Opinion: Restorative Justice Is Often Misunderstood. Let’s Dispel 3 Myths

Renee Thomas is a 25-year middle school U.S. history teacher, restorative community lead and selected as a San Diego Unified School District Teacher of the Year in 2021. She serves as vice chair of the Exemplary Teacher Advisory Council. 

Tanya arrived late to class and told me that Chris pushed her into the bushes because he thought it was funny. Although I asked Chris about this in a calm and non-accusatory tone, he became confrontational, yelling and dropping F-bombs. 

This incident occurred a couple weeks into the school year, so I didn’t know Chris very well yet. Because he was so easily provoked, I went to the office to check his discipline record. I discovered that this middle school student had several documented disciplinary incidents, ranging from aggressive behavior, defiance, vandalism, and theft, beginning in kindergarten. I could already see where this was heading: the school to prison pipeline. I decided my response would be to implement restorative practices.

There has been some backlash to restorative practices from parents, and yes, even some teachers, for not using more punitive measures when addressing challenging student behaviors. Some colleagues have told me these practices are ineffective. 

As a teacher of 25-years, who has served as a lead in the use of restorative practices at my school site, let’s dispel the myths.

Myth 1: Restorative Practices Means There Are No Consequences

The truth is that school employees who don’t have training in restorative practices often mischaracterize their lack of response to student misbehavior as restorative when it is not.

At schools, training has not been mandatory, so it is up to each teacher to attend voluntarily or each administrator to decide if they want to require their staff to attend. This has led to a mischaracterization resulting in many teachers and parents deeming restorative practices ineffective. However, when used correctly and with fidelity, the opposite is true. Accountability through repairing harm is the consequence for poor behavior and is more effective than punitive measures. Punitive responses are retaliatory in nature and thus do not correct behaviors; they merely exacerbate them. 

Teachers who use these practices consistently discover that they serve as a preventative measure to challenging behaviors. There are consequences. They are merely restorative rather than punitive. They benefit all parties by providing an avenue for healing for the person who was harmed, and building character of the student who caused harm through reflection and taking responsibility to repair it. Whereas, punitive measures don’t do either. They exacerbate challenging behaviors and inflict more trauma on a person who has already been harmed. This is often why they harm others in the first place.  Because hurt people, hurt people. Punitive measures also do not involve an attempt to make the person who was harmed whole again.

Myth 2: Restorative Practices Benefits Students of Color at the Expense of Other Students

This idea is a reaction to the concept that restorative practices can address disparity in suspensions, expulsions and other disciplinary actions. 

Studies show that Black students are suspended for defiance more than three times the average rate of White students. 

Suspensions also disproportionately affect Latinos and other marginalized groups. These students are more likely to drop out of school and be incarcerated as a result of school suspension and expulsion. Although restorative justice practices were implemented to address the inequities among these students, all students benefit from them.

The largest demographic at my school site is White students. I surveyed 97 of my students about their feelings toward restorative practices. Fifty-eight percent of these students were White. Only four students expressed ambiguous feelings about restorative practices. This alerted me that there was a breakdown in the relationship. So, I responded by having a restorative conversation with them to repair it. The other 93 students had feedback that was overwhelmingly positive.  Many responded with responses like, “I like my relationship with my teacher because whenever I get in trouble, I get a chance to do better. I like how she explains her rationale for what we do and helps us to do our best.” Another stated, “It is definitely my favorite class… because of the amazing environment.” This group of students also requested restorative interventions when they needed emotional support, assistance with conflict resolution, and community-building academic learning experiences. 

Myth 3: Restorative Practices Foster an Unsafe Classroom Environment

It is actually the case that using punitive measures contributes to a negative school climate. 

Punishing students and removing them from the classroom for non-violent or disruptive behaviors, sends the message that they are not valued members of our school community, reinforcing what they already believe and exacerbating those behaviors when they return to class. 

As teachers, it is our job to build relationships with “all” students since students with behavioral challenges will eventually be reintegrated into the classroom. There is no dispute that students should be removed from class for violent behavior or to quickly diffuse a situation. However, creating an avenue for a welcoming reentry into the classroom should always be the goal. We can meet the goal of fostering a positive school climate and culture if restorative practices are implemented consistently by trained administrators, teachers, and support staff.  I made the decision not to write Chris a referral for his behavior. Instead, I decided to provide additional support for him during the school year. He was surprised, as I can only assume he was rarely chosen for anything. As my school’s restorative lead, my attempt was to build a relationship with Chris and break the cycle of negative relationships that his discipline report suggests he likely had with peers and adults since the beginning of his school career. By the end of the school year and with lots of effort, we developed a mutual respect for one another. Chris responded positively when I addressed his behavior which occurred much less frequently. 

As teachers, we must acknowledge that our mission is not only to teach a subject, but to teach students to develop good character and become thriving, functional adults. Utilizing restorative practices plays a significant role in meeting this goal. Doing so not only benefits all students but society as a whole.

The post Opinion: Restorative Justice Is Often Misunderstood. Let’s Dispel 3 Myths appeared first on Voice of San Diego.