School Discipline
Learning institutions have in place policies or guidelines that they use when dealing with students that threaten the safety of others or whose behaviors do not conform to the expected outcomes. The basic expectation when adopting these policies is that they would protect the other students from any negative behaviors affecting their learning processes. In some cases, learning institutions are forced to consider temporary suspension or permanent expulsion as some of the drastic measures to deal with such behaviors. The traditional approaches used to reduce conflict and misbehavior in schools often lack that sense of effectiveness in promoting discipline among students. Therefore, learning institutions are shifting their focus towards trying to under the value or implications that restorative practices may have in reducing cases of student suspension. A review of literature indicates a significant number of researchers agree that use of restorative practices may be of great value in reducing student suspensions.
Zero Tolerance
Zero tolerance is an approach in which schools consider swift and strict punishment for any unwanted behaviors that go against overall expectations. Traditionally, schools have used zero tolerance policies to deal with cases where students are involved in much more serious offences, such as truancy, bullying, or fighting. The whole design around zero tolerance policies in learning institutions focuses on promote deterrence as one of the ways to deal with cases of indiscipline in schools ( Augustine et al., 2018; Gregory et al., 2016). However, many of these policies fail to achieve their intended objective, which is indiscipline deterrence, resulting in instances where students engage in misbehaviors regardless of existence of such punishments. Unfortunately, considering zero tolerance policies as the only way to deal with misbehavior among students may be counterproductive. For example, when a student is suspended from schools due to misbehavior, the only impact is that the student is much more likely to experience lower academic performance compared to others.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
An American Psychological Association Zero Tolerance Task Force, convened in June 2005, focused on evaluating the impacts that zero tolerance is having on the climate in schools. In its 2008, the task force noted that the adoption of zero tolerance does not necessarily improve school climate or safety (Kane, et al., 2008). The adoption of zero tolerance policies only contributed to an increase in the rates of suspension and expulsion, which had negative impacts on the performance of students. Burnes (2009) notes that although zero tolerance policies may be viewed as effective, they occur in absence of intervention aimed at advancing pro-social responses for the students involved. The main issue of concern is that many of the suspended students are much more likely to engage in similar misbehaviors once they are back to school after a suspension regardless of the punitive measures taken.
The use of suspensions or expulsions among students should only be considered in cases where students engage in misbehaviors that put the physical safety of other students at risk. The main challenge when dealing with zero tolerance policies is that many of these policies are not designed with the focus being on the student engaging in misbehaviors. Instead, they are designed as a form of punishment without due consideration of the fact that students are much more likely to retaliate. Critics of zero tolerance policies argue that most of these policies often fail to consider the position of the student and how the school may help in changing his/her behavior (Gregory et al., 2016). The outcome is that the punishment of suspension or, in serious cases, expulsion is unjust and unequal considering that it only creates a situation where students face serious challenges in their learning processes. The unequal nature of these punishments can be seen from the fact that students of color receive far harsher disciplinary action compared to other students.
Racial Disparities in School Discipline
An evaluation of school suspensions and expulsions shows a significant racial disparity. Todnem By (2005) supports the position that African American students are suspended much more frequently attributed to their much higher rate of misbehavior compared to any other community. The challenge when dealing with misbehaviors among African American students is that they often believe that the approaches taken as part of disciplining them are exclusionary when compared to students from other races. The U.S Department of Education Office for Civil Rights notes that the average rate of suspension for white students is 4.6% while that of African American students is 16.4% ( Augustine et al., 2018). That serves as an indication of the fact that that there is need to come up with a new approach to dealing with misbehavior among students that would create an even ground for discipline and punishment.
Regarding the adoption of restorative practices in schools, race also places a key role in determining whether schools adopt such practices. Kline (2016) notes that schools with a higher percentage of African American students are far less likely to consider the idea of using restorative practices. The key issue of concern is that many of these schools consider such practices as being non-effective when dealing with such students. However, the assumption against restorative practices is often misinformed considering that many of the traditional punishments considered, such as suspensions, only create a gap between students and teachers. Cavanagh (2009) highlights the need to come up with a new approach that would help create a shift towards new strategies that would be of value as teachers are dealing with their students in learning environment. The objective is to create a new standard that would ensure students feel the need to change their misbehaviors as opposed to them becoming much more defiant to the school rules.
