Building restorative cultures

[W]e do need to address the fact that
some schools and local authorities are latching onto RJ as an
off-the-shelf strategy, simply because the school down the road is
doing it, or because there is money available from another sector
(police, probation, etc.).  This can result in poorly conceived,
superficial programmes that are unlikely to be successful, or to be
transformative in the ways that we know RJ can be. 

Other services can become frustrated that schools are such impenetrable
places, and that they have been unable to impact on cultures of
schooling which remain punitive, hierarchical and lacking in strategies
to promote wellbeing and peaceful communities.  It is these underlying
conditions that I am interested in researching as an educationalist. 
What is it that makes schools so resistant to restorative approaches? 
How can we support change from the inside to ensure that these
approaches are embraced in the ways that  they need to be?

What is my role as an academic working in these areas?  Do I avoid
sharing the results of my research with teachers and others for fear of
being misrepresented? Do I only give the good news so that we
strengthen the case of an approach that is vulnerable to rejection in
the current socio-political climate?  Or do I trust policy makers and
practitioners to engage with me in genuine debate and problem-solving? 

I hope that this give more background as to why I did voice concerns
about the need for RJ to be properly imbedded.  The reverse is often
the case, resulting in some reduced / damaging practice at times. 

The media may like soundbites, but most human beings fall into a
similar trap from time to time: we seek silver bullets — single
interventions that will solve our problems.The difficulty is that problems are usually complex which means that they will have no single-faceted solution.

Schools are an interesting arena of work and study, because they
have their own cultures. Those are complex and not easily changed. They
can change, but generally that is because there has been a courageous
champion of innovation.

One of my favorite quotes (see my Facebook profile) comes from Niccolò Machiavelli’s The Prince:

It must be considered that there is nothing more difficult to carry
out, nor more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to handle, than
to initiate a new order of things. For the reformer has enemies in all
those who profit by the old order, and only lukewarm defenders in all
those who would profit by the new order, this lukewarmness arising
partly from fear of their adversaries, who have the laws in their
favour; and partly from the incredulity of mankind, who do not truly
believe in anything new until they have had the actual experience of
it.

A school principal or headmaster who introduces restorative
discipline as part of an overall effort to change the culture of the
school will face resistance from many sources. They will need tools to
instill new values, and restorative discipline can be one of those
tools. But others will be needed as well.

A school official who has taken Machiavelli’s advice to lay low, may
half-heartedly introduce restorative discipline as an experiment but it
will have much less effect than if that is done by a politically-astute
champion of change.

What does this mean to those who promote restorative interventions?
We should begin by acknowledging that we often begin with simple
declarative sentences. We speak of its benefits. That is because we are
trying to overcome the inertia (and attention span) of leaders wedded
to the old order.

But we need to understand not only the potential, but also the
limits of restorative justice. We need to become aware of the
conditions in which it is effective. We must develop a nuanced
conception of its role in schools, workplaces, families, communities,
and the justice system.

In my 25+ years working with restorative justice, I have found that
some of the most important contributions to my understanding have come
from researchers who challenge the rhetoric and claims that we make.
After all, if we really want a new order, we had better understand the
nature of the old order as well as the limits and potential of the
tools we are using.

That is why www.restorativejustice.org
calls itself a “non-partisan” website. Not only do we avoid taking
sides in the conflicts within the movement, but we seek to collect and
make available all the information we can find on this topic.

We seek to adopt a posture of receptivity to those who criticise and those who warn. They make us better.

The book of Proverbs tell us that “Wounds from a friend can be trusted, but an enemy multiplies kisses.” Dr. Cremin, and other researchers of restorative justice, are friends.

By the way, in one of her messages she attached a notice of what sounds like a
fascinating series of seminars beginning in October 2009 on the topic:

“Inter-disciplinary Perspectives on Restorative Approaches
to Reducing Conflict in Schools: Exploring Theory and Practice from
Cross-national and International Settings.”

If you are anywhere near Cambridge, you should check it out.