintegrate the member of the community who has violated the shared values back into the fabric and culture of the school.
– Restorative Group Conferencing – A facilitator leads those who were involved in an incident, whether they were harmed or did the harm, as well as their supporters in a face-to-face process. This process aims to address the harm, make things right and prevent reoccurrence, and is based on the ideas of restorative practices and mutual accountability.
– Restorative Peer Juries – The peer jury is about creating a space where students can be respected and heard and can engage in a corrective process for behaviors. Juries shall be convened for restorative purposes as an alternative to other interventions or consequences, and shall not be conducted in an adversarial manner (restorative Peer Juries are different from student courts). The Peer Juries may be held in the school that is attended by the student who caused harm or in a school within the area of the student’s school. In order to appear before a school Peer Jury, the student who caused the harm must admit to committing the misconduct, and the student and parent or guardian must agree to abide by the decisions of the school Peer Jury and complete the corrective actions it recommends.
– Impact Panels – A forum for students or adults who were harmed by an incident to tell other students who have caused harm about the impact of the incident on their lives and on the lives of their families, friends and neighbors. Panels typically involve three or four speakers who have experienced harm, each of whom spends about 15 minutes telling their story in a non-
SWPBIS and Restorative Practices in Schools: Challenges and Opportunities Jeffrey Sprague, Ph.D. ([email protected]) 7/7/2016
judgmental, non-blaming manner. These forums are used to educate other students about the impacts of harm in the school community. While some time is usually dedicated to questions and answers, the purpose of the panel is for those impacted by the harm to speak, rather than for those who have caused harm to engage in a dialogue.
– Mediated Conferencing – A process that provides those harmed by an incident an opportunity to meet the person who caused the harm, in a safe and structured setting, and engage in a mediated discussion of the offense. With the assistance of a trained mediator, those who were harmed are able to tell the person who caused the harm about the incident’s physical, emotional and other impacts; to receive answers to lingering questions about the incident; and to be directly involved in developing a plan for the harm to be repaired
SEAD: Stop Everything & Dialogue Purpose: A way to engage the staff, a classroom or an entire school in a dialogue and action planning about a topic or challenging issue. Background: In working with schools around issues such as bullying, sexual behavior problems and discrimination or prejudice around students within the school, it became clear that a way to engage the whole school community in dialogue was critical in order to: Increase knowledge about a topic
• Understand the student’s perception of the issue • Glean ideas for action to move things forward in a positive way • Strengthen relationships between staff and students and within the student population • Create a way for students to be heard.
Examples of Use: The Minneapolis Public School that helped design SEAD and was the first pilot site was Ramsey International Arts Magnet, a K-8 site. SEAD was started as a way to help all the staff use circles (a way to engage in respectful dialogue that creates a way for all to have a voice) and to improve education and involvement in solutions around some behavior problems at the school. The model evolved into once a month SEAD’s throughout the school year. A large suburban high school used the SEAD model to engage the entire 11th grade in discussions about racism and bystanders. The school had a strong peer leadership group that was trained in one session to conduct circle dialogues. An educational session was presented over the school’s television systems into all classrooms. The entire grade then went into the very large auditorium with 8-12 students in each circle facilitated by a student leader. All the teachers were standing by to step in when the plan didn’t work. The students were so engaged that the staff had an impromptu circle that identified many staff issues that were identified for follow-up action. Ideal: Topics selected throughout the year. SEAD held once a month or every other month. Topics selected by some combination of staff and students based on the school’s needs. Basic Model:
• 10 minutes’ mini-education (this may be a follow-up to a school assembly or a prior class lesson)
• 30 minutes’ circle • 10 minutes’ arts infused activity (this may be done the next day or in a second class period)
Method: All staff at least has basic training on SEAD and circles. A SEAD committee is established or the work is done by some other staff committee. Each month a dialogue topic is selected by staff SEAD committee and/or alternative months are selected by students). It is useful to have one or two months open to deal with issues that come up or have the flexibility to switch the topics around based on need. It may also be necessary to do a
follow-up SEAD a few months later to see if the concepts were understood and identified action/needs were addressed. On a given day all grades & classes participate in SEAD: mini education/lecture, a circle on the same topic. The circle is followed by an arts activity that allows the students to further reflect upon and communicate what they learned.
• The outcome of the arts activities, when appropriate, can be posted in hallways or on class doors, to reinforce the messages and discussions.
• Samples of student’s arts activities can be collected as a year-end portfolio. Parents are informed of the topics and when the circles will be happening so they can reinforce the discussion at home. Ideally, staff debrief at a staff meeting once a month, after SEAD, to discuss what worked and didn’t about the circle and related activity. A staff committee works to select topics (and/or help students identify topics)
• This same committee also selects possible arts infused activities staff can use along with each topic
It is useful to outline for all staff how to introduce the topic, define the issue, and possible dialogue questions. Consider varying expectations or activities based on age/ability. Link to existing curriculum/topics when possible. It is also useful to have a simple form staff completes after each SEAD:
Sample/Potential topics include: • Bullying/Cyberbullying • Bystanders: What it means and how to use positive influence • You Made It My Business When (How to Make It Work) • Normalization of Sexual Harm (Hyper sexualized culture) & Sexual Behavior Problems in
schools • Sexual Behavior Continuum (differentiating what is healthy, appropriate and expected from
that which is disruptive, harmful or illegal) • Language • Dress code • Positive and Negative Peer Pressure • Cliques • Male/Female “gender” roles/expectations (positives/negatives) • Racism • GLBTQ • Targeted behaviors/School Themes: Is it clear? Is it on target? Are we behaving in
Allows the student to share his or her version of events and be heard by a nonjudgmental adult listener.
2. What were you thinking at that time? Provides an opportunity to understand the student’s intent and provide insight into the student’s level of social and emotional development.
3. What are you thinking about the situation now?
Provides the opportunity for the student to reflect back on his or her actions when calm and take responsibility for them.
4. Who did this affect? Provides an opportunity for the student to demonstrate accountability and articulate an understanding of how his or her actions affect other people.
5. What do you think you need to do to make things right?
Provides the student with the chance to explore ways in which the situation can be rectified. It also presents an opportunity for the student to take an active role in correcting the wrongdoing. The response can provide a natural segue into a restitution plan (the second strategy in this article).
6. How can we make sure this doesn’t happen again?
Gives the student an opportunity to reflect on the support and skills he or she needs for future success. Provides a natural segue into behavior skills coaching (the third strategy in this article).
7. What can I do to help you? Allows the student to recruit the help that he or she needs to be successful. Provides an opportunity for relationship building and an understanding that the student has support in making reparations.
Restorative Practices Scripts: Elementary School Two girls get into fist fight over tetherball game (Frank Silva, Browns Valley) Restoration: For one week during recess must work together on primary playground teaching rules to the games to younger students. Every day must sit across the table from each other at lunch. Sanction: Missed recess with peers for 1 week, restricted seating at lunch Treatment: Problem solved with girls, conflict mediation, and resolution Outcome: They are the best of friends. Several students misbehaved for Substitute Teacher (Frank Silva, Browns Valley) Students would not line up for the sub. The sub took names and the following day… Restoration: Those students walked around the school with the principal with trash bags and cleaned the entire school campus during lunch recess to prepare for the upcoming school carnival. Sanction: Missed recess Students were rude to the custodian (Olivia McCormick, Shearer Charter) Two boys threw trash down in front of the custodian and said, “He’ll pick it up.” Restoration: The boys became the custodian’s assistants for 2 days. Sanction: Missed recess and fun activities with class Outcome: They became the custodian’s main ‘buddies’ who helped out and encouraged other students to be respectful and helpful as well. Boys get in fight after one accuses the other of something (Olivia McCormick, Shearer Charter) Rete aching: Conflict mediation in with principal. Taught a Second Step Lesson on ‘Accusations’ Restoration: Made a poster together about solving a problem Sanction: Students called their parents, missed the following 2 recesses Can’t keep hands to himself (Helen Rocca, Shearer Charter) Rete aching: Practiced keeping hands to self, used Second Step Lessons Sanction: Restricted activities during recess Restoration & Treatment: Boy carries and stacks heavy orange cones during recess as a ‘helper’ for the yard supervisor. “Heavy work” in occupational therapy circles (i.e., proprioceptive input) are used for children with sensory processing difficulties to help increase attention, decrease defensiveness, and modulate arousal. It is the performance of tasks that involves heavy resistance and input to the muscles and joints, and is essential in helping our bodies assimilate and process both movement (vestibular) and touch (tactile) information. Outcome: Boy kept his hands to himself for those 15 minutes (and then hit someone in line!) 5th graders Bullying at Recess Repeated bullying incidents on the playground perpetrated by a small group of kids.
