A faithful compass: rethinking the term restorative justice to find clarity

In the field of restorative justice (rj) there is regular debate regarding the terms restorative and justice. In spite of efforts to come to a common vision, this ongoing discussion illustrates how theoretical and practical disagreements have resulted in rj being characterized as ambiguous and inconsistent within the judicial context and beyond (Gavrielides, 2008; Sullivan & Tifft, 2005; Johnstone & Van Ness, 2007). Arising out of research conducted in an education context (Vaandering, 2009), this paper identifies the impact of this ambiguity on educators. More importantly, however, it examines the term justice and discovers that an overemphasis on justice as fairness and individual rights has pulled the field off-course. The paper identifies that what is needed is a broader understanding of justice than that given in the judicial context and makes the case for justice as honouring the inherent worth of all and enacted through relationship. If understood as such, I argue that the terms restorative and justice must remain paired and in place in order to serve as a muchneeded compass needle that guides proponents of rj in the field to their desired destinations.

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

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 current recommendations for combining the strengths of several current approaches for a more effective outcome (Osher et al. 2010).

The Significance of Critical Theory for Restorative Justice in Education

Restorative Justice (rj), a distinctive philosophical approach that seeks to replace punitive, managerial structures of schooling with those that emphasize the building and repairing of relationships (Hopkins 2004) has been embraced in the past two decades by a variety of school systems worldwide in an effort to build safe school communities. Early studies indicate rj holds significant promise, however, proponents in the field identify that theoretical and evidence-based research is falling behind practice. They call for further research to deepen the current understanding of rj that will support its sustainability and transformative potential and allow it to move from the margins to the mainstream of schooling (Braithwaite 2006; Morrison & Ahmed 2006; Sherman & Strang 2007).

Relational restorative justice pedagogy in educator professional development

What would a professional development experience rooted in the philosophy, principles, and practices of restorative justice look and feel like? This article describes how such a professional development project was designed to implement restorative justice principles and practices into schools in a proactive, relational and sustainable manner by using a comprehensive dialogic, democratic peacebuilding pedagogy. The initiative embodied a broad, transformative approach to restorative justice, grounded in participating educators’ identifying, articulating and applying personal core values. This professional development focused on diverse educators, their relationships, and conceptual understandings, rather than on narrow techniques for enhancing student understanding or changing student behaviour. Its core practice involved facilitated critical reflexive dialogue in a circle, organized around recognizing the impact of participants’ interactions on others, using three central, recurring questions: Am I honouring? Am I measuring? What message am I sending? Situated in the context of relational theory (Llewellyn, 2012), this restorative professional development approach addresses some of the challenges in implementing and sustaining transformative citizenship and peacebuilding pedagogies in schools. A pedagogical portrait of the rationale, design, and facilitation experience illustrates the theories, practices, and insights of the initiative, called Relationships First: Implementing Restorative Justice From the Ground Up.

Implementing restorative justice practice in schools: what pedagogy reveals

In the ongoing pursuit for creating safe, nurturing and relational school cultures, educators continue to turn to restorative justice (rj) principles and practice. Predominantly, schools begin to engage with rj in an effort to address harm done, causing its discourse to be situated in literature tied to classroom management and behaviour. However, in this location, the effectiveness of rj can be limited because the power relationships underlying the original punitive, managerial structures maintain their grip. Drawing on a qualitative study that examines the experiences of educators committed to implementing rj principles, this article explores how placing rj in the context of engaged, productive pedagogies better nurtures the hoped for relational and peaceful school culture.

A window on relationships: reflecting critically on a current restorative justice theory

Inherent in the task of theorising is a responsibility for ongoing critical reflection of the ideas presented (Steele, 2010). To that end, this article responds to the invitation extended by McCold and Wachtel to examine the conceptual theory of restorative justice they first presented in 2003 and which continues to be promoted globally. One particular aspect of their theory, the Social Discipline Window, is examined. Drawing on a qualitative, critical case study conducted in schools in Ontario, Canada, the article illustrates: (a) how unexamined theory can be problematic and promote practice that counters the principles of restorative justice; and (b) how people's lives can be impacted by power dynamics inherent in the theory presented (Woolford, 2009). In response, a revised Relationship Window is presented along with examples of how it can affect practice that is more consistently aligned with the philosophical foundations of restorative justice.

The effects of audio cueing and an instructions, feedback and praise package on the distribution of teacher praise to students of differing on-task levels

In an audio cueing system, a teacher is presented with randomly spaced auditory signals via tape recorder or intercom. The teacher is instructed to praise a child who is on-task each time the cue is presented. In this study, a baseline was obtained on the teacher's praise rate and the children's on-task behaviour in a Grade 5 class of 37 students. Children were then divided into high, medium and low on-task groups. Followinq baseline, the teacher's praise rate and the children's on-task behaviour were observed under the following successively implemented conditions: (l) Audio Cueing 1: Audio cueing at a rate of 30 cues per hour was introduced into the classroom and remained in effect during subsequent conditions. A group of consistently low on-task children were delineated. (2) Audio Cueing Plus 'focus praise package': Instructions to direct two-thirds o£ the praise to children identified by the experimenter (consistently low on-task children), feedback and experimenter praise for meeting or surpassing the criterion distribution of praise ('focus praise package') were introduced. (3) Audio Cueing 2: The 'focus praise package' was removed. (4) Audio Cueing Plus 'increase praise package': Instructions to increase the rate of praise, feedback and experimenter praise for improved praise rates ('increase praise package') were introduced. The primary aims of the study were to determine the distribution of praise among hi~h, medium and low on-task children when audio cueinq was first introduced and to investigate the effect of the 'focus praise package' on the distribution of teacher praise. The teacher distributed her praise evenly among the hiqh, medium and low on-task groups during audio cueing 1. The effect of the 'focus praise package' was to increase the percentage of praise received by the consistently low on-task children. Other findings tended to suggest that audio cueing increased the teacher's praise rate. However, the teacher's praise rate unexpectedly decreased to a level considerably below the cued rate during audio cueing 2. The 'increase praise package' appeared to increase the teacher's praise rate above the audio cueing 2 level. The effect of an increased praise rate and two distributions of praise on on-task behaviour were considered. Significant increases in on-task behaviour were found in audio cueing 1 for the low on-task group, in the audio cueing plus 'focus praise package' condition for the entire class and the consistently low on-task group and in audio cueing 2 for the medium on-task group. Except for the high on-task children who did not change, the effects of the experimental manipulations on on-task behaviour were e quivocal. However, there were some indications that directing 67% of the praise to the consistently low on-task children was more effective for increasing this group's on-task behaviour than distributing praise equally among on-task groups.