Running Head: RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD

GRADE

The Effects of Introducing Restorative Practices on Student Conflicts in 3rd Grade

Alexander J. Dailey

ED626 Classroom Research

University of Alaska Southeast, Dr. Elizabeth Hartley

April 21, 2018

RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 2

Abstract

Little research exists documenting the use of restorative models of discipline in the mid-to-lower

elementary grades. This study set out to determine the effects of introducing restorative practices

on student conflicts in the third grade. The guiding research question for this study was, “How

will training four 3rd grade classrooms (teachers and students) in restorative discipline strategies

for resolving student conflicts affect the frequency and severity of student conflicts?”

Participants included four third grade classrooms, each consisting of one teacher and about 22

students. The study began with an introduction to restorative justice, followed by two training

sessions whereby teachers and students were taught to hold and participate in restorative circles.

Over a four-week period, participants were asked to use this restorative discipline to address

student conflicts as they occurred. Data was collected using surveys, interviews, and

observations. These tools were focused on determining trends in student conflict

frequency/severity as well as participant dispositions towards the restorative discipline model.

The study results were inconclusive in regard to whether the restorative model had an effect on

the frequency/severity of student conflicts but demonstrated that the restorative model does hold

advantages over the traditional, punitive model of discipline, especially when it comes to

participant satisfaction. Information reported by participants indicated that the restorative model

is a viable one for the third grade. This study would serve as an excellent pilot study should

future researchers continue to investigate the benefits of implementing a restorative model of

discipline in the mid-to-lower elementary grade levels.

RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 3

Introduction

After completing my student teaching in the third grade and spending most of the 2016-

17 and 2017-18 school years at a 2-5 elementary school, I’d become greatly interested in the

varying level of student conflict resolution skills that I witnessed. It fascinated me how some

classrooms seemed to experience an exceedingly high level of student conflicts while others

experienced very few. Moreover, it seemed that for many of the students at the center of these

conflicts, teacher intervention was necessary in order to achieve resolution yet ineffective at

providing the skills necessary for that student to resolve future conflicts on their own. It became

clear that there was something backwards about the way many student conflicts are traditionally

approached. Teachers (myself included) were attempting to solve issues as they occurred while

ignoring the needs of the students that created the issues. It only took a short step back to realize

that what many of us were doing was at odds with the greater goals of education. What we were

doing was the equivalent of trying to teach math by giving out the answers to the test while

ignoring the base concepts. We were doing all of the work for our students and depriving them of

the learning that they so desperately needed. It was after realizing this simple idea that I began

looking for ways to approach discipline issues in a way that would actually help my students

grow.

Through the principal at the elementary school where I work, I was turned on to the idea

of restorative justice. It provided a model of discipline that was based on relationships rather than

rules. While originally ported to western culture from its traditional roots as an alternative model

to our judicial system, it has been slowly growing in popularity as a discipline model that can be

used in schools. Intrigued by the philosophy that true resolution requires addressing the needs of
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 4

all who are involved in a conflict, including the needs of the perpetrator, I became hopeful and

began looking into existing research on restorative justice in schools.

While the restorative model of discipline is not without weaknesses, it is my belief that it

holds great advantages over the traditional model of discipline. I truly feel that it has taken me

leaps and bounds in the right direction and has made me a better educator.

Literature Review: Restorative Justice

Traditionally, school discipline has resembled an exclusionary or punitive model

whereby students who break rules are punished, often by being removed from the classroom via

suspension or detention. Over the past several decades, more and more data has come to light

showing that this simply is not a productive model (Fronius, Persson, Guckenburg, Hurley, &

Petrosino, 2016; Hambacher, 2017). Following that data has come increasing cries for revision of

the education discipline process. Many schools and communities have turned to restorative

justice (RJ) as an alternative to the traditional model that seems to have some promising results.

The main difference between punitive discipline and restorative models of discipline is

that traditional discipline is system-focused and primarily functions by assigning punishments to

those who violate the rules of the system. Restorative justice, on the other hand, is relationship-

focused and functions by building communities and providing restitution for victims, educating

offenders, and restoring the peace (Abbamonte & Cavaliere, 2012). Restorative justice typically

accomplishes this through structured meetings. In these meetings, both parties are encouraged to

share their thoughts and feelings in a way that everyone is ‘heard’. Then begins the learning

process whereby the offender(s) take responsibility for their actions and are helped to understand

how those actions affected others. From here, all parties work together to determine how

reconciliation may be acquired. Finally, plans are made for the future that ensure such issues do
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 5

not arise again (Abbamonte & Cavaliere, 2012). Restorative justice is a long and complicated

process that does not have any hard, fast rules, but preliminary results suggest that it is well

worth the time and investment to figure out.

Shortcomings of the Punitive Model

One of the most compelling arguments for adopting a new discipline model in schools is

the fact that the traditional method of punishment and exclusion is both ineffective and harmful.

Punishment does nothing to remedy harms already inflicted. It only serves as a deterrent to future

infractions of the rules, and studies have shown that this is simply not effective (Hambacher,

2017). These punishments also cause serious harm to students through alienation, dissolving of

trust in the system, and loss of educational time (Fronius et al., 2016; Hambacher, 2017).

Furthermore, no growth is taking place. Students who are suspended or given detention are not

learning anything aside from “Getting caught doing A will result in B.” If our true goal as

educators is to provide the greatest opportunity for success for all of our students, then clearly,

we need to take a closer look at how we promote acceptable behavior in our schools.

Promising Results

Another important reason schools are adopting the RJ model is because it seems to work.