Treatment: Each class of fifth graders came to the multipurpose room where the classroom teacher and PE teacher conducted a circle. As each student used the talking piece, they were able to explain to the kids who were causing the problems how they felt about what they were doing. We also discussed what the expectations are for student to student and student to adult interactions- respect, appropriate, responsible, etc. Re-teaching: We also discussed what the expectations are for student to student and student to adult interactions- respect, appropriate, responsible, etc. Sanction: Suspension was not used. Outcome: The severe behavior has stopped; I think because students were empowered to let the kids who were bullying know how they felt about it- it was out in the open- a great place to be. Victims also realized they were not alone- so isolation was no longer an issue either. Parents responded very well to this intervention- and suspension was not used as a result. 5th grade boys who had daily behavior problems (Deb Wallace, Principal NVLA) These 17 boys were turned into school “Kindness Coaches.” Every day during lunch and recess, these boys wear “Kindness Coach” t-shirts and spend time on the kindergarten playground playing and handing out positive tickets. Then, they go into the 2nd and 3rd grade classrooms and facilitate a discussion on kindness, “What will make our school an even kinder place?” “What can you do to make NVLA the kindest school in the country?” Now 4 weeks into the program, these boys have become school leaders and have had a significant reduction in problem behaviors. Window broken over winter break (Pam Perkins, principal Salvador) After it was repaired a 3rd grader was identified as the person responsible. As it was too late to pay for the window, Salvador Principal, Pam Perkins, met with the student and his father and asked how they could “restore” and contribute to the school community. The father worked in landscaping and offered to help set up the school’s drip line for the garden. After spending an entire Saturday working and sweating next to his father, the boy said over and over, “This looks really good. I feel proud.” The boy’s behavior has since improved greatly and the father is now helping on a regular basis with school improvement projects!
Boys Kick in a Fence on the Way home from School (Deb Wallace, NVLA) 2 brothers (4th and 6th grade) got into a scuffle with each other on the way home from school and ended up breaking about 6 fence boards off a picket fence. They were caught by a neighbor who called the police who came and talked to them and told them they would have to pay for the damage. The officer let me know what happened. I took the boys over to the house and they apologized and asked what they could do to make it up to them. The young couple asked them if they would come on sat and paint the fence. They happily agreed. Their mom went over and talked to the couple and let them know she would have the boys there on Sat. The boys understood that they could have pressed charges, but chose not to. They went the last 2 Saturdays and finished the job. They also brought their older brother (12th grader) who is spec ed. He plays the guitar and coincidentally so does the fence owner who ended up inviting him to play with him in his garage studio. They learned a lot about what it means to be a good neighbor, take care of others and their property Student Planner and Back to School Night
(by Julie Herdell, West Park Elementary Principal) WEST PARK SCHOOL RULES
All students will be expected to adhere to the following rules: • Be Safe • Be Respectful • Be Responsible
Best Behavior addresses school wide, classroom, and individual student interventions, as well as family collaboration, and it is one of the few programs that offer supports for all students in the school, some students with additional needs, and the few students who need the most intensive supports. Positive Reinforcement for desired behaviors: Movies, treats, turtle coupons, auctions, happy day notes, good grades, stickers, award certificates, verbal praise, Eagle coupons Consequences for Negative Behavior: We use “Restorative Practices”. Examples are: students practicing the behavior they forgot to show; students filling out a reflection form to think about their choices and to make a plan for change; students doing a good deed for someone they hurt. Parents are notified if a student needs some time in another classroom or are sent to the principal. Consequences for Severe Behavior: Students will be sent directly to the Principal for the following:
• Fighting • Possessing cigarettes, alcohol, knives or other weapons/controlled substances • Defiance of school personnel, out-of-control behavior or habitual profanity
Conference with the parent, Principal and child will be held. Child may be suspended from school for up to five days. Playground Fight, 4th Graders (by Nicole Soriano & Sherry Vieira, Vista 360 Teachers) Dear Parent, During the last 5 minutes of school last Thursday, April 21, your son was involved in a fight on the soccer field. There were 6 boys involved. The boys lost their tempers and were physical by pushing, punching, and hitting each other. Ms. Vieira and Ms. Soriano observed the fight and broke it up. However, since it was the end of the day and the bell rang, they were not able to talk with the boys involved. Today, Monday, April 25, we talked about what happened. We have discussed; other ways to handle aggressive behavior on the soccer field, alternative activities to do instead of staying in a bad situation, and the best thing to do when someone else pushes, punches, or hits you. The boys involved in the fight are not allowed to play soccer on the field during any recess for 2 weeks starting today. In addition, they must serve our school community by any of the following ways: pick up garbage before school, play with primary students during first recess, help the custodian at primary lunch, and get signatures on my “Friendly Interaction Sheet.” Every time one of the following services is chosen, an adult signature is required to show that the service was performed. One point will be given for each service. 15 points need to be earned at the end of the 2-week period. We believe that this unfortunate incident can be a learning experience for these 4th grade boys. While we are very disappointed with their behavior, we know they can behave appropriately and contribute greatly to their school environment in a positive way. Thank you for your support. Ms. Vieira Ms. Soriano __________________________ ____________________________ Parent Signature Student’s Signature __________________________ ____________________________
Friendly Interaction Sheet “H! My name is _______________________________. Could I please get your autograph to show that we have had a friendly interaction? Thank you.”
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Sample email to staff from teacher) Hi All, 4th grade had a problem with several boys on the soccer field during PE a few days back. The way we have handled it is we have asked the boys to serve their school community doing various jobs. Besides picking up garbage, they may choose playing with primary students during recess. They may ask you if you have anything you need done. Feel free to give them a job. They need to get a signature to get credit for their labor. If you do not think they offered their service in a friendly, cooperative fashion, don’t sign their sheet. If they are not being helpful, send them back to their classroom. Our intent is not to add to your job but offer these boys an option of being useful in their community. So far, we have seen their self-esteem increase as well as their sense of belonging to our community. You can identify them by the clipboard they carry with them during first recess, lunch recess and sometimes before school. We would like them to recognize that school is a good place to be and their actions contribute to it being good. Thanks All, Sherry and Nicole (Sample email to staff from principal)
At the BEST team meeting yesterday, we discussed strategies that are in various stages of practice at the classroom and school levels. We are working to keep our school as positive and productive as it can be. We are a place of learning, and we help students to meet our expectations in ways that best help them to learn. Rarely do children—or any of us—learn best in an environment that is negative and punitive.
Sherry and Nicole’s strategy with the errant soccer players is an outstanding example of a restorative practice. Fighting is a serious offense. Instead of the punitive response of suspending the boys, however, which has been the common, get-tough response and well within the Ed Code, the teachers provided a way for the boys to earn their way back into the school community and on to their field trip by performing community service.
Restorative Practices Scripts: Secondary Classroom Disruption to be handled by Administrator (Linda Beckstrom, Harvest Middle School Principal) Student standing in hall, outside classroom door Principal: Hi, how are you? What’s going on? Anything I can help you with? Student: No. Principal: Walk with me. Is there somebody else I need to talk to besides you? Student: Yes, Mrs. Smith. (Tells his side of story) Principal: I’m going to listen to both sides. My experience is that the truth is somewhere in the
middle. I am not saying that you are lying, but it is my job to figure out both points of view.
Student: Finishes story Principal: Are you ready to go back into class and talk to your teacher? (walks student back into class) Principal (to teacher): I was hoping to get a minute of your time because we need to get something
resolved. If not, we can arrange for another time to talk with you and (student name) together.
Teacher: Tells story of what happened, why the student was sent to the hall. Principal: I want to work it out between you. To teacher: My goal is to get him back into class,
learning and cooperating. To student: and for you to feel safe and successful. To both: How are we going to resolve this?
Teacher: States what he/she needs student to do. Principal tries to keep the teacher focused on behaviors they want to see rather than punishment they want meted out.
Principal: Restates what teacher said, “So your teacher is saying that you need to stay in your seat and raise your hand if you have a question. Can you do what your teacher is asking you to do?”
Student: Yes. Principal: To student: Can you look at your teacher and tell him/her in a complete sentence that
you can do it? (Principal may have to create a sentence for the student to repeat). Student: I can stay in my seat and raise my hand with a question. If behavior merits a detention or other sanction: Principal: You may have to serve a 30-minute detention because your behavior was extremely
disruptive to your class. Present a bargain: If you can stay in your seat and raise your hand respectfully to your teacher for the next 2 days, you won’t have to do the detention. OR Is there something you can do in class to help your teacher (e.g. community service) instead of serving the detention OR Can this student serve his detention with you and do something to help you to make up for the time he took away from the class/your instruction, etc.?