Alternatives to Zero Tolerance
While considering failure by zero tolerance policies to achieve the intended outcome, which is to promote deterrence, learning institutions find themselves facing the need for consideration of alternatives. Kane et al. (2009) argue that extremely punitive school discipline policies may not have any value in reducing misbehavior among students but may lead to an increase in the number of suspensions. Adopting policies on zero tolerance does not help in understanding students; thus, creating a situation where it becomes much harder for students to change their misbehaviors. One such alternative that schools may consider as part of pushing for a much better understanding of students is advancing use of restorative practices. The main objective for learning institutions as they adopt these practices should be the fact that they would help in reducing the rates of suspension considering that they focus more on the student.
Restorative practices focus on an evidence-based approach aimed at restoring the relationship between the victim and the offender with the aim of finding a way forward. Armour (2015) notes that the use of restorative practices in schools serves as an approach that helps when responding to conflict and aids in building relationships in an inclusive yet nonpunitive manner. In other words, these practices will help ensure that the students engaged in misbehavior understand that their behaviors are having serious impacts on other students. On the other hand, restorative practices also offer an opportunity for teachers to respond to student’s disruptive behaviors or actions within a ‘responsive circle’ (Hayes, 2018; McCluskey et al., 2008). The circle helps students discuss any key factors contributing to conflicts with their offenders. Emphasis of such practices is on the harm committed not the person that was involved in committing the harm. The basic expectation is that this will help push a much more advanced outcome in ensuring students learn the importance of taking responsibility for their behaviors and actions.
Restorative Practices
The implementation of restorative practices in a school setting is a significant measure that helps to reduce suspensions among the students. Considering the diversities experienced in a school setting, it is important for school administrators to have adequate and effective strategies that may help in dealing with the inappropriate behaviors among the students. Burnes (2009) maintains that school administrations should not only focus on punishing the students with inappropriate behaviors but should also ensure that the students are able to change their behaviors gradually. Constant punishments without providing guidance on effective behavior change may result in a recurrent situation of the indiscipline cases among the students (Burnes, 2009; Todnem By, 2005). In that it is important to change from the common punitive measures such as suspensions to the use of an approach that focuses on restoring the discipline of the students. Although the change of view is not easy, a gradual implementation of an effective approach towards restorative practices may enable the students to change their behavior.
The first significant aspect of consideration when focusing on the issue of restorative practices in a school setting is the fact that discipline of the students is mainly defined by the nature of relationships that exist in a school. Todnem By (2005) argues that a majority of the disciplined students in the learning institutions tend to have positive relations, which play a significant role in fostering good interactions. When dealing with the key factors that results to the suspension of the students, it is important to note that most of the conflicts and cases could be resolved through positive interactions. Additionally, majority of the students prefer to undergo the restorative practices rather than the suspensions considering the dire consequences that they experience. In that case, the implementation of restorative practices in a school setting may not only focus on reducing the rates of suspension among the students but also focus on creating a positive and gradual transformation of the student’s behavior.
Secondly, the implementation of restorative practices model not only focuses on the victim but also on other students and the entire school environment. Kline (2016) discusses that the practices do not capitalize on victimizing an individual but encourages all students to engage in positive behavior that promotes good relations. In a situation where students have a conflict, the restorative practices model provides a problem-solving approach that enables the conflicting parties to resolve the conflict and work towards maintain good relations. In this case, the main objective of the practices is to ensure that the offenders understand their mistakes and learn an approach that may help to prevent the occurrence of the such incidents in future. Cavanagh (2009) mentions that students gain the ability to understand the consequences of inappropriate behaviors without necessarily having to undergo through suspensions and other tough and ineffective punitive measures.
