6. RJ in North America
• Elmira, Ontario – 1974 – Victim/Offender
Reconciliation, link.
• Minnesota leads the nation, link.
• 1990’s Nancy Riestenberg, link
7. “Restorative justice is a process to
involve, to the extent possible, those who
have a stake in a specific offense and to
collectively identify and address harms,
needs, and obligations, in order to heal
and put things as right as possible.”
8. Restorative Justice*
• Conflict understood as a wound in
relationships and fabric of the community
• Changing hearts and minds requires human
encounter, acknowledgement of each other’s
story, and tolerance of differences
• Focus is on humanizing the conflict and
repairing the harm
9. • Creation of a safe place where people can speak
and listen from the heart
• Suspension of judgmental attitudes
• Openness to hearing the life context of the other
person
*Mark S. Umbreit, Ph.D.
Center for Restorative Justice & Peacemaking
University of Minnesota, School of Social Work
10.
11. • respect for all involved
• rooted in deeper values
–equal worth of all people
–appreciation for diversity
–belief in interconnectedness
• Problem Solving/Empowering
13. Restorative Process
• Return to a Balance
• Restore Harmony
• Make things Right
• Plan for the future
• Teaches self-governing
Blog Post on September 24
Minnesota Restorative Services Coalition Resources
14.
15. Accountability
• Acknowledging that you caused harm
• Understanding the harm from other
viewpoints
• Recognizing that you had a choice
• Taking steps to make amends
• Taking action to change
16. Healing
• Addressing what thwarts your good
• Honoring the Harm
• Coming full Circle or around the spiral
• Working towards wholeness
• Becoming a better person
17. Besides attending to the needs of the
victims, restorative practices usually
generates some level of personal
change for all those involved:
• Greater sense of understanding
• Compassion
• Increase of self-respect
• Increase of respect for others
- M.Farley 4/27/10 ppt
18. Restorative Measures is NOT
• A specific program
• Forced upon
• Suitable for all settings
• Saying “sorry”
• New or only in Wisconsin
• A replacement for all discipline process
22. Relationship and Respect – These are values and
behaviors we carry into the process.
Responsibility – This R speaks to our ability to
listen to another's story and fully tell our own
story with complete honesty.
Repair – We agree to repair the harm we caused
to the extent possible, even if we didn't intend
the harm.
Reintegration – This R requires a willingness to
open our heart's door to let another back in
once they have demonstrated their integrity by
accepting responsibility and repairing the harm
to the extent possible.
23. When you plant lettuce, if it does not
grow well, you don't blame the
lettuce. You look into the reasons it is
not doing well. It may need fertilizer,
or more water, or less sun. You
never blame the lettuce.
—Thich Nhat Hanh
28. Guiding questions
• Who has been hurt?
• What are their needs?
• Whose obligations are these?
• Who has a stake in this situation?
• What is the appropriate process to involve
stakeholders in an effort to put things
right?
29. The Five Magic Questions
• What happened?
• What were you thinking?
• How were you feeling?
• Who else has been affected by this?
• What do you need now so that the harm can be
repaired ?
30. In relationships we are broken and
in relationships we are healed.
Judge Ed Wilson
Rondo to Rwanda
31. Restorative Measures . . .
The building of social capital and
achieving social discipline
through participatory learning
and decision making
- M.Farley 4/27/10 ppt
32. Restorative measures build on the
premises:
• From coercion to healing
• From solely individual to individual and
collective accountability
• From primary dependence on the state to
greater self reliance within the community
• From justice as “getting even” to justice as
“getting well”
- M.Farley 4/27/10 ppt
34. Values
• Goals & ways of behaving despite
objects or situation.
• Standards & Principles that guide our
actions.
• Should do, rather than want or have
to.
35. Restorative Measures
• Change in language, why to what happened.
• Responding to harm vs rule broken.
• Empowering community (classroom)
resolution.
• Involving students/others in outcomes
• Build restorative skill-sets before resolving
conflict
• Clear expectations/baseline behaviors
37. Restorative Measures in Schools
• Based in Indigenous wisdom and modern
restorative justice philosophy plus:
– positive youth development, social emotional
learning, psychology of affect, cognitive psychology
• Consists of principles and practices
• Focuses on relationships and fair practices
• Whole school approach: re-affirm, repair, rebuild
– Peaceable schools/social emotional learning
– Affective statements/questions; mediation
– Collaborative problem solving/repair of harm
– Pranis, Stuart & Wedge; Thorsborne & Vinegrand; Stutuzman
Amstutz & Mullet; Morrison; Hopkins; Schiff & Bazemore; McColl
& Wachtell
38. A Whole School Restorative approach
can contribute to:
• Emotional Literacy
• Addressing bullying behaviours
• Reducing staff turnover and burnout
• Raising morale and self-esteem
• Culture of inclusion and belonging
39. A Whole School Restorative approach
can contribute to:
• Happier and safer schools
• Mutually respectful relationships
• More effective teaching and learning
• Reducing exclusion
• Raising attendance
40. Good relationships need to be at the heart of
everything a school does if effective
teaching and learning are to take place.