Principal returns a few minutes later to class to check on student and provide positive reinforcement to both the student and the teacher.
6th graders Bullying during break & lunch Repeated bullying incidents on the playground perpetrated by a small group of kids. Treatment: Each class of 6th graders came to the gym room where the PE teacher and classroom teacher conducted a circle. As each student used the talking piece, they were able to explain to the kids who were causing the problems how they felt about what they were doing. Re-teaching: We also discussed what the expectations are for student to student and student to adult interactions- respect, appropriate, responsible, etc. Sanction: Suspension was not used. Outcome: The severe behavior has stopped, because students were empowered to let the kids who were bullying know how they felt about it- it was out in the open- a great place to be. Victims also realized they were not alone- so isolation was no longer an issue either. Parents responded very well to this intervention- and suspension was not used as a result. Middle School Boys Fight (by Karen Brocker, AP Silverado Middle School) Neither of the boys has ever had a major incident, and both were friends until this event. The boys started calling each other names during their 3rd period class, and then got into a fight later in the day, pushing and slapping each other. Re-teaching- Conferences with parents Restoration & Treatment- Boys worked on apologies to each other and a project to promote friendship. Sanction - It took several days of supervised milk break and lunch, with some time out of PE to complete the project. Both were on our non-privilege list for 20 days. Outcome - Neither boy was suspended. They are best of friends again!). High School Students Get into Fight across the Street (Annie Petrie, Napa High) Restoration – Families offered to pay for damage in store across the street. Instead of a 5-day suspension provided students with a choice to reduce suspension days and volunteer for “College Night” as an act of community service. Treatment - You should read their essays following the night – many did not think they could go to college but after an evening helping host the event are interested in applying for colleges and financial aid! Chronic Misbehavior from 8th Grade Boy (Dan Scudero, ACMS) Restoration - The team determined that much of his behavior stemmed from seeking peer and adult attention. Now, he is working as a TA in the afternoons when he shows appropriate behavior during the day. Outcome - He is eating up the positive attention from the secretaries and they are enjoying interacting with him on a different level! Fantastic! Two Boys Hurling Racial Insults (Lillian Zmed, Counselor ACHS) After one boy moved his friend’s lunch the other called him a racist name. The first student tackled him and they had to be broken up by staff. Restoration - One boy had to write a paper on hate speech and the other had to apologize. Treatment – The one who tackled the other had to learn how to express his feelings in more constructive ways and will be attending some anger management sessions with the school counselor.
In House Suspension Program (Tom Solberg, New Tech)
• All in house suspensions are logged in AERIES • Student will be placed in a grade level and classroom not of their own. Talk to host staff
member to advise of situation • Student arranges their own plan of action for the day by contacting teachers and group
members before the first in house suspension day. • Student will produce a “to do” list for the day during their in house suspension • Student will be stationed in an area of the classroom that will not disturb the class • Student will not be allowed to communicate with students in the class or teacher unless
specifically to do so by the teacher • Student is not allowed to listen to music • Student will not be allowed to leave class during class time • Student will spend break and lunchtime in the Administration Office • Student is allowed to leave designated class3 minutes before break and lunch start but must
arrive at the Administration Office immediately • Assistant Principal, or designee, will input information into AERIES and make proper notification
Restorative Practices in a Tiered Fidelity Inventory1 Framework (RP-TFI): An Evaluation Tool
Jeffrey Sprague & Tary Tobin
Restorative practices have a long history -- and a recent surge in popularity for use in schools -- in different cultures and places around the world. Ted Wachtel, president and founder of the International Institute for Restorative Practices (iirp.edu), explains that "Restorative practices are transcultural and are useful in bridging divisions between students of different cultures" (Wachtel, 2013, p. 41). He illustrates this with many examples:
• Inner-city Dutch schools with "a lot of nationalities. We have 95% of children whose parents were not born in the Netherlands. . . restorative practices gave me the opportunity and tools to deal with [group pressure] . . . in a very good way" (Wachtel, 2013, p. 41).
• In an "economically disadvantaged school district in Michigan, about one-fifth of its students speak Bengali as their primary language, one-fifth speak Arabic and others speak Bosnian, Polish and Albanian -- 27 languages in all . . . [and] has experienced a 75 percent decrease in bullying since . . . restorative practices were introduced" (Wachtel, 2013, pp. 41-42).
• "Restorative approaches such as "circles" (a particular practice that emerged from First Nation communities in Canada) [is] a way to work through, resolve, and transform conflicts" (Zehr, 2002, p. 4).
• "Indigenous traditions and current adaptations which draw upon those traditions [include] family group conferences adapted from Maori traditions in New Zealand . . . sentencing circles from aboriginal communities in the Canadian north; Navajo peacemaking courts; African customary law . . . Above all, restorative justice is an invitation to join in the conversation so that we may support and learn from each other. It is a reminder that all of us are indeed interconnected" (Zehr, 2002, p. 62).
The inspiration for this tool, RP-TFI, for evaluating restorative practices within a Tiered Fidelity Inventory (TFI) (Algozzine et al., 2014) framework came from the SWPBIS Cultural Responsiveness Companion (Leverson, Smith, & McIntosh, 2015). In the Part 1, definitions and common elements are discussed. In Part 2, for each item in the TFI, related aspects of restorative practices are listed, along with criteria for evaluation. Part 3 contains additional tools, further discussion, and references.
1 Algozzine, B., Barrett, S., Eber, L., George, H., Lewis, T., Putnam, B., Swain-Bradway, J., McIntosh, K., & Sugai, G. (2014). School-wide PBIS Tiered Fidelity Inventory. OSEP Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. Retrieved from https://www.pbisapps.org/Resources/SWIS%20Publications/SWPBIS%20Tiered%20Fidelity%20Inventory%20(TFI).pdf
Culturally Responsive Teaching (CRT): The use of “cultural characteristics, experiences, and perspectives of ethnically diverse students as conduits for teaching them more effectively” (Gay, 2002, p. 106). Restorative circles provide an excellent way for a teacher to learn about and understand the cultural characteristics, experiences, and perspectives of his or her racially and ethnically diverse students in order to be able to use those characteristics, experiences, and perspectives in teaching.
Restorative Practices (RP): "Restorative practices are processes that proactively build healthy relationships and a sense of community to prevent and address conflict and wrongdoing. . .. Types of restorative practices [include] restorative justice . . . community conferencing . . . community service . . . peer juries . . . circle processes . . . preventive and post-conflict resolution programs . . . peer mediation . . . informal restorative practices . . . [such as] affective statements . . . affective questions . . . proactive engagement . . . [and] social-emotional skills" (Restorative Practices Working Group, 2014, pp. 2-4).
Schools that are successfully using a restorative approach select specific RP practices that fit with their needs, not all possible ones. Typically, they use (a) the circle process, including proactive and reactive circle discussions in classrooms; (b) informal conversations with affective statements and questions; and, for more serious problems, (c) formal conferences with school administrators and persons involved in, or concerned with resolving, a harmful incident. Restorative Practices can be used as an alternative, or to reduce the length of time a student may be excluded from the classroom or school.
"In a circle process, participants arrange themselves in a circle. They pass a 'talking piece' around the circle to assure that each person speaks, one at a time, in the order in which each is seated in the circle. A set of values . . . is often articulated as part of the process--values that emphasize respect, the value of each participant, integrity, the importance of speaking from the heart" (Zehr, 2002, p. 51). "While circles can be used as a response to wrongdoing, they are also very effective as a proactive process for building social capital and creating classroom norms" (Costello, Wachtel, & Wachtel, 2009, p. 23).
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS): Contextual fit "is a core principle of SWPBIS [School Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports], [and] SWPBIS is not fully implemented until it is culturally responsive" (Leverson, Smith, & McIntosh, 2015, p. 1). Contextual fit refers to the extent to which the intervention plan incorporates the values, skills, resources, and administrative support of those who implement the plan (Albin, Lucyshyn, Horner, & Flannery, 1996; Benazzi, Horner, & Good, 2006; O’Neill et al., 2015). The degree of contextual fit indicates the extent to which the intervention is implemented with cultural responsiveness and sensitivity. "Lucyshyn, Dunlap, & Albin (2002), in their work on parent training, emphasized the need to adapt to parents' values, schedules, and routines to be successful in teaching them how to implement PBS [positive behavior support] interventions. .
