Going Restorative, Staying Tough: Urban Principals’ Perceptions of Restorative Practices in Collocated Small Schools

Abstract

Drawing on data from a year-long multi-case ethnography of three secondary urban public schools implementing restorative practices, the current piece examines how principals negotiate restorative practices despite conflicting pressures to maintain order and compel obedience. I frame my inquiry through Sergiovanni’s (2000) concept of “systems” in the “lifeworld,” asking whether principals use restorative practices as systems in service of cultural transformation or merely as a replacement for suspension. Findings suggest tensions between principals’ purposes for implementing restorative practices and the pressure they feel to maintain an image of “school order” and “toughness” in the eyes of internal and external stakeholders. I close with recommendations for research and practice. I also make some preliminary recommendations for principal preparation.

Fostering teacher self-efficacy: understanding the impact of trauma through student behavior

“…According to Lustick (2021), "restorative practices included peer mediation, communitybuilding circles for establishing relationships, restorative circles for healing harms, and restorative chats for informally addressing disruptive student behavior" (p. 747). Providing professional learnings will support teachers to foster a greater understanding of students' needs and how to respond to those needs.…”

“…Restorative practices are utilized before conflict appears in a school setting and is founded on creating connections and building relationships. Restorative approaches are an alternative style to traditional school and classroom management (Anfara et al, 2013;Lustick, 2021), and can foster and strengthen self-regulatory neural pathways. Through creating community, connection, and systems, students in a restorative system develop ownership and connection to the community proactively, universal implementation.…”

“…This community-based approach to consequences supports the offender understanding the intent and impact of their actions and "conferencing allows students to resolve interpersonal problems so they can resume attending class in good standing" (Davidson, 2014, p. 22). In restorative practices are routines and systems 34 rooted in strengthening the community because consequences are not solely imposed externally; the student has an inherent motivation to restore the situation and return to the learning community (Lustick, 2021). Dhaliwal et al (2021) explains that "while zero tolerance privileges swift punishment for student offences, RP is more incremental and judicious approach that prioritizes improving campus climate to prevent misbehavior in the first place" (p. 5).…”

“…School leaders can alter the paradigm of punitive consequences in reflection of the situation and in respect of fulfilling a need of the student and acts as a "positive behavior approach" (Mansfield et al, 2018, p. 306). Implementing restorative practices bridges a gap from complying to the status quo to a sense of responsibility and accountability to the community (Lustick, 2021), and implementation "depends on a top-down and bottom-up approach, a long-term commitment" and requires a mindset shift from traditional punitive discipline to a system that supports student connection and reintegration (Vincent et al, 2021, p. 427). Restorative justice is a counter-narrative to traditional discipline that strengthens the part of the student's brain that understands actions and consequences.…”