Schools all over the United States and in other countries are reporting incredible decreases in

reported behavioral incidents (suspensions, detentions, office referrals, fights, disruptions, etc.),

in some cases, upwards of 90% (Armour, 2014; Fronius et al., 2016; International Institute for

Restorative Practices, 2014; Mirsky, 2003; Reimer, 2011). Whether or not this is a result of truly

changed behavior or a simple byproduct of the RJ model, students are staying in the classroom

and that is good. The more time in the classroom, the better their academics will be, as supported

by improved standardized test scores in a middle school in Texas who recently converted to the
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 6

RJ model of discipline (Armour, 2014). RJ practitioners are also reporting that in the schools

they work in they are seeing improved social and self-regulation skills among students that they

directly attribute to RJ practices (Armour, 2014). Students in these schools are reporting that they

feel safer and more respected by both students and teachers (Armour, 2014; Gregory, 2016;

Reimer, 2011). This bodes well for student-teacher relationships, which according to

Hambacher, (2017) is a necessity if we are to help students succeed to their potential – especially

those in minority groups or who come from lower-economic backgrounds.

There is also the fact that RJ actively supports the victim who is so often forgotten under

traditional discipline models. With restorative practices, conscious effort is made to “make things

right” with all parties involved in a conflict. Studies have shown that victim engagement in RJ

circles is likely to reduce trauma and stresses related to that incident (Angel, 2005). Part of this is

due to the fact that restorative justice has demonstrated itself to be a reliable vehicle for enabling

the healing and reconciliation process so necessary for achieving peace and justice after a

conflict (Abbamonte & Cavaliere, 2012).

The offender is not forgotten either. Under a RJ model, the person who committed the

misdeed is made part of an experience that helps them to learn social and self-regulation skills

that will afford them a greater opportunity for success in the future. Further, the RJ model can

give students that sense of belonging to a community that is so often at the root of behavioral

problems. In the end, it is a practice that not only successfully addresses the present, but the

future as well.

Difficulties of the Restorative Model

Why then, if restorative justice appears to be so successful, is it not more popular among

classrooms and school districts? The fact is that it is not easy to implement or sustain. Studies
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 7

containing interviews with RJ teachers and administrators about the feasibility of RJ in schools

has revealed some serious concerns. Part of the problem has to do with the fact that a general

consensus of RJ best practices/model does not exist (Hurley, Guckenburg, Persson, Fronius, &

Petrosino, 2015). There is no go-to strategy for teachers to adopt on their own, independent of

one another. And despite the fact that RJ was ported to education from our judicial system

(where it was used as a reactive practice), there is a consensus that RJ is far less effective in a

school setting when used reactively (Hurley et al., 2015; Reimer, 2011). The problem here is that

without coordinated efforts on a district level, teachers often don’t have the time or ability to

implement RJ in any fashion other than a reactive one. The solution then is to adopt a RJ model

wholesale. If teachers are going to be able to successfully utilize RJ practices, they will need

support from their school administrators, and they from the school board. While nothing is set in

stone, popular theory suggests that the most effective way of approaching restorative justice is to

embed it into the very culture of the school and to use it as a proactive strategy for building

community (Hurley et al., 2015).

While quantitative research of the effectiveness of RJ in schools is limited, this literature

review examines several studies, articles, and reviews, written and conducted mostly by teacher

researchers who are blazing the first trails in the field of educational discipline. Through this

review, three major themes have become apparent: 1) the punitive model of discipline is short-

sighted, ineffective, and possibly even immoral; 2) restorative practices have very promising

preliminary results in terms of reducing behavioral issues and increasing educational quality; and

3) it will be difficult to implement and utilize a restorative justice model to its fullest potential

without an abundance of support.

Theoretical Framework and Research Question

RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 8

Despite its challenges, the literature reviewed in this study indicates that RJ appears to

have significant potential to be a more effective model of discipline than the punitive model we

traditionally see in schools. It has demonstrated itself to be effective in reducing disciplinary

issues while improving social dynamics (Armour, 2014; Fronius et al., 2016; International

Institute for Restorative Practices, 2014; Mirsky, 2003; Reimer, 2011) and comes without the

negative effects tied to exclusionary or punishment-based models of discipline (Fronius et al.,

2016; Hambacher, 2017). But perhaps the most appealing aspect of RJ is that it is focused on

people and not on the system. Offenders are enlightened, victims are healed, and the community

is restored.

While the concept of RJ is derived from cultures and practices far older (Clifford, 2013),

there are several popular theories that support the application of this modernized RJ as a

discipline model in schools.

When it comes to the benefits of RJ on the offender the most important connected theory

is the constructivist theory of learning. Constructivism claims that people learn best when they

are able to construct their own understandings (Slavin, 2015). In a school-discipline arena, this

suggests that students who work through conflicts are more likely to develop self-discipline

skills than those who are simply told what is right and what is wrong. As Amstutz and Mullet put

it in their book Restorative Discipline for Schools (2005), “When children’s lives and behavior

are too regulated by others, they feel no need to control themselves as others do it for them” (p.

9). If we take away a child’s role in resolving a conflict by removing them from the situation or

by assuming absolute control, we are taking away their opportunity and motivation to learn from

that conflict.
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 9

Following this idea of control - within a RJ circle or meeting, much of Thomas Gordon’s

theories on relationships and needs can be seen. Gordon believed that approaching behavior

issues through an authority-subordinate relationship was ineffective and damaging. Instead, he

suggested we communicate about these issues in ways that reveal perspectives and sides unseen

by the other party (Gordon, 2016). This helps those involved to see with an empathetic eye and

builds social and self-discipline skills.

Haim Ginott’s Communication Model (Ginott, 1972) can also be found within RJ

practices. Like the Gordon-Model, it maintains that the phrasing used in discipline scenarios is

extremely important. By focusing attention on the misbehavior and its results as opposed to the

offender, we leave the door open for that individual to acknowledge and address the issue. In RJ,

by addressing the situation without attacking the individual responsible for the situation, we not

only allow that individual to become a part of the solution, but we maintain that individual’s role

within the classroom community – an idea that is critical to RJ.