.. Culture, as an indispensable ecological context of human development, has a profound impact on human behavior . . . People determine a particular behavior as appropriate or inappropriate or even problematic on the basis of specific cultural values and beliefs" (Singer & Wang, 2009, p. 37).
Common Elements
The term "Voice" is used in discussions of (a) cultural responsiveness within in school wide positive behavioral interventions and supports (SWPBIS) (Leverson et al., 2015) and (b) circles in RP (http://www.safersanerschools.org/). According to Michelle Maiese (2005), "'Voice' refers to the ability to engage in meaningful conversation, to make a difference through what one says, and to have a say in key decisions. . .. When parties have a voice, their viewpoints, thoughts, and feelings receive a 'fair hearing' and are readily recognized by others. . .. For those who are marginalized, excluded, and/or disenfranchised, voice is a source of empowerment. . .. When all those most affected by the conflict have a voice in open and inclusive decision-making, this fosters . . . peace." (http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/voice) Another common element is the importance of building community and relationships so that within the school and classrooms, a culture of care develops, even if a history of racial or ethnic conflict existed before (Cavanagh, Vigil, & Garcia, 2014). "With improved relationships, distrust, implicit bias and cultural misunderstanding may be reduced between teachers and students historically over-represented in school discipline" (Gregory, 2013, p. 15). Sugai, O'Keefe, and Fallon (2012), after a study of culture and context from a SWPBIS perspective, reported that "Klingner et al., (2005) provide an excellent summary for our conclusions:
For these reasons, we take the stance that school wide PBS interventions should be proactive and promote a positive, culturally responsive climate that is conducive to learning by all. Teachers, administrators, and support staff should understand that perceptions of behavioral appropriateness are influenced by cultural expectations, that what is perceived as inappropriate varies across cultures, and that behaviors occur within larger socio-cultural contexts; connect with their students in ways that convey respect and caring; explicitly teach rules and expected behaviors within a culture of care; provide a continuum of support; and involve families and the community in positive, mutually supportive ways. (p. 19)" (Sugai et al., 2012, pp. 204-206, emphasis added).
Restorative practice circles, culturally responsive teaching, and positive behavioral interventions and supports have developed from different perspectives and each has its own literature base and network of advocates. However, recently, many schools are starting to combine these practices. This is expected to lead to new research to determine if blending these approaches will improve educational outcomes. The next section is a tool for evaluating fidelity of implementation of RP within SWPBIS.
Restorative Practices within a TFI Framework (RP-TFI): An Evaluation Tool
Directions
1. Complete the SWPBIS Tiered Fidelity Inventory (TFI; available at https://www.pbisapps.org/Pages/Default.aspx) and the Action Plan that goes with it. Keep these handy to refer to as each of the related Restorative Practices (RP) elements (listed below) is evaluated.
2. Read the following list of elements2 of Restorative Practices (RP) and evaluate how well each RP element is being implemented, using the following scale:
3. Record any ideas for improving the implementation of RP elements that might be added to the Action Plan that was created based on the TFI.
Elements of Restorative Practices Organized by the TFI Features
TFI 1.1 Team Composition
RP 1.1a Someone with Restorative Practices (RP) expertise is on the school's Tier I team.
0 = No one on the school's Tier 1 team has any RP expertise. 1 = At least one person on the school's Tier 1 team has some level of RP expertise but could use more training or experience. 2 = One or more Tier 1 team members have a high level of RP expertise (professional training and experience). TFI 1.2 Team Operating Procedures
RP 1.2a Team members are leading and influencing the whole school staff in the use of RP.
0 = No one on the school's Tier 1 team is doing anything related to leading or influencing any other school staff members in the use of RP. 1 = Some members of the school's Tier 1 team are doing something related to leading or influencing some other school staff members -- but not all -- in the use of RP. 2 = Team members are leading and influencing the whole school staff in the use of RP. RP1.2b At least 80% of the school staff have indicated willingness to adopt and use RP.
0 = No attempt has been made to determine how many school staff members are interested in or willing to use RP. 1 = Some of the school staff have indicated interest in and/or willingness to use RP but not 80%. 2 = At least 80% of the school staff have indicated willingness to use RP. 2 Sources for ideas for this list are marked with an asterisk in the reference list.
RP 1.3a Behavioral expectations are not just rules but "agreements" developed with input from students and staff members for all school and classroom environments.
0 = Rules or behavioral expectations are not developed as "agreements" with input from students and staff. 1 = Some of our school or classroom behavioral expectations were developed as agreements with some input from students or staff. 2 = Behavioral expectations are agreements that were developed with input from students and staff for school and classroom. RP 1.3b Behavioral expectations include relationship language (e.g., we respect and support each other).
0 = Behavioral expectations for school and classrooms do not include any relationship language. 1 = Behavioral expectations for school or for classrooms include one items related to relationships. 2 = Behavioral expectations for school and for classrooms include topics about peer relationships and student-staff relationships. TFI 1.4 Teaching Expectations
RP 1.4a Students have been taught (a) how to have informal RP conversations with affective statements and questions, (b) the RP circle process, and (c) what to expect and do if they are ever involved as a stakeholder in any role in a formal RP conference.
0 = None of that has been taught to any students. 1 = Some of that has been taught to some students. 2 = Students are taught all these things. RP 1.4b In the classrooms3, RP circles and/or Stop Everything and Dialogue (SEAD) activities (Anderson, n.d.; Riestenberg, 2012) are among the methods used to teach behavior expectations. 0 = Neither RP classroom circles nor SEAD activities are used to teach behavioral
expectations. 1 = RP classroom circles and/or SEAD activities are sometimes used by some teachers to
teach behavioral expectations, but not on a systematic or school-wide basis. 2 = On a systematic, school-wide basis, RP classroom circles and/or SEAD activities are
used to communicate and teach behavioral expectations. TFI 1.5 Problem Behavior Definitions
RP 1.5a Problem behavior definitions are related to information for teachers indicating distinctions among types of behaviors that are considered (a) "serious" enough to warrant a formal RP conference that includes an administrator, (b) best handled in informal RP conversations with teachers, (c) likely to be resolved by a classroom RP circle, or (d) not appropriate for RP management. This could be shown in a flowchart illustrating if and when to use RP, which type (circle, conversation, or conference). Note that participation in a formal RP conference should be voluntary although preliminary individual talk with teacher or principal may lead to student deciding to participate.
0 = Problem behavior definitions have not been related to any information for teachers about when to use RP or what type of RP to use and no flowchart about this for our school exists. 1 = Problem behavior definitions have been related to some information (or a flowchart) for teachers about when to use RP and/or what type of RP to use although it is still not clear. 2 = Problem behavior definitions have been related to information (or a flowchart) for teachers about when to use RP and/or what type of RP to use and it is clear so that decisions can be made quickly. TFI 1.6 Discipline Policies
RP 1.6a District/School policies and procedures describe and emphasize preventive, instructive, and restorative (both proactive and reactive) approaches to student behavior (Algozzine et al., 2014, emphasis added).
0 = Discipline policy has information only on rules and reactive and punitive consequences if rules are broken.
1 = There is some information about some preventive, instructional, and/or RP approaches in the discipline policies and/or some indication of use of these approaches.
2 = RP, both proactive and reactive ones, are described in discipline policies and the school administrator reports consistent use.
RP 1.6b The school's Office Discipline Referral (ODR) form includes an RP option for a consequence / administrative decision.
0 = There is nothing about RP on the ODR form. 1 = RP is not listed on the ODR form as an option for a consequence / administrative
decision but sometimes a comment is written in that mentions RP. 2 = The school's ODR form includes an RP option for a consequence / administrative
decision. RP 1.6c Discipline policies provide clear guidance (written protocols) in use of discipline procedures (e.g., office vs. classroom managed, out of school or alternative) and use of RP in connection with (or instead of) ODRs or out of school or alternative.
0 = The discipline policies do not provide clear guidance in these matters.
1 = The discipline policies provide some guidance on some of these matters but it is not clear for all of them.
2 = Discipline policies provide clear guidance (written protocols) in use of discipline procedures (e.g., office vs. classroom managed, out of school or alternative) and use of RP in connection with (or instead of) ODRs or out of school or alternative.