4 Key Relationships in School Buildings:
• Teacher to Teaching
• Teacher to Student
• Student to Student
• Student to Learning
45. “Peacemaking Circles bring together the ancient
wisdom of community and contemporary
value of respect for the individual in a process
which honors the presence and dignity of
every participant, values their contributions,
emphasizes the connectedness of all things,
supports emotional and spiritual expression,
and gives equal voice to all.”
Kay Pranis 2001
46.
47. Circle Process
• Method for providing Restorative Justice
• Advanced Training strongly recommended
• Four Stage format
• Based on values
• Effective for elementary youth – college age
• Brain-based & SEL based
49. Tertiary Prevention:
POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL Specialized
Intervention & Individualized
SUPPORT Systems for Students
5%
with High-Risk Behavior
Secondary Prevention:
15%
Specialized Group
Systems for Students
with At-Risk Behavior
Primary Prevention:
School-/Classroom-
Wide Systems for
All Students,
Staff, & Settings
80% of Students
50. Restorative Practices
Triangle
Intensive Intervention
Few Re-Build
Relationships
Some Early Intervention
Repair
Relationships
All
Prevention & Skill
Building
Re-Affirm
Relationships
55. Types & Examples of Circle
• Community-Connection Building
– RJ Class/Culture
– Classroom connections
• Centered around a risk/behavior
– Boxer shorts as pajama’s
• Centered around an incident/In response to a
wrong-doing
– Fight, vandalism
56. Effective School-based Circles
•Circles as climate & culture
•Tier I, II & III
•Open & Close
•Values
•Talking Piece
•Four Stages
•Getting Acquainted
•Building Relationships
•Addressing Issues
•Taking Action
57. Tier II
• “I smell a Circle!”
• Circumstance in the Center Tier III
• Role Models and those who • Incident of Harm
struggle • Prepare harmed & harmer
• What could we do better • Strong community
• Plan of action for members
community • What can be done to repair
• Plan of action for harmer to
make things right
58. Effective School-based Circles
“Wide” Topics:
•Community Building
•Addressing Culture
•Planning Circles
•Educational Use
•Sharing, promoting inclusion
“Narrow” Topics:
•Concerning behavior
•Incidents of harm
•Reintegrating a student
•IEP meetings
•Problem Solving
60. Outcomes
• Victims & Offenders – prefer over formal
justice process
• Offenders are more compliant
• Victims are more satisfied
• Reduces Victim PTSD
• Saves money
• Reduces recidivism
• Provides for community input
61. IIRP comparison
Issue – students report before after
students will make fun of 70 % 29%
you
You get picked on 49% 16%
experienced theft 47% 24%
Wrecked property incident 31% 8%
63. Zero Evidence of Zero Tolerance
working.
B. Morrison
ABA & the APA
Chicago Public Schools
-Summer ‘07
2/3/2013 63
64. Outcomes Cass Lake-Bena Elementary
In school suspensions
• ’01 61 suspensions a month all year long
• ’02 13 suspensions a month (first 3 months)
Last Quarter First Q
97 Noise or swearing 40
54 off task 20
10 inappropriate physical contact 1
65. Pattengill Middle School, MI
• 15% drop in suspensions
(other schools increased)
• Averted 2 expulsions
• 93% of students participated
• 90% new skills, 86% used those
• 1 Elem/3 MS/1 HS saved Lansing students
1,500 days of suspension.
66. Practitioner Check-list
Understand the Philosophy
Knowledge of the intended outcomes
Experience and comfort w/healing
Understanding of accountability to community
Knowledge of the Circle Process
Experience in a Restorative Justice Circle
Support and team members
Knowledge of the stages, role of keeper, tips &
techniques of Circle-keeping
67. Circle-keeping is not a
position of power.
Circle-keeping is a
position of love.
- M.Farley 4/27/10 ppt
68. 5 stage model
1. Own develop the vision
2. Steering group
3. Training team
4. Support the team
5. Plan organization & policy review
69. A School’s Journey
Change
changes people
• As many as possible to ‘walk the talk’
• Utilize the circle process
• Establish a strong working enviornment