On the idea of community, connections can also be drawn from Rudolf Dreikurs Social

Discipline Model (Gurcan & Tekin, n.d.) to the practices of RJ. Dreikurs believes that behavior

is a product of our purposes and that most misbehavior stems from an unfulfilled desire to be

accepted. RJ operates under the idea that everyone plays a role in the classroom/school

community and seeks to repair and prevent harms committed by members, at least partially, by

helping them find their place in that community. The types of reparations determined by RJ

circles also typically resemble what Dreikurs would call logical consequences as they are

designed to make things right (Gurcan & Tekin, n.d.).

The purpose of this particular study will be to determine the effectiveness of RJ practices

with 3rd graders given a limited introductory scope. Effectiveness, in this case, refers to how well
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 10

these RJ practices reduce the frequency and severity of student conflicts as well as any positive

changes in student conflict resolution skills. RJ practices will include student and teacher training

and participation in RJ circles following behavioral incidents. This training will involve an

explanation of RJ theories and purposes as well as prescribed procedures for initiating and

participating in RJ circles. The limited introductory scope is a direct response to the popular

belief that RJ must be whole-system in order to function effectively. In this study, only a few

classrooms will receive training, independent of one another, and that training will be carried out

within a one-week period. The idea here is that the philosophy of RJ is both simple and

powerful; and with proper exposure of this philosophy to 3rd graders, it can still have positive

effects on student behavior. Therefore, the guiding question of this study is as follows: How will

training four 3rd grade classrooms (teachers and students) in restorative discipline strategies for

resolving student conflicts affect the frequency and severity of student conflicts?

Methods and Research Design

In this study on the effectiveness of restorative practices on reducing student conflicts in

3rd grade, I take a qualitative inquiry approach, examining real world situations, without

manipulating them. I take a naturalistic approach in the research through a mixed methods design

that is both historical and observational (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The purpose of this study is

to gain insight into the practicality of introducing restorative practices into a classroom with little

to no background in restorative practices and little to no outside support system. By this I am

referring to the fact that the teachers and students participating in this study have no previous

training in restorative practices and will receive no direct support from other teachers or the

school administration.

Participants
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 11

The participants in this study include students and teachers from four 3rd grade

classrooms at an elementary school in Southeast Alaska. The number of students in these

classrooms ranges between 20 and 22 students. While each classroom is slightly different, the

ethnic diversity within these classrooms mirrors that of the school in which approximately 51%

of students identify as white/Caucasian, 29% identify as American Indian or Alaska Native, 9%

identify as Asian, 3% identify as Hispanic, 2% identify as Pacific Islanders, and less than 1%

identify as African American (data reported by the school district). Of the four teachers, three are

white females and one is white male.

I elected to study the effectiveness of restorative practices in 3rd grade classrooms for

several reasons. The primary reason being that existing studies on the effectiveness of restorative

practices are extremely limited in elementary grades and so such a study would have unique

value by providing insight into a lesser explored area of restorative discipline. I chose 3rd grade,

instead of other elementary grades, because I have a great deal of experience working with this

particular grade in this school and I felt that my existing relationships and the students’

familiarity with myself would allow the instructional phase of this study to be more easily

accomplished. Lastly, these four classrooms were selected because these teachers were willing to

participate and experiment with a new discipline model.

Data Collection

teacher surveys.

The first data collection tool I will be using will be pre and post surveys completed by the

four 3rd grade teachers. The pre-survey will be administered prior to the introduction of

restorative practices and the post-survey will be provided about two to three weeks after the

introduction of restorative practices. Aside from a small stipulation to the post-survey that
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 12

answers should only consider events occurring after the introduction of restorative practices,

these surveys will be identical (Appendix A). These surveys will ask for information regarding

the frequency, severity, and sources of student conflicts within the classroom. The surveys will

consist of eight questions. Six of those questions will prompt a percentage response between 0-

100, one question will pertain to frequency of student conflicts, and one question pertaining to

conflict sources will be open response. Due to the small research window of this three-week

study, checks will be conducted on responses to the post-survey to ensure that a lack of

reportable incidents does not skew the research data. I will briefly meet with teachers to ensure

the data reported on the post-survey is an accurate representation of reality and not a product of

this study’s small sampling window.

The purpose of these teacher surveys is to obtain quantitative data sets that can be cross-

measured between pre and post-surveys as well as against the data sets from other classrooms.

teacher interviews.

The second data collection tool used in this study will be teacher interviews (Appendix

B). These semi-structured interviews will take place at the end of the three-week study and will

focus on the teachers’ perspectives regarding the effectiveness, practicality of implementation,

and dispositions towards this model of restorative discipline. I have chosen to conduct these

interviews in a semi-structured way because it needs to be acknowledged that each of these

teachers are going to have very difference experiences with restorative practices in their

classrooms. I want to be able to capture unexpected data that may be overlooked were these

interviews to follow a rigid structure. In total, there will be eight interview questions with the

opportunity for further discourse should the need arise. Interviews should take place in a setting

chosen by the teacher in order to offset, as much as possible, any stressors related to being
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 13

interviewed about professional philosophy/practice and a possible change to that

philosophy/practice.

The purpose of conducting teacher interviews in addition to teacher surveys is to obtain

qualitative data sets that will reveal more in-depth reflections on the successes and failures of

this restorative discipline model. The interviews will also provide richer context to data collected

through the teacher surveys, ensuring a greater degree of validity in this study’s findings.

observations.

A third method of data collection will come in the form of informal observations. It will

be unlikely that I am available to observe every restorative circle that takes place in these four

classrooms, but I intend on being present whenever possible. In addition, I will be present during

the introduction, training, and a mock restorative circle for each classroom. These items will take

place at the beginning of the study. I will also do my best to observe, or even take part in, any

restorative practices that take place outside of the classroom as a result of these restorative

discipline trainings. At these times when I am present during a restorative practice in action, I

will take notes on type of practice, the dialogue that takes place, and the fidelity in which the

participants followed the practice. I will also record my interpretations of the dispositions that

participants display towards the practice as well as how successful I felt the practice was in

handling the conflict at hand.

student interviews.