Another vital aspect of consideration is that the restorative practices focus on relational rehabilitation, which is a non-judgmental approach towards promoting positive behaviors among the students. Kane et al. (2009) argues that majority of the students who undergo suspensions tend to be more arrogant and resistant to change considering that the approach focuses on victimizing them rather than changing their attitudes and behaviors. In that case, the implementation of effective restorative practices may help in ensuring that the students are able to fulfil their learning objectives as they are able to concentrate on the positive aspects of the school environment. Additionally, the implementation of the practices may enable parents and guardians to take part in the monitoring, evaluating and shaping the student’s behavior and attitudes without condemnation. Through the restorative practices, a parent and a student may develop positive relations that enhances the ability to identify strengths and weakness that are crucial in the learning process of a student.
Peacemaking Circles
Peacemaking circles is a primary model of the restorative practices that could be implemented in a school setting to improve on the behavior of the students. Considering that conflicts are inevitable in a school setting, the peace-making circles could be used as an effective classroom management tool that helps to deal with a wide range of issues that may arise among students. The most significant aspect that is necessary to consider when dealing with the peace-making model is the fact that it is designed to address the needs of all people in a given environment (Armour, 2015; Hayes, 2018). The model focuses on four main areas that include knowing each other, building an effective relationship, addressing the existing issues or harm, and repairing the harm. In a conflicting situation, the peace-making model may help to effectively solve a conflict. The key person in the circles include a facilitator, an offender, and the individuals impacted by the offense committed.
The primary objective of the model is to promote healing, which is an aspect that create an emotional situation in the circles upon the realization of the harm and the offense committed. The implementation of the model in a school setting would mean that the students are able to address a wide range of issues and controversies that would lead to their suspension is not tackled properly. Armour (2015) maintains that the peacemaking circles plays a vital role in ensuring that the students are heard by presenting their ideas and reasoning regarding a given aspect in the school environment. Lastly, the fact that a facilitator of the circles is often a teacher, the students are able to gain trust and confidence with their teachers considering that they understand their issues and concern. The peace-making circles is an effective restorative practice model that may reduce the rates of suspension among the students and foster positive behaviors and relations.
Family Group Discussion
Another key model used as part of promoting restorative practices is family group discussion, which brings together the different parties involved in a misbehavior. In a school setting, this model brings together the offender, the victim, teachers, and parents for all students involved. The objective of this model is to give each of the parties an opportunity to express themselves based on what they consider as being negative outcomes relating to the offence in question (Kane, et al., 2008; Kline, 2016). For example, when a student has been involved in bullying, his/her victim is given an opportunity to talk about the experience with the focus being on ensuring that he/she discusses the harm they experience. On the other hand, the student involved in perpetrating the case of bullying is also given an opportunity to express him/herself to indicate why he/she may have engaged in such behaviors. The use of this model focuses on the idea of avoiding suspension at all costs with the view being that suspension does not guarantee that students will learn from their mistakes.
Teachers are expected to serve as facilitators in the discussion between the victim and the perpetrator with the view being that they should allow each party to engage in the discussion. The discussion should be focused on the misbehavior conducted as opposed to focusing in the student, as this would have a serious effect on how the student views their actions. In cases where the discussion focuses on the student, there is a high possibility that the student would feel much more left out because they are not given an opportunity to talk about why they engage in such behaviors. However, when the discussion is centered on the student’s actions, it becomes much easier for the student to take responsibility for his/her actions.
Victim-Offender Mediation
Victim-offender mediation is another notable model associated with restorative practices that places notable emphasis on both the victim and the offender. The focus of this model is to establish clear ground that would allow a victim and an offender to work out their differences in an amicable manner. In a school setting, this model is effective because it ensures that any student involved in a misbehavior mediates with his/her victim (Kane, et al., 2008). For example, in the case of bullying, the model is effective because it helps bring together the perpetrator and the victim. They are both expected to tale about what they considered as the reasons why bullying is a behavior that is not acceptable in learning institutions and the effects that it is having on students.