RP 1.6d The school administrator (or designee) plans for and facilitates restorative conferences as: interacting with students, teachers, and parents and asking questions like: What happened? Who was involved? What needs to happen to set things right? 0 = No records or verbal reports or interviews indicating that this happens. 1 = Some indication that some of this happens sometimes. 2 = Records and/or verbal reports or interviews clearly indicate that restorative
conferences using these questions are planned and facilitated. RP 1.6e When addressing harm, administrators will (Riestenberg, 2012): • Assess the readiness of all parties in using a restorative response • Use restorative questions in face-to-face meetings, • If appropriate involve teachers or other staff affected by harm in face-to-face meetings with
students • Provide teachers with appropriate information on the agreements • Keep track of data: office referrals, restorative meetings, agreements kept, and evaluation
of the restorative process. • Involve the community (staff, students, family, and community members) in reintegrating
students into school and classroom. 0 = Administrators are not using RP to address harm. 1 = Administrators are not formally using RP to address harm; no formal system exists. 2 = Administrators are formally using RP to address harm.
RP 1.6f Restorative conferences, or other formal RP activities to repair harm, are co-facilitated by the professionally trained RP Coach or administrator as agreed upon by staff.
0 = Neither the RP Coach nor an administrator facilitates or there was no agreement about who does this. 1 = The RP Coach or an administrator does facilitate but this is not done in a way agreed upon by the staff. 2 = Restorative conferences, or other formal RP activities to repair harm, are co-facilitated by the professionally trained RP Coach or administrator as agreed upon by staff.
RP 1.6g Restorative conferences are documented and assessed using a checklist such as the one shown below. * 0 = No records or verbal reports or interviews indicating that this happens. 1 = Some indication that something like this happens sometimes.
2 = Records and/or verbal reports or interviews clearly indicate that restorative conferences are assessed using a checklist such as the one shown below:
*Checklist for Restorative Conferences
• All relevant stakeholders (e.g., person(s) affected or harmed, person(s) who caused the harmful incident, school staff person with professional training in leading formal restorative conferences, advocate or support person(s) for the person(s) affected or harmed, advocate or support person(s) for the person(s) who caused the harmful incident) are invited to participate. ___ Yes ___ No
• Participation in a formal RP conference is voluntary although preliminary individual talks with teacher or principal may lead to all relevant stakeholders deciding to participate. ___ Yes ___ No
• RP conference is held as soon as reasonably possible after the harmful incident it concerns. ___ Yes ___ No
• Conference leader directs the following questions to the person who caused the harm (Costello et al., 2009): What happened? ___ Yes ___ No What were you thinking at the time? ___ Yes ___ No What have you thought about since then? ___ Yes ___ No Who has been affected by what you did? ___ Yes ___ No In what way have they been affected? ___ Yes ___ No What do you think you need to do to make things right? ___ Yes ___ No
• Conference leader directs the following questions to the person who was affected or harmed: What did you think when you realized what happened? ___ Yes ___ No What impact has this incident had on you and others? ___ Yes ___ No What has been the hardest thing for you? ___ Yes ___ No What do you think needs to happen to make things right? ___ Yes ___ No
• The RP conference results in consensus on a plan to repair the harm. ___ Yes ___ No • The restorative plan includes measurable descriptions of:
How the harm will be repaired. ___ Yes ___ No How the harm will be avoided in the future. ___ Yes ___ No How the person(s) who caused the harmful incident will give back to the community. ___ Yes ___ No Specific supports for the person(s) who was affected or harmed (see also RP 1.6g below). ___ Yes ___ No Specific supports for the person(s) who caused the harmful incident. (See also RP 1.6g below). ___ Yes ___ No Timeline for completion of responsibilities, including, if needed, follow-up meetings. ___ Yes ___ No
RP 1.6h RP support plans include consideration of possible use (or modification) of the school's PBIS Tier II and Tier III interventions and relevant follow-up activities for that.
0 = Restorative support plans do not include any consideration of possible use (or modification) of the school's PBIS Tier II and Tier III interventions.
1 = Restorative support plans include consideration of possible use (or modification) of the school's PBIS Tier II and Tier III interventions but no relevant follow-up activities.
2 = Restorative support plans include consideration of possible use (or modification) of the school's PBIS Tier II and Tier III interventions and relevant follow-up activities are scheduled.
RP 1.6i A process is described for follow-through on agreed-upon plans made as part of a restorative practice to track accountability for repairing harm and provision of any promised support.
0 = No such process about follow-through is described. 1 = Some mention is made of RP follow-up but it's not a clear description of a process
for tracking accountability for repairing harm or providing any promised support. 2 = A process is clearly described for follow-through on agreed-upon plans made as part
of a restorative practice to track accountability for repairing harm and provision of any promised support.
RP 1.6j A process is described for organizing use of a "peace room" or special place for RP activities (e.g., circles, conferences, Peer Juries) including (a) decision rules for use, (b) physical space, (c) staffing, and (d) invitations to attend. 0 = No such process about a special place for RP activities is described. 1 = Some mention is made of a special place for RP activities but the process for using
that place is not spelled in detail. 2 = A process is clearly described, in detail, for use of a special place for RP activities. TFI 1.7 Professional Development
RP 1.7a A written process is used for orienting all faculty/staff members on core Restorative practices4:
o Affective statements, etc. • Conducting class meetings and circles • Requesting assistance for chronic harm/misbehavior
o Are there scheduled annual training events for school team members? o Is there a faculty-wide orientation led by the full School Climate Leadership team? o Is there a scheduled annual orientation for new faculty members?
4 We will update this list based on final PBIS+RP content.
o Are there documented strategies for orienting substitutes or volunteers? 0 = No process for teaching staff is in place. 1 = Process is informal/unwritten, not part of professional development calendar,
and/or does not include all staff or all core Tier I PBIS + RP practices. 2 = Formal process for teaching all staff all aspects of Tier I system, including all core
Tier I PBIS + RP practices.
RP 1.7b All teachers, support staff, and administrators receive ongoing professional development in the use of RP. 0 = No school staff have training in the use of RP. 1 = Some school staff have some training in the use of RP. 2 = All teachers, support staff, and administrators receive ongoing (initial training and
annual boosters) professional development in the use of RP. .
RP 1.7c Written orientation information on RP is available for all volunteers, substitute teachers, and guest who will be interacting with students, and clarified if they have questions. 0 = No such written information on RP is available. 1 = Some information on RP is available but not all volunteers, substitute teachers and
guests are aware that it is available or have a chance to get any questions clarified. 2 = Written orientation information on RP is available for all volunteers, substitute
teachers, and guest who will be interacting with students, and they are told about it and about how to get any questions they have about it answered.
TFI 1.8 Classroom Procedures5 RP 1.8a Classroom behavior expectations
o Are positively stated o Are publicly posted in all classrooms o Are co-developed with students using “group agreements” o Are regularly reviewed and taught using a variety of formats (at least once per
month), such as class meetings and SEAD activities (Anderson, n.d; Riestenberg, 2012)
0 = Classroom teachers are not communicating or teaching school wide expectations. 1 = Classroom teachers are informally communicating and/or teaching school wide expectations but no formal system exists. 2 = Classrooms are formally communicating and teaching school wide expectations, using a variety of formats (at least once per month), such as class meetings and SEAD activities (Anderson, n.d; Riestenberg, 2012)
. RP 1.8b At least once a week, at least 15-20 minute RP circles or class meetings occur school wide according to an agreed upon schedule.6 0 = Classroom teachers are not formally implementing RP circles or class meetings 1 = Classroom teachers are informally implementing RP circles or class meetings but no
school wide or scheduled system exists or it is not at least once a week for at least 15 minutes.
2 = Classrooms teachers are formally conducting RP circles or class meetings according to school wide, agreed upon schedule for at least once a week for at least 15 minutes. [Part 3 of this document includes more information on recommendations for RP Circles in the classroom, a checklist for assessing quality of RP circles, and examples of frequency and duration from schools and teachers reporting successful use of circles.]
RP 1.8c Quality and fidelity of use of RP circles in the classroom is assessed and documented using the Checklist for RP Circles in Part 3 of this document, or a similar tool. 0 = Classroom RP circles are not being assessed or documented. 1 = Classroom RP circles are informally assessed or documented but not using any kind
of checklist or tool. 2 = Classroom RP circles are formally assessed and documented using the checklist in
Part 3 of this document (or a similar tool: ____________________________________________)
[Reference for the similar tool, if one is used.]
RP 1.8d At least once per week, a talking piece7 is used to share or teach or for an RP circle. 0 = Classroom teachers never use a talking piece. 1 = Classroom teachers sometimes use a talking piece but not often, not every week. 2 = Classrooms teachers use a talking piece at least once a week.
RP 1.8e Classrooms reflect a "culture of care" (Cavanagh, n.d.; 2014; Sugai, O’Keeffe, & Fallon, 2012) as indicated by the following qualitative and quantitative features:
Qualitative Features:
o Focus is on relationships and interactions. o Students treated as co-creators. o Power and responsibility are shared. o Wrongdoing and conflict are learning opportunities. o Capacity of students and teachers is built to solve problems nonviolently.