The final official method of data collection will be brief student interviews (Appendix C)

with students who took part in and were at the center of a restorative practice. These interviews

will be semi-structured and will focus on student satisfaction and perception of effectiveness.

These interviews should also provide insight into whether or not students have learned any
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 14

conflict resolution skills through the use of restorative practices. Altogether, there will be seven

questions, though room will be made for additional comments or questions should any unique

situations make such discourse beneficial to understanding the effectiveness of this restorative

discipline model. These interviews will take place in a low stress setting, such as the hallway

outside the classroom, to lessen the pressure felt by students being interviewed. Also, interviews

should take place a day or two after the incident of conflict so as to allow tensions spurred by the

conflict and the restorative process to soften. Having a delayed interview will also allow students

to learn more about the process themselves by giving them time to participate in class post-

conflict. This will allow them to answer questions about the effectiveness of the practice with

more confidence.

Process

introduction.

For each of the four participating classrooms, this study will begin with an instructional-

style introduction to restorative discipline. This introduction will begin with a whole-class

discussion and evaluation of how student conflicts are traditionally handled, with a focus on

identifying who is affected by student conflicts and how those people are harmed or benefitted

by the traditional disciplinary response. This discussion will be followed by the introduction of

restorative justice and how this model of discipline is designed to benefit all who are involved

and affected by student conflicts. Heavy emphasis should be placed on the idea that discipline is

about learning and not about punishing. And that with this particular model, the primary goal is

to “make things right,” or in other words, achieve restoration.

After an introduction to the philosophy behind restorative justice, students will be

introduced to the practice of restorative circles, specifically, a conflict circle. Through direct
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 15

instruction, the guidelines for participating in restorative circles will be outlined and recorded

(Appendices D & E). From here, the class will participate in a non-conflict restorative circle in

order to practice the procedures and gain familiarity with how circles work. This first circle

should be kept short and light, so as to keep students engaged with the idea of restorative circles.

After concluding this circle, I will explain to students that we will be meeting a second time to

practice using this kind of circle to handle a student conflict.

mock circle.

Depending on the schedule of each classroom, I will return a day or two later to introduce

and practice a restorative conflict circle. Here, a mock conflict will take place in class and

students will practice forming and addressing the conflict through a restorative circle, making

sure to abide by the circle guidelines addressed in the previous training. Following the resolution

of this mock circle, the class will debrief on how the circle functioned and how it led to a

positive outcome for all involved. At this point, I will explain to students that they will be

trialing this model of discipline for the next three weeks and that I will try to participate in their

classroom circles whenever possible. I will also explain that I will be periodically checking in on

their progress and conducting short interviews with students and teachers about their thoughts on

this model. My goal, as I will explain it to students, is to introduce to their classrooms a more

positive and beneficial way of resolving conflicts – one that they may very well adopt

permanently.

teachers as co-researchers

Because I am conducting this study across four different 3rd grade classrooms, it will not

be possible for me to observe and participate in every conflict circle that takes place. As such, I

have asked teachers to report to me on the occurrence and functioning of any restorative circles
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 16

that take place in their classrooms. This will allow me to provide further guidance on restorative

practices should these teachers encounter any issues. It will also allow me to contact and

effectively conduct student interviews with students who were at the center of a restorative

conflict circle.

In addition to reporting on restorative circles, I have asked the teachers in these

classrooms to document the frequency and severity of student conflicts in their classrooms. One

of the goals of this study is to determine whether or not the introduction of these restorative

practices affect the severity of student conflicts over the three-week trial period. To accomplish

this, I will ask teachers to classify student conflicts, as they occur, on a sliding scale from 1-4

(Appendix F). Severity is a relative term, the important part about these scales is that each

teacher use them consistently. This way, severity of conflicts within classrooms can be reliably

tracked in terms of overall improvement, deterioration, or stagnation.

Validity

Internal validity in this study will be accomplished through triangulation, the analysis of

multiple sources of qualitative data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Because of the unpredictable and

unique nature of each source of data in this study, a content analysis of interviews, surveys, and

observations, will be conducted. In these analysis, I will do my best to interpret, retell, and

provide clarity to the largely subjective data sets that are collected. Because my data will come

from so many different interviews and observations, I believe a synthesis of this data will serve

the purpose of this study best. Much of my data will be collected through narrative reports of

completely separate incidents and so a narrative analysis would result in a less than cohesive

conclusion.

Results
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 17

This study set out to answer the question, “How will training four 3rd grade classrooms

(teachers and students) in restorative discipline strategies for resolving student conflicts affect

the frequency and severity of student conflicts?” The process began in each of the four third-

grade volunteer classrooms with an introduction of restorative justice followed by two training

sessions on restorative practices. Teachers and students were asked to use the restorative

discipline model introduced to them to solve conflicts in their classrooms as they occurred over a

four-week period.

The trial period, including the first week of RJ training, provided useful qualitative data

and some quantitative data sets as support. Data was collected in five ways: 1) teacher pre and

post surveys pertaining to the frequency and severity of student conflicts, 2) teacher interviews

regarding perceptions of the RJ model of discipline, 3) student interviews focused on student

perception of conflict circles, 4) conflict trackers designed to track the frequency and severity of

student conflicts, and 5) observations focused on student/teacher interest and dispositions

towards RJ practices, as well as successes/failures experienced in both the training session and in

conflict circles.

Teacher Surveys

Teacher surveys indicated little change during the four-week trial period concerning the

frequency, severity, types, and origin of student conflicts observed by the volunteer classroom

teachers. Many survey items were marked “No change.” In those items where a change was

reported, the change was minimal.

