Student, Teacher, and Administrator Perspectives on Harm: Implications for Implementing Safe and Caring School Initiatives

Abstract

Abstract:This article reports on a study that examines student, teacher and administrator perspectives on harm and how their schools address harm. It presents an overview of these perspectives within and across 3 different school environments. In doing so, the study contributes to a better understanding of the often ineffective implementation of safe and caring school initiatives. By drawing on restorative justice and relational theory, the findings illustrate how a focus on well-being and relationship is critical for meeting the needs of those harmed and those causing harm. Such a focus requires interaction rooted in social engagement rather than social control (Morrison 2012) and challenges currentrecommendations for combining the strengths of several current approaches for a more effective outcome . STUDENT, TEACHER, ADMINISTRATOR PERSPECTIVES ON HARM 3Creating safe, caring school environments continues to generate ongoing conversation in the media, professional journals, and academic research especially through the persistent attention given to incidents and impact of bullying on youth. In Canada, several provincial governments have instituted or are debating the implementation of antibullying laws for school contexts (Mitchell 2012) Early research indicates that schools engaged with rj practices are able to cultivate more supportive relationships amongst all participants in the school community so that aggressive incidents are lowered substantially. Quantitatively this is evident in the reduced numbers of suspensions, expulsions, and office referrals (Porter, 2007).Qualitatively reports indicate participants are satisfied with the process employed to address incidents of harm, have increased sense of safety and contentment while in school, and have an increased ability to focus on academic tasks (Thorsborne, 2000), .Though there may be other contributing factors to these outcomes, as studies examining Theoretical FrameworkThe theoretical framework that supports this study comes from two rj theorists. First, early theory proposed by Zehr (2002) suggests that looking at harm done instead of rules broken allows for a focus on the people involved. He concludes that harm will be repaired when three aspects of rj are acknowledged: 1. harm done and the resulting needs; 2. obligations arising from the incident; 3. engagement with one another (p. 23). This relational theory recognizes that when respect, concern and dignity for others are given individually or collectively, the well-being of all involved is nurtured-it is reciprocal.This framework structures the analysis of participants' perspectives in this study and uncovers the degree to which the desire for each other's well-being is actually in place in schools prior to being introduced to rj. Why examine perspectives of harm?In viewing an iceberg from land, only 10 percent of its mass is visible. For a perspective of the entire berg, one would need to go below the waterline where the foundation of the icberg's tip could be seen. As concerns regarding the safet...

Assessment of Ongoing Training in Restorative Practices

“…The study is the starting point of a broader project on the implemention of training in restorative practices in education establishments in the Balearic Islands and its impact in the life of students and staff. The growing body of research regarding the effectiveness of restorative practices (Gray & Drewery, 2011;MCluskey et ál, 2008;Reimer, 2011;Vaandering, 2013), among others; is evidence of their progressive implementation and of the need to analyse their implementation.…”

“…Restorative practices generate community by providing effective, direct ways of teaching pupils -like all adults (Morrison, 2006;Morrison et ál., 2005;Vaandering, 2013;Vaandering, 2014)that they are part of it, that their actions affect others and that they share the responsibility of making their community a place where they would like to live. Thus, restorative practices are directly related to the aim of contributing to the construction of a more democratic society.…”

“…This perspective is built day by day, by fostering participation structures so that people have the chance to interact, establish bonds, engage in dialogue, make and share proposals, agree and commit, reflect on actions and ideas; in short, to share their experiences, feelings, needs, and expectations. Educational centres constitute privileged spaces for the application of these practices, both those that are aimed at dealing with conflicts in an alternative way to punitive discipline (Mirsky, 2011), and those that are focused on constructing, maintaining and renewing relationships between all the members of the educational community (Reimer, 2011;Vaandering, 2013Vaandering, , 2014.…”

Enacting Relational Leadership Through Restorative Practices

“…A philosophy of restorative practices emphasizes that relationships are integral to fulfilling student needs (Vaandering, 2013(Vaandering, , 2014a. Restorative practices is often referred to as restorative justice.…”

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

“…However, it is still likely that principals are responding to a number of conflicting pressures and factors in addition to their own values. For example, principals are beholden to internal and external stakeholders' expectations for what a safe and orderly school environment looks like, and Vaandering (2014) has found that these expectations hold cultural sway even in a school ostensibly committed to non-punitive discipline. Zero tolerance policies created a "culture of control" (Nolan, 2006) in schools by shifting administrator mentality from educative to punitive.…”