6 Rita Alfred has suggested (a) Monday morning circle and check in, (b) Wednesday circle at lunch (student run), and (c) Friday afternoon circle and check out. For other examples, see Part 3 of this document and/or the following authors: Amstutz & Mullet (2005); Costello, Wachtel, & Wachtel (2009); Riestenberg (2012); Wachtel & Mirsky (2008). 7 See Using Talking Circles in the Classroom by A. Winters, for information on the "talking piece" at http://pbisnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/talkingCircleClassroom.pdf
o Healing harm to relationships is a focus. Quantitative Features Observed:
o Students are asked a question pertaining to empathy; empathy is the "ability to identify with and feel another person's concerns" (Riestenberg, 2012, p. 34).
o The teachers use an “I “statement to express feelings or model the process of adult thinking.
o The teacher models active listening when seeking input from students (Costello et al., 2009).
o The teacher uses affective language when talking to students and responding to minor problem behavior (reframing, offering support, giving choices; expressing feelings).
0 = Classrooms do not reflect a "culture of care" as indicated by any of these features. 1 = Classrooms have a few of the features of a "culture of care." 2 = Classrooms have many of the features of a "culture of care."
TFI 1.9 Feedback and Acknowledgment8
RP 1.9a Students and staff receive feedback on their participation in RP and acknowledgement for following agreements and cooperating with the school's efforts to create a culture of care using RP. 0 = The school has no systematic plan that involves providing students or staff with
feedback or acknowledgement related to participation in RP. 1 = Some school staff sometimes provide some feedback or acknowledgement related
to participation in RP to some students or to some other staff members, but it is sporadic and not guided by any school plan.
2 = The school has developed a systematic plan that coordinates RP with PBIS and assures that students and staff receive feedback on their participation in RP and acknowledgement for following agreements and cooperating with the school's efforts to create a culture of care using RP.
TFI 1.10 Faculty Involvement
RP 1.10a All school staff participate cooperatively in RP activities as needed. 0 = School staff are not participating cooperatively in RP activities at all. 1 = Some school staff sometimes participate in RP activities but this may or may not be in a cooperative way or when needed.
8 Feedback and acknowledgement, sometimes spoken of as including "rewards" and "positive reinforcement" are key elements of PBIS. However, these have not often been addressed directly in literature on RP, although it is obvious that social attention is a key part of RP and that can function positively or negatively. Indeed, RP is used with the intention of affecting behavior by way of social attention. See Part 3 of this document for more information on this topic.
2 = All school staff are participating cooperatively in RP activities when needed.
RP 1.10b The school leadership team reports the exclusionary discipline outcomes and related RP data to key stakeholder groups, including faculty, monthly. The data are disaggregated by race/ethnicity, gender and disability. 0 = This is not happening at all. 1 = Faculty receive some information on disciplinary outcomes and related RP data
sometimes but not often, not monthly. 2 = Faculty receive monthly reports on exclusionary disciplinary outcomes and related
RP data and the data are disaggregated by race/ethnicity, gender and disability.
TFI 1.11 Student/Family/Community Involvement
RP 1.11a RP has been explained to students/family/community and they participate in RP circles/chats/conferences as needed. 0 = This is not happening at all. 1 = Some explanation of RP has been given to students/family/community and
sometimes some of them participate in some RP activities when needed but either the explanations or the participation, or both, need to be improved.
2 = RP has been explained to students/family/community and when needed, with very few exceptions, they participate in RP activities.
RP 1.11b The school leadership team reports the exclusionary discipline outcomes and related RP data to key stakeholder groups, including students/family/community, monthly. The data are disaggregated by race/ethnicity, gender and disability. 0 = This is not happening at all. 1 = Students/family/community receive some information on disciplinary outcomes and
related RP data sometimes but not often, not monthly. 2 = Students/family/community receive monthly reports on exclusionary disciplinary
outcomes and related RP data and the data are disaggregated by race/ethnicity, gender and disability.
TFI 1.12 Discipline Data
RP 1.12a The school staff, including teachers and administrator(s), have agreed on a process for documenting RP, including teachers' and administrators' activities, responsibilities, ways of following up on how well restorative plans are carried out, and if harmful incidents are occurring repeatedly in spite of restorative efforts or not. 0 = Nothing like this is happening. 1 = We are starting to do this but it is not all worked out yet. 2 = We have agreed on a process for documenting RP, as described above.
RP 1.12b School staff are using the process we agreed upon to document RP activities.
0 = Nothing like this is happening. 1 = Some school staff are sometimes using the process we agreed upon for documenting
RP but not consistently. 2 = School staff are consistently using the process we agreed upon for documenting RP.
RP 1.12c in addition to the discipline data that is collected and graphed, as described in the TFI, the school is collecting data on RP, analyzing that data, and relating the RP data to discipline data. 0 = We have no data on RP. 1 = RP data are collected sometimes but not consistently and/or not analyzing or
relating it to discipline data. 2 = RP data are collected, analyzed, and related to discipline data.
RP 1.12d The school has a system for consistently documenting use of RP in connection with (or instead of) an office discipline referral (ODR), in-school suspension (ISS), or out-of-school suspension (OSS). 0 = Nothing like this is happening. 1 = We are starting to do this but it is not all worked out yet or it is not being
consistently used yet. 2 = The school has a system for consistently documenting use of RP in connection with
(or instead of) an ODR, ISS, or OSS.
TFI 1.13 Data-based Decision Making
RP 1.13a The school leadership team reviews the exclusionary discipline outcomes and related RP data monthly. 0 = Nothing like this is happening. 1 = This happens but not monthly. 2 = The school leadership team reviews the exclusionary discipline outcomes and related RP data monthly.
RP 1.13b At least one goal in the data-based action plan of the School Climate Leadership [Tier 1] team is focused on RP. 0 = There is no data-based action plan developed by a Tier 1 team. 1 = There is a Tier 1 team data-based action plan but it does not include an RP goal. 2 = The Tier 1 team has a data-based action plan that includes at least one RP goal.
TFI 1.14 Fidelity Data
RP 1.14a The Tier 1 team reviews and uses data on the fidelity of implementation of RP practices, using tools such as this document, at least annually. 0 = No data on fidelity of implementation of RP collected.
1 = RP fidelity information is collected informally and/or reviewed or used less than annually.
2 = RP fidelity of implementation data are collected systematically, and reviewed and used annually in school improvement planning.
TFI 1.15 Annual Evaluation
RP 1.15a Tier I team documents fidelity of implementation of RP and evidence related to its effect on student outcomes and school climate, at least annually (including year-by-year comparisons), shares the evaluation with stakeholders (staff, families, community, district), and makes decisions regarding future processes related to RP based on the evaluation. 0 = No evaluation of fidelity of RP implementation takes place or evaluation occurs
without data. 1 = Evaluation of fidelity of RP implementation conducted, but not annually, or
outcomes are not used, or not shared with stakeholders. 2 = Evaluation of fidelity of RP implementation is conducted annually, shared with
stakeholders, and used to make relevant decisions.
1. Circles are used for community building / welcoming. ___Yes ___No
2. Purpose of circle is clearly stated before the circle begins. ___Yes ___No
3. Students have contributed to establishment of circle values. ___Yes ___No
4. Circle keeper is identified for each circle event (can be staff or student). ___Yes ___No
5. Circle keeper consistently states circle guidelines. ___Yes ___No
6. Circle keeper initiates dialogue using a talking piece. ___Yes ___No
7. Circle keeper provides the opportunity for all participants to speak in turn. ___Yes ___No
8. Does the teacher keeps a log about circles? ___Yes ___No
The log should show dates, times, topics, outcomes (Were agreements kept?), fidelity (How well did we follow circle guidelines?), and other comments, including reflection suggestions from Pranis (2005): (a) For Peacemaking Circles: "Are the key parties willing to participate? Are trained facilitators available? Will the situation allow the time required to use the circle process? Can physical and emotional safety be maintained?" (Pranis, 2005, p. 44). (b) For Talking Circles: "Are there people who are willing to participate--does the topic matter to anyone? If not, then a Circle is not appropriate. Am I (the organizer) hoping to convince others of a particular point of view or change others? If the answer is yes, the Circle is not the appropriate forum. Am I open to hearing and respecting perspectives very different from mine? If not, then a Circle is not appropriate. Is the intent respectful of all participants? If not, then a Circle is not appropriate." (Pranis, 2005, p. 50) Other dimensions to consider when reflecting on RP circle processes have been suggested by Gregory, Gerewitz, Clawson, Davis, & Korth (2013) and more recently, in a talk given by Anne Gregory (2015), for the National Network of Restorative School Research: Safety: Are circle agreements kept? If broken, can they be restored? ___Yes ___No
Is there positive rapport (friendly tone) between teacher and student? ___Yes ___No
Do students listen to each other and show empathy? ___Yes ___No
Do students have a voice in circle topics and process? ___Yes ___No
Do students share personal experiences appropriately? ___Yes ___No
If the circle involves problem-solving, is the problem clearly identified and are possible
solutions considered in a respectful way? ___Yes ___No
Do students have a positive attitude and stay focused? ___Yes ___No
9 See Pranis, 2005, pp. 44-45 for 4 key stages: (a) determining suitability, (b) preparation, (c) convening all parties, (d) follow-up.