Below are three figures, each representing one of the four 3rd grade classrooms. Each

graph tracks change in reported frequency of questions 2-7 in the Teacher Survey (Appendix A).

These questions were designed to track the frequency and severity of conflicts in the classroom
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 18

as well as conflict resolution success. Change is measured across the pre-survey (teacher

perception of frequency prior to RJ training) to the post-survey (teacher perception of frequency

during the trial period). A downward trend represents a positive change.

Questions 1 and 8 of the Teacher Survey are excluded from these graphs as they either

prompted a qualitative response or a non-frequency based response. In all four cases, teachers

reported “No change” in respect to question 8 regarding the perceived primary source of student

conflict in the classroom. In all but one classroom, teachers reported “No change” in respect to

question 1 regarding the estimated number of student conflicts per week. In the single classroom

that did report a change in conflict occurrence, conflicts were reported to have dropped from

~15-20 times to ~10 times. There is no graph for Classroom 2 as this teacher did not respond

with quantitative values. This teacher did however report “No change” across the board.

Figure 1 details reported changes in conflicts occurring in Classroom 1 during the 4-week

trial period. Questions taken from the teacher surveys (Appendix A) are color coded in the

figure. These can be found to the right of the figure graphic. Some small positive change is

documented concerning both severity of conflicts occurring in the classroom as well as the

success of conflict resolution. Note that Classroom 1 teacher is the only teacher to hold more

than one restorative circle during the trial period.

RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 19

Classroom 1 - Changes in Frequency of Conflicts

80
Reported Frequency of Conflict Traits

70 % Conflicts transcending minor

60 arguments
50 % Conflicts involving physical
force
40
% Conflicts involving personal
30 attacks
20 % Conflicts requiring adult
10 intervention
0 % Conflicts that are reoccuring
Pre Survey Post Survey incidents
Difference of Frequency Between Pre and Post Survey Responses % Conflicts that are product of
unresolved prior conflicts

Figure 1. Classroom 1 teacher responses to teacher pre and post survey questions (Appendix A).

This figure illustrates reported changes in conflicts occurring in Classroom 1 during the 4-week

trial period.

Figure 2 details reported changes in conflicts occurring in Classroom 3 during the 4-week

trial period. Questions taken from the teacher surveys (Appendix A) are color coded in the

figure. These can be found to the right of the figure graphic. Positive change is documented

concerning the success of conflict resolution taking place in the classroom. Negative change is

documented concerning the severity of conflicts occurring in the classroom during the trial

period.
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 20

Classroom 3 - Changes in Frequency of Conflicts

100
Reported Frequency of Conflict Traits

90
% Conflicts transcending minor
80 arguments
70
% Conflicts involving physical
60
force
50
40 % Conflicts involving personal
attacks
30
20 % Conflicts requiring adult
10 intervention
0 % Conflicts that are reoccuring
Pre Survey Post Survey incidents
Difference of Frequency Between Pre and Post Survey Responses % Conflicts that are product of
unresolved prior conflicts

Figure 2. Classroom 3 teacher responses to teacher pre and post survey questions (Appendix A).

This figure illustrates reported changes in conflicts occurring in Classroom 3 during the 4-week

trial period.

Figure 3 details reported changes in conflicts occurring in Classroom 4 during the 4-week

trial period. Questions taken from the teacher surveys (Appendix A) are color coded in the

figure. These can be found to the right of the figure graphic. A small positive change is

documented concerning the success of conflict resolution taking place in the classroom. Minor

negative change is documented concerning the severity of conflicts occurring in the classroom

during the trial period.

RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 21

Classroom 4 - Changes in Frequency of Conflicts

60
Reported Frequency of Conflict Traits

% Conflicts transcending minor

50 arguments
40 % Conflicts involving physical
force
30
% Conflicts involving personal
attacks
20
% Conflicts requiring adult
10 intervention

0 % Conflicts that are reoccuring

Pre Survey Post Survey incidents

Difference of Frequency Between Pre and Post Survey Responses % Conflicts that are product of
unresolved prior conflicts

Figure 3. Classroom 4 teacher responses to teacher pre and post survey questions (Appendix A).

This figure illustrates reported changes in conflicts occurring in Classroom 4 during the 4-week

trial period.

Teacher Interviews

Teacher responses to the interview questions were varied but were generally positive

regarding the use of restorative practices. Each teacher held their own unique philosophy of

discipline and preferred to implement different methods and tools for maintaining behavior

within the classroom. For instance, Classroom 2 teacher reported that she avoids the use of

punishments and rewards and pushes a student-directed model of discipline. Classroom 1 teacher

reported that she consistently uses both rewards and punishments and tends to lean on teacher-

direction for behavioral issues. Despite the stark contrasts within this group’s beliefs on

discipline, all four teachers praised the RJ model and believed that it would be successful with

3rd graders if it were implemented at the beginning the year and built into the classroom routines.

All four teachers also stated that they would like to either continue using the RJ model, or at least

build it into their discipline system with next year’s class.

RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 22

Three out of the four teachers reported that these restorative practices did not reduce the

frequency and/or severity of student conflicts in their classrooms, but each of these teachers also

claimed that this was not a result of the discipline model, but of their lack of implementation and

consistency in using this model over the study period. The only teacher that did claim a reduction

was also the only teacher who conducted more than one restorative circle. It was her opinion that

the circles helped two of her students to develop stronger empathy skills, helping them to

become more sensitive of one another’s needs and feelings.

While no teachers had critiques of restorative discipline itself, every teacher expressed

concerns about the difficulty of finding the time necessary for holding circles. Several of the

teachers also identified that student buy-in was paramount to the success of a system like this and

thought that beginning-of-the-year implementation would allow it to be more successful,

especially with students who might be more reluctant to engage in a relationship/trust-based

model like this.