Mediation creates a new avenue through which students can talk about their deep-rooted insecurities or challenges that push them towards misbehavior. The basis of mediation is for the students to understand that what they did is wrong, which means that they need to take responsibility for their actions. Additionally, mediation will help build a positive relationship between the perpetrator and the victim as one of the ways to ensure that each student learns. The objective is to ensure that other students, apart from those involved in the offence, learn the importance of avoid similar mistakes in future (Kane, et al., 2008; Cavanagh, 2009). However, it is important to consider the importance of cooperation in pushing for effectiveness in delivery of this restorative practice model. Cooperation is important because it ensures that each student would be willing to talk about his/her experiences as a way of finding an amicable solution to the misbehavior.
Discussion
A thorough and in-depth review of literature conducted in this study indicated that the consideration of zero tolerance policies, which is part of the traditional approaches used as part of punishment, has not been as effective as may have been expected. The long-term effects of zero-tolerance policies are having negative impacts on students considering that it only creates a situation where students experienced slowed academic performance (Kline, 2016). Therefore, this highlighted the need for having to consider the adoption of alternative approaches, such as consideration of restorative practices. Restorative practices create a framework within which students can view their mistakes to improve their ability to accept that indeed they may have been wrong (Burnes, 2009). Generally, restorative practices offer a much more advanced outcome when dealing with misbehavior, as they focus on the nature of the behavior as opposed to the student committing the misbehavior.
The focus of this study was to examine the implications that restorative practices are likely to have on students, especially considering whether these practices can help reduce suspensions. Suspensions are used as part of the traditional punitive approaches in learning institutions that allow teachers to control students’ behaviors and way of thinking (Todnem By, 2005; Kane et al., 2009). However, use of suspensions may not necessarily be as effective as may be expected considering that they only promote defiance among students. The most prominent outcome of the literature review is that it reflects on the positives associated with using restorative practices arguing that these practices establish advanced outcomes in reducing suspensions. Restorative practices focus on a nonpunitive way of dealing with misbehavior where teachers ensure that students understand that their behaviors may be having negative impacts on others. The ultimate outcome is that it becomes much easier for students to change their behaviors to help build a positive relationship with those around them.
References
Armour, M. (2015). Restorative practices: Righting the wrongs of exclusionary school discipline. U. Rich. L. Rev. , 50 , 999.
Augustine , C. H., Engberg, J., Grimm, G. E., Lee, E., Wang, L., Christianson, K., & Joseph, A. (2018). Restorative practices help reduce student suspensions . https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_briefs/RB10000/RB10051/RAND_RB10051.pdf
Burnes, B. (2009). Managing change: A strategic approach to organizational dynamics . Pearson Education.
Cavanagh, T. (2009). Restorative practices in schools: Breaking the cycle of student involvement in child welfare and legal systems. Addressing Youth Offending Through Collaboration and Engagement , 24 (4), 53-60.
Gregory, A., Clawson, K., Davis, A., & Gerewitz, J. (2016). The promise of restorative practices to transform teacher-student relationships and achieve equity in school discipline. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation , 26 (4), 325-353.
Hayes, J. (2018). The theory and practice of change management . Palgrave.
Kane, J., Lloyd, G., McCluskey, G., Maguire, R., Riddell, S., Stead, J., & Weedon, E. (2009). Generating an inclusive ethos? Exploring the impact of restorative practices in Scottish schools. International Journal of Inclusive Education , 13 (3), 231-251.
Kane, J., McCluskey, G., Lloyd, G., Riddell, S., Stead, J., & Weedon, E. (2008). Can restorative practices in schools make a difference? Educational Review , 60 (4), 405-417.
Kline, D. M. S. (2016). Can restorative practices help to reduce disparities in school discipline data? A review of the literature. Multicultural Perspectives , 18 (2), 97-102.
Todnem By, R. (2005). Organizational change management: A critical review. Journal of change management , 5 (4), 369-380.