Restorative Practice Implementation Questions for School Staff
When asked to respond to the following questions about implementation, most school staff who are asked will answer at least 5 of the 7 questions well and in accord with the PBIS + RP training provided:
1. Briefly, what is the general concept of restorative justice in a school context?
2. Have you used affective questions and statements to resolve conflict and manage student behavior?
3. Could you demonstrate the use of affective questions and statements to resolve conflict and mange student behavior?
Please provide an example of an affective statement.
4. Do you model and use active listening as a conflict resolution and behavior management strategy?
Please provide an example of active listening.
5. I model and use reframing as a conflict resolution and behavior management strategy
Please provide an example of reframing.
6. Have you used restorative circles in the past week to reinforce expected behavior and
foster positive school climate? Please provide an example of using circles in your classroom.
7. Have you used restorative circles in the past week to responsively address harm and wrongdoing? Please provide an example of conducting a circle in your classroom in response
Frequency and Duration of Circles: Examples from Successful Use of Circles How often for circles?
"Circles at the beginning of each day can help develop common understandings of guidelines, expectations, and values . . . address tensions or problems that may have arisen the day before" (Amstutz & Mullet, 2005, p. 55, emphasis added).
"A fifth grade class began holding circle meetings every morning . . . [Students became] more respectful of each other." (Costello, Wachtel, & Wachtel, 2009, p. 23, emphasis added).
"At the beginning of each class, you may do a go-around in which each student responds to a question or statement like, 'How are you feeling today?'" (Costello, Wachtel, & Wachtel, 2009, p. 24, emphasis added).
" Once circles have been established as a normal part of the classroom routine, at the beginning of each class, at the beginning and ending of each week, or perhaps every Wednesday, students will become very comfortable with the process" (Costello, Wachtel, & Wachtel, 2009, pp. 27-28, emphasis added).
CSF [Community Service Foundation] Buxmont School has "morning circle meetings" (Wachtel & Mirsky, 2008, p. 11, emphasis added).
At the "Academy" [a project-based program for students "struggling with behavior or academic performance" at Palisades High School] 'check-in' and 'check-out' circles [occur] at the beginning and end of each 90-minute class period -- an opportunity for students to set goals and expectations together Wachtel & Mirsky, 2008, pp. 37-38, emphasis added).
"Souderton High Spanish teacher Tammy Caccova does check-in and check-out circles at the beginning and end of class periods, which has helped build community in her classes (Wachtel & Mirsky, 2008, p. 78, emphasis added).
"Indian Crest learning-support teacher Doug Henning (whose students have learning, emotional or behavioral issues) . . . has regular check-in and check-out circles. Monday is "good and new day," when student share one good or new thing. Friday is "smiles and cries day," when they share something happy or sad" (Wachtel & Mirsky, 2008, p. 79, emphasis added).
At a residential special school for boys with emotional and behavioral difficulties, ages 11 to 16, "circle meetings [are held] at the end of every school day . . . we ask questions about the last 24 hours . . . 'What had gone well? . . . What has not gone so well? . . . [Later] we changed the school timetable to hold classroom circles each morning in addition to the unit-based evening circles" (Wachtel & Mirsky, 2008, pp. 109-111, emphasis added).
Pranis (2005): Does not address this at all but see her directions for deciding if a Circle is appropriate for a situation.
Riestenberg (2012) provides information on different answers to this in different schools -- all with good results:
• "A group of multi-cultural, multi-political high school students gathered once a week for a one-credit semester course in Circle after the September 11 (2001) attacks" (Riestenberg, 2012, p. 106, emphasis added).
• "One alternative learning program asks the students at the Wednesday weekly Circle to share a high and a low of the week so far" (Riestenberg, 2012, p. 102-103, emphasis added).
• "Elementary school teachers in Minneapolis public schools used the 'Magic Circle' to start or end the day. Magic Circle was a self-esteem and drug abuse prevention programs" (p. 118).
• "When I learned about restorative measures and the Circle process . . . It resonated with . . . the morning meeting from Responsive Classroom, Olweus's class circle, the old Magic Circle" (p. 118, emphasis added).
• "A 'recovery school' is an alternative learning center where the students have all been in treatment for chemical dependency . . . The school started using Circles for students to 'check in' at the beginning of the week and to 'check out' at the end of the week. The school also began using circles to repair harm" (pp. 125-126).
• "We implemented a daily 'check in' circle" (p. 129). • A music teacher starts each class with a 3-minute circle. First, one minute of silence.
Then each student says his or her name and one word about how they are feeling. (p. 146)
• "The staff [in a K-8 school] was trained by Cordelia Anderson and was encouraged to use it in their classrooms on a daily basis . . . In reality, teachers were not always able to conduct their morning meetings in Circle; other demands sometimes disrupted their regular routine" (p. 150)
• At a charter school, Circles were held "once a week" (p. 213). • "Setting aside time--even once a week in a high school or daily in an elementary
classroom--for students to talk, discuss, and debate with each other, to listen, confer, and problem solve with each other seems a small investment, when the results are a safer school" (p. 215, emphasis added).
How much time should be allocated for a Circle10?
10 For a formal "conference" -- not a classroom Circle but a conference for a serious disciplinary infraction, Thorsbourne & Vinegrad (2009) state: "Preparation time will depend on the circumstances and complexity of the incident, the number of people involved and how willing they are to participate. Facilitating the conference will take on average one and a half to two hours. Conferences are usually held within one to five days of the incident occurring. Sometimes the process is used as the 'ceremony of reintegration' to terminate a fixed term exclusion (suspension) before the pupil is back in class" (p. 88).
There should be enough time for this guideline: "Everyone gets a chance to talk without interruption" (Riestenberg, 2012, p. 91). To estimate how much time would be needed, consider:
• (a) the number of people involved and likely to be willing to speak and start by
estimating at least 1 or 2 minutes or more per person for each time the talking piece will be passed around;
• (b) the topic to be discussed and type of circle;
• (c) how long opening ("Invite the students to sit in silence for a minute or to participate in simple yoga breathing . . . [then] a reading or a story . . . [to] establish its focus" (Riestenberg, 2012, pp. 99-1010 and closing ceremonies ("Closings can be formal with a reading of another quote or story, or they can be a summary of the discussion . . . time for the keeper to highlight one idea" (Riestenberg, 2012, p. 101) will take;
• (d) if chairs & center piece need to be set up (and then put back afterwards), how long that usually takes; (e) whether or not decisions (based on consensus, of course) need to be made; and
• (f) how many times you expect to need to go around the circle -- "Circles usually involve a number of rounds" (Amstutz & Mullet, 2005, p. 53). Consider these two guidelines from Riestenberg (2012): (1) "Ali Anfinson, a Circle keeper and trainer, speaks of the 'rule of three' for passing around the talking piece. 'Passing the talking piece around three times on a topic or question usually elicits a response or comment from everyone (p. 111) and (2) "Most circles close with one final pass of the talking piece, so that everyone can essentially 'check out.' The Circle keeper may solicit final thoughts by asking, 'In one word, how was this Circle for you?' or 'Is there anything else anyone has to say?' (p. 101).
Various Amounts of Time Reported
Alternatively, Riestenberg (2012) reports that "Another teacher holds fifteen-minute Circles with the students as they stand circling the classroom" (p. 113). Costello, Wachtel, and Wachtel (2009) describe a longer one: "What was intended as a brief circle to introduce new students and begin the new school year turned into a lengthy discussion . . . talked about their fears and frustrations. The circle went on for three hours" (p. 31). At Springfield Township High School, "Eighth grade teacher Michele Mazurek uses check-ins on Mondays and check-outs on Fridays . . . Just doing it twice a week has cut down on the number of incidents of teaching . . . Social studies teacher Dave Gerber . . . [says] 'You don't have to spend 40 minutes doing a circle. You can spend five minutes and it is effective'" (Wachtel & Mirsky, 2008, pp. 53-54). [No explanation is provided about how to do an effective circle in 5 minutes -- but see below for someone else's explanation of a 3-minute circle.]