When asked what it would take to help them adopt a restorative model of discipline in

their classroom, several teachers requested additional training. None, however, believed that

administrative or whole-school support was a necessary factor. And none listed lack of support

as a hurdle or obstacle for implementing this model within their classroom.

Student Interviews

I only had the opportunity to conduct interviews with two students following their

participation in a single conflict circle. In both cases, neither student could definitively say what

kind of agreements had been made. These students also gave contradictory accounts of the nature

of the initial conflict that led to the restorative circle. In the end, student responses to the

interview questions demonstrated two very different perceptions of how successful the same
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 23

restorative circle had been. In the first case, student Tom voiced skepticism about how well the

restorative circle solved the conflict and believed that another conflict was likely to occur. In the

second case, student Harper seemed very pleased with the results of the circle and seemed to

believe that the issues leading to the initial conflict had been solved completely.

Conflict Trackers

The data collected through the Conflict Trackers was discarded as none of the volunteer

teachers found the time to use them consistently. Because this data collection tool was meant to

show change over time within each classroom, inconsistent data reporting led to highly

misleading reports. As such, the minimal data that was collected was not usable.

Observations

During the training sessions, restorative discipline was, on the whole, very well received

by both students and teachers. Students seemed to understand and appreciate the goals of

restorative discipline, especially when compared to the traditional, punitive alternatives. The four

volunteer teachers universally agreed that restorative discipline seemed like a positive and

productive way of handling student conflicts. Teachers commented that they, “liked the ideas

behind restorative justice,” and were excited to try it out in their classrooms.

That said, the training sessions were not successful for everyone. I noticed that a few

students within the four classrooms were reluctant to participate or take the trainings seriously.

Unfortunately, these happened to be the students who are more regularly involved in conflicts

and for which I thought restorative discipline would be the most beneficial.

While I did not get the opportunity to participate in or observe any conflict circles in

action within this study group, I did gather some insight into student and teacher dispositions

towards conflict circles. On several occasions, I witnessed students directly requesting to hold a
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 24

conflict circle to solve a problem. Also on several occasions, it was reported to me by a teacher

that they had an opportunity to hold a circle, but declined to do so due to time constraints or

simply because they felt the issue would be better solved using a different course of action.

Analysis

The research that led to the creation of this study, which was focused on the RJ model of

discipline, suggests that the traditional, punitive model is ineffective and counter-productive in

relation to the goals of our educational system. It also makes it clear that the RJ model of

discipline has promise in terms of reducing behavioral incidents and improving the general

school climate. Finally, the restorative model of discipline is not without fault. Studies based on

the opinions of RJ practitioners have made the claim that in order for RJ to be effective in

schools, it requires whole-school support.

In an attempt to test this “promise” and challenge the critique of RJ, that it needs to be

centered around a macro-community, I developed this study. To be more specific, the purpose of

the study was to determine whether restorative discipline is a viable and effective model of

discipline for third graders granted it is used as a reactive process and the students and teachers

have little to no background in RJ and little to no outside support.

Effects of Restorative Discipline on Behavioral Incidents

Through a content analysis of several qualitative and quantitative data sets, I failed to

document much change regarding behavioral incidents due to restorative discipline. But that,

according to my observations and testimonials from the teachers who volunteered to help me run

this study, had at least something to do with a lack of fidelity in implementation. The single

teacher who was able to host more than one conflict circle reported a positive change in her

students’ social and conflict resolution skills. All of the volunteer teachers believed that RJ was a
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 25

sound enough model that it would be effective with third graders given proper exposure and

consistent implementation.

Restorative Model Favored Over Punitive Model

Through observations and interviews, it was very clear that the ideals of RJ were well

accepted, and the model was at least philosophically more popular than the traditional, punitive

model of discipline. Only one participant in this study openly expressed dissatisfaction with a

restorative experience. During a student interview, student Tom, who had recently participated in

a restorative circle, suggested that the experience failed to meet his needs. After interviewing all

parties involved in that circle, it turns out that a lack of fidelity in following the RJ guidelines

may have been a factor here as well. Those interviews also raised some questions about the

developmental appropriateness of the specific strategies in which I trained students. It became

clear that some modifications might be beneficial, namely a physical recording of the details and

agreements of any given conflict circle so that they may be referred to and more easily

remembered.

A Reactive Model without Whole-School Support

When discussing what it would take to help these teachers adopt a restorative model of

discipline permanently, there was no mention of needing support from outside of the classroom.

After watching and experimenting with this model for four weeks, each teacher felt that, given

additional trainings, they could successfully implement and sustain this model of discipline

independent of outside assistance. That said, every teacher also voiced concerns over the amount

of time needed to resolve conflicts through restorative circles. Several suggested incorporating

some sort of structured conflict circle schedule into their weekly routines. According to my

observations as well as information volunteered by the teachers, much of the failure to

RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 26

implement certain aspects of this study were a direct result of not having that extra time to set up

a conflict circle. While whole-school support could certainly alleviate part of this burden, I am in

agreement with the teachers in that it is not necessary. Through careful planning and

restructuring of the classroom schedule, carrying out restorative circles does not have to interfere

with instructional time.

Restorative justice has demonstrated itself to be a successful model, especially where

punitive models have failed. A large part of this has to do with the fact that restorative practices

lean on building relationships and establishing community. It supports Dreikurs’ Social

Discipline Model (Gurcan & Tekin, n.d.) which claims that many misbehaviors are the

misguided product of people trying to find their place in a social world. Herein lies the problem

of using restorative practices as a reactive process only. The relationship and community

building is not there to lean on. I discovered this during the training sessions in each classroom.

While most students were ready and excited to engage, the students in these classrooms who are

consistently involved in the most conflicts were unwilling to participate in one sense or another.

These also happened to be the students with the biggest trust issues. By approaching restorative

discipline as a reactive process instead of a proactive one, where community, relationships, and

trust are established first, we are unintentionally excluding those students who would probably

benefit from a restorative discipline model the most. During the interview, Classroom 3 teacher

suggested that he felt this discipline model was perhaps not suited towards more behaviorally

challenged students. I believe that if restorative discipline were approached proactively instead

of how we used it in this study that would not be the case. In order to truly be successful with RJ

you must have student buy-in. And because RJ is so heavily based on relationships and
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 27

community, it would be ideal to achieve buy-in from all of your students. As such, I believe that

a proactive approach will be the most effective.

In the end, through a mixed methods approach, and by triangulating my data through the

use of several data collection tools, this study suggests the following: 1) a restorative model of

discipline does have certain advantages over punitive models, especially when it comes to

student/teacher acceptance and satisfaction, and 2) while a whole-school approach to RJ is not

necessary, a proactive approach is more likely to yield greater returns. The data does not support

making any claims about the effectiveness of restorative practices on reducing the frequency or

severity of student conflicts

Discussion

Although this study did not produce as much data as I had hoped, it is not without value.

Existing research pertaining to RJ in schools is overwhelmingly centered on secondary

education. There is far less documentation of RJ being used at elementary grade levels. This, I

believe, has to do with the fact that RJ is focused on relationships and is heavily reliant on users

having empathy and respect for others – traits that many believe are, developmentally speaking,

too advanced for students in the lower elementary grades.

According to Lawrence Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development (McDevitt & Ormrod,

2010), most lower elementary grade students are still very egocentric in their moral reasoning

and lack a certain societal perspective necessary for relationships to take a pivotal role in

determining behavior. He argued that it is not until students are older that they become motivated

by the perspectives and intentions of others.

While I do not challenge the idea that younger children are more egocentric and less

capable of understanding alternate perspectives, it is my belief that third graders, given a

RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 28

supportive classroom environment, are fully capable of learning to govern themselves based on

social standards. That is partially what I set out to determine in this study – whether or not third

graders could experience success with a discipline system based on relationships, empathy, and

respect.

Following this idea, the study aimed to push the boundaries of existing research regarding

RJ in schools. And it is here that this research holds its greatest value for the educational

community. It provides hopeful documentation of RJ being used in the third grade, even if it

does not contribute to the question of whether RJ is an effective discipline model.

I say hopeful documentation, because even though the quantitative data lacks the depth to

assume success in implementing RJ in the third grade, the pattern of qualitative data collected

through interviews and observations was overwhelmingly positive. Were this study to be

reinstituted at the start of the next school year, I would feel confident that new data sets would

demonstrate positive changes regarding student behavior when measured against the control data

collected through this study’s pre-training teacher surveys.

Were I to reinstitute this study next year, I would make several small changes. First, I

would incorporate an additional, separate, training seminar for volunteer teachers that offered

opportunities for observing and practicing the facilitation of restorative circles. Second, I would

make small changes to the restorative circle procedures. I would incorporate some method of

physical documentation in order to provide clarity and reference to circle participants of the

agreements made. Third, I would ask that volunteer teachers reserve at least one or two times per

week in their classroom schedules specifically for the hosting of restorative circles. Part of the

reason so few conflict circles were held is because the teachers often could not find the time to fit

them into their existing schedules. And finally, I would increase the data collection period from
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 29

four weeks to fourteen weeks – enough time to develop student buy-in and to ensure many more

opportunities for data collection.

Conclusion

This study began with four third grade classrooms being introduced to and trained in a

new model of discipline: restorative justice. Trainings took place over two consecutive sessions

and were focused on the philosophy behind restorative discipline and the procedures for

mediating and participating in a restorative circle. At this point, teachers were asked to use

restorative practices to address behavioral incidents occurring within their classrooms. Data

pertaining to the general effectiveness and dispositions towards RJ was collected through

surveys, interviews, incident logs, and observation reports.

At the end of the four-week data collection period, results were inconclusive in regards to

determining the effect of RJ on reducing the severity or frequency of behavioral incidents, but

showed heavy favor of participants towards the discipline model. Existing research on the use of

RJ in schools suggested that in order for RJ to be successful, it should be approached as a

proactive strategy and would require whole-system support. Qualitative data collected from

participants in this study supported the idea that RJ should be proactive but challenged the idea

of needing out-of-classroom support systems.

This study should provide value to those interested in implementing RJ in their

elementary classrooms as well as to those who wish to further research the effects of RJ in

schools. In particular, I believe this study was of greatest value to the four teachers who

volunteered their classrooms in an attempt to experiment with a new discipline model. Each of

these teachers came away with a new skill set and a taste for RJ – one they indicated they were

anxious to satisfy at the start of the next school year.

RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 30

I plan on using what I have learned here about restorative discipline to manage my own

classroom disciplinary issues. This study has provided insights into the practicality of

implementing the restorative model as well as to the challenges of using such a model at the

third-grade level. That said, the results of this study provided a less than clear analysis of RJ and

so I would likely introduce RJ into my classroom under the lens of another study similar to this

one. I would be looking to discover evidence regarding the effectiveness of RJ in reducing

behavioral incidents and improving student social skills related to conflict resolution and

communication. I would also seek to determine the level of burden associated with scheduling

and resolving conflicts through strategies as time consuming as restorative circles.

This study has given me high hopes for the success of RJ in schools. I am anxious

continue the learning process in my own classroom and I am excited to expose my own students

to the potential benefits that I see in the restorative discipline model.

RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 31

References

Abbamonte, L., Cavaliere, F. (2012). Restorative Justice and Mediation – The Healing Power of

Language. University of Naples.

Amstutz, L., Mullet, J. (2005). Restorative Discipline for Schools. Good Books.