A music teacher starts each class with a 3-minute circle. First, one minute of silence. Then each student says his or her name and one word about how they are feeling. (Riestenberg, 2012, p. 146)
Different Backgrounds, Common Goals
PBIS and RP have different backgrounds yet can be blended because of common goals: better outcomes for students, teachers, and schools. PBIS builds on the strengths of Applied Behavior Analysis and the study of school systems. RP builds on two theories, social control theory and social-cultural theory. Social control theory is concerned with people's relationships, commitments, values, norms, and beliefs that affect decisions to get along well with others. If individuals accept peer norms and are bonded with, and have a stake in their wider community, they will voluntarily limit their propensity to commit deviant acts11. Social-cultural theory12 includes an important concept called the zone of proximal development -- the distance between the actual development level . . . and the level of potential development . . . under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers [e.g., in a circle]. (See http://psychology.about.com/od/developmentecourse/f/sociocultural-theory.htm)
11 Hirschi, T. (2002). Causes of delinquency. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Publishers. 12 Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
References Albin, R. W., Lucyshyn, J. M, Horner, R. H., & Flannery, B. K. (1996). Contextual fit for behavioral
support plans: A model for “goodness of fit.” In L. Koegel, R. Koegel, & G. Dunlap (Eds.), Positive behavioral support: Including people with difficult behavior in the community (pp. 81-98). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
*Algozzine, B., Barrett, S., Eber, L., George, H., Lewis, T., Putnam, B., Swain-Bradway, J., McIntosh, K., & Sugai, G. (2014). School-wide PBIS Tiered Fidelity Inventory. OSEP Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. Retrieved from https://www.pbisapps.org/Resources/SWIS%20Publications/SWPBIS%20Tiered%20Fidelity%20Inventory%20(TFI).pdf
*Amstutz, L. S., & Mullet, J. H. (2005). The little book of restorative discipline for schools. Intercourse, PA: Good Books.
*Anderson, C. (no date). Restorative justice and circles. Sensibilities Prevention Services. Retrieved from http://www.cordeliaanderson.com/SEAD&CircleTools
Benazzi, L., Horner, R. H., & Good, R. H. (2006). Effects of behavior support team composition on the technical adequacy and contextual fit of behavior support plans. Journal of Special Education, 40, 160-170.
*Cavanagh, T. (no date). Culture of Care Observation Tool. Appendix C of Professional Development Training Proposal in Cavanagh's "RJ Education Vision." Unpublished tool. Fort Collins, Colorado: Restorative Justice Education.
*Cavanagh, T., Vigil, P, & Garcia, E. (2014). A story legitimating the voices of Latino/Hispanic students and their parents: Creating a restorative justice response to wrongdoing and conflict in schools. Equity and Excellence in Education, 47(4), 565-579. [See also http://americanindigenousresearchassociation.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Cavanagh-et-al.-Restorative-Justice.pdf]
*Costello, B., Wachtel, J., & Wachtel, T. (2009). The restorative practices handbook for teachers, disciplinarians and administrators. Bethlehem, PA: International Institute for Restorative Practice.
Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53, 106-116. Retrieved from https://www.uwec.edu/COEHS/upload/Pattee-Article.pdf
*Gregory, A., (2013). The promise of restorative practices for reducing racial disparities in school discipline. Collaborative on racial and gender disparities. Chicago, IL. Retrieved from http://gsappweb.rutgers.edu/rts/equityrsch/equitypdfs/Equity%20and%20Restorative%20Practices.pdf
*Gregory, A. (November 19, 2015). Restorative practices and fidelity of implementation. Paper presented for the National Network of Restorative School Research. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers.
*Gregory, A., Gerewitz, J., Clawson, K., Davis, A., Korth, J. (2013). RP-Observe Manual. Short excerpt posted: http://www.iirp.edu/pdf/pa13-handout-gregory-davis.pdf
*Kidde, J., & Alfred, R. R. (2011). Restorative justice: A working guide for our schools. San Leandro, CA: Alameda County Health Care Services Agency, School Health Services Coalition. Retrieved from http://acschoolhealth.org/Docs/Restorative-Justice-Paper.pdf but also see for citation: http://reclaimingfutures.org/juvenile-justice-system-school-to-prison-pipeline-restorative-justice-guide-for-schools
Klingner, J. K., Artiles, A. J., Kozleski, E., Harry, B., Zion, S., Tate, W. Riley, D. (2005). Addressing the disproportionate representation of culturally and linguistically diverse students in
special education through culturally responsive educational systems. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(38). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v13n38/.
*Lewis, S. (2009). Improving school climate: Findings from schools implementing restorative practices. Bethlehem, PA: International Institute on Restorative Practices. A link to a PDF of the report retrieved from http://www.iirp.edu/pdf/ImprovingSchoolClimate.pdf
*Leverson, M., Smith, K., & McIntosh, K. (2015). PBIS CR companion guide. Unpublished working draft. Eugene, University of Oregon, College of Education.
Lucyshyn, J. M., Dunlap, G., & Albin, R. W. (Eds.). (2002). Families and positive behavior support: Addressing problem behaviors in family contexts. Baltimore: Brookes.
Maiese, M. (2005). Voice. Beyond Intractability. Retrieved from http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/voice
O'Neill, R. E., Albin, R. H., Storey, K., Horner, R. H., & Sprague, J. R. (2015). Functional assessment and program development for problem behavior: A practical handbook, 3rd ed. Independence, KY: Cengage Learning.
*Pranis, K. (2005). The little book of circle process: A new/old approach to peacemaking. Intercourse, PA: Good Books.
*Restorative Practices Working Group. (2014). Restorative practices: Fostering healthy relationships and promoting positive discipline in schools: A guide for educators. Opportunity to Learn Campaign. Retrieved from http://www.otlcampaign.org/restorative-practices
*Riestenberg, N. (2012). Circle in the square: Building community and repairing harm in school. St. Paul, MN Living Justice Press.
Singer, G. H. S., & Wang, M. (2009). The intellectual roots of positive behavior support and their implications for its development. In W. Sailor, G., Dunlap, Sugai, & R. Horner (Eds.), Handbook of positive behavior support (pp. 17-46), a volume in the Issues in Clinical Child Psychology series. New York: Springer.
*Sprague, J. (2015). PBIS + RP Fidelity Alpha Table 1.2. Unpublished draft. Eugene, University of Oregon, College of Education.
*Sugai, G., O'Keeffe, B. V., & Fallon, L. M. (2012). A contextual consideration of culture and school-wide positive behavior support. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 14, 197-208.
*Swain-Bradway, J., Eber, L., Johnson, E., Balgoyen, S., Maggin, D., & Hearn, A. (2015, April 9). Restorative practices implementation checklist. Unpublished draft. Chicago: Midwest PBIS Network.
* Tobin, T. J., Tobin, J. C., & Vincent, C. G. (2015, November 10). Circling up for culturally responsive teaching and positive, restorative discipline. Presentation at the Northwest Positive Behavior Support (NWPBIS) Conference, Seattle, WA.
*Wachtel, T. (2013). Dreaming of a new reality: How restorative practices reduce crime and violence, improve relationships and strengthen civil society. Pipersville, PA: The Piper's Press.
*Wachtel, T. (2013). Defining restorative. Bethlehem, PA: International Institute for Restorative Practices. Retrieved from http://www.iirp.edu/pdf/Defining-Restorative.pdf
*Wachtel, T., & Mirsky, L. (2008). Safer saner schools: Restorative practices in education. Bethlehem, PA: International Institute for Restorative Practices.
*Zehr, H. (2002). The little book of restorative justice. Intercourse, PA: Good Books.
• Two randomized control trials in elementary schools (C.P. Bradshaw, Koth, Thornton, & Leaf, 2009; Lynne-Landsman, Bradshaw, & Ialongo)
• One completed randomized control trial in middle schools (Sprague et al., submitted)
• Multiple single subject studies and evaluation studies documenting positive effects (C. P. Bradshaw & Garbarino, 2004)
• Multiple case study reports in U.S. and Canada (Leff, Kupersmidt, Patterson, & Power, 1999; Lewis, 2009; Marini, Dane, Bosacki, & YLC-CURA., 2006; Sumner, et al., 2010)