Angel, C. M. (2005). Crime Victims Meet Their Offenders: Testing the Impact of Restorative

Justice Conferences on Victims’ Post-Traumatic Stress Symptoms. University of

Pennsylvania.

Armour, M. (2014). Ed White Middle School Restorative Discipline Evaluation: Implementation

and Impact, 2013/2014 Sixth & Seventh Grade. University of Texas at Austin.

Clifford, A. (2013). Teaching Restorative Practices with Classroom Circles. Center for

Restorative Process.

Gurcan, T., Tekin, E. (n.d.). The Social Discipline Model of Rudolph Dreikurs. Retrieved

February 20, 2018, from

http://users.metu.edu.tr/home303/e133376/wwwhome/project/The%20Social%20Discipli

ne%20Model%20of%20Rudolf%20Dreikurs.htm

Fronius, T., Persson, H., Guckenburg, S., Hurley, N., & Petrosino, A. (2016). Restorative Justice

in U.S. Schools: A Research Review. San Francisco, CA: WestEd.

Ginott, H. (1972). Teacher and Child: A Book for Parents and Teachers. New York, NY:

Macmillan.

Gordon, T. (2016). Origins of the Gordon Model. Gordon Training International. Retrieved from

http://www.gordontraining.com/thomas-gordon/origins-of-the-gordon-model/
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 32

Gregory, A., Clawson, K., Davis, A., & Gerewitz, J. (2016). The Promise of Restorative

Practices to Transform Teacher-Student Relationships and Achieve Equity in School

Discipline (Vol. 26, Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, pp. 325-

353, Rep.). Routledge.

Hambacher, E. (2017). Resisting Punitive School Discipline: Perspectives and Practices of

Exemplary Urban Elementary Teachers. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in

Education, 32(2), 102-118.

Hurley, N., Guckenburg, S., Persson, H., Fronius, T., & Petrosino, A. (2015). What Further

Research is Needed on Restorative Justice in Schools?. San Franscisco, CA: WestEd.

International Institute for Restorative Practices. (2014). Improving School Climate: Evidence

from Schools Implementing Restorative Practices.

McDevitt, T. & Ormrod J. (2010) Kohlberg’s Three Levels and Six Stages of Moral Reasoning.

Education.com. Retrieved April 15, 2018, from

https://www.education.com/reference/article/kohlbergs-moral-reasoning/

Merriam, S. & Tisdell, E. (2016) Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation

4thed. Jossey-Bass. San Francisco, CA.

Mirsky, L. (2003). SaferSanerSchools: Transforming School Culture with Restorative Practices.

International Institute for Restorative Practices.

Reimer, K. (2011). An Exploration of the Implementation of Restorative Justice in an Ontario

Public School. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, (119).

San Francisco Unified School District. (2018). Restorative Practices: Circle Guidelines.

Slavin, R. (2015). Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice (11th ed.). Upper Saddle River,

NJ: Pearson
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 33

Appendix A

Teacher Survey (pre/post)

1. About how many times per week would you say students engage in conflicts with one another
within your classroom?

2. About what percentage of these conflicts transcend minor arguments/bickering?

3. About what percentage of these conflicts involve physical force?

4. About what percentage of these conflicts involve personal attacks?

5. About what percentage of these conflicts require adult intervention in order to be resolved?

6. About what percentage of these conflicts do you feel are reoccurring incidents?

7. What percentage of these conflicts do you feel are the product of unresolved prior conflicts?

8. What would you consider to be the primary source of student conflict in your classroom?
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 34

Appendix B

Teacher Interview Questions

 How would you describe your discipline philosophy going into this study?

 Do you feel like these practices helped to reduce student conflicts?

 Is restorative justice something you could envision working well with 3rd graders?

 What was the hardest part about using restorative practices?

 What is your biggest critique of this restorative model of discipline?

 What modifications would you make to this restorative model of discipline?

 Do you intend on continuing the use of restorative practices?

 What would help you to adopt a restorative model of discipline like this one?
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 35

Appendix C

Student Interview Questions

 Can you describe the conflict that you were involved in?

 Do you believe that the conflict was resolved?

 Are you happy with how the conflict was resolved?

 Do you think that whatever caused this problem will result in another conflict in the
future?

 Do you feel like the conflict strategies used here helped to solve the problem?

 Is there anything you wished were handled differently, either by yourself or by others
involved?

 What do you think you’ll do next time something like this happens?
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 36

Appendix D

Restorative Circle Guidelines

 Respect the talking piece: everyone listens, everyone has a turn.

 Speak from the heart: share only your truth, your perspectives, your experiences.

 Listen from the heart: let go of judgments and stories that make it hard to hear one
another.

 Trust that you will know what to say: no need to rehearse.

 Say just enough: without feeling rushed, be concise and considerate of the time of others.

 Agreements: invite additional agreements from the group.

Source: San Francisco Unified School District. Student, Family, and Community Support
Department.
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 37

Appendix E

Guiding Restorative Questions

1. What happened, and what were you thinking at the time of the incident?

2. What have you thought about since?

3. Who has been affected by what happened and how?

4. What about this has been the hardest for you?

5. What do you think needs to be done to make things as right as possible?

Source: Clifford, Center for Restorative Process. Developed for San Francisco Unified School
District.
RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN 3RD GRADE 38

Appendix F

Severity of Student Conflict Scale

1. The conflict led to personal attacks and/or a disruption of learning but was, or likely

would have been, solved by the parties involved.

2. The conflict involved arguing/shouting and personal attacks. The conflict was severe

enough to disrupt the class and required intervention in order to be resolved.

3. The conflict involved prolonged (longer than momentary) aggressive/hostile behavior but

did not and would not have likely led to physical force. The conflict was severe enough

to disrupt the class and required intervention in order to be resolved.

4. The conflict involved prolonged (longer than momentary) aggressive/hostile behavior

that was a prelude to, or led to, physical force.