1

Running head: RESTORATIVE PRACTICES

Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports: Restorative Practices

Madelyn A. Manzoni

Bel Air Elementary School

Capstone Research Project

EDAD 694

Frostburg State University

2
Running head: RESTORATIVE PRACTICES
Introduction and Problem Statement

Bel Air Elementary School, located in Cresaptown, Maryland, is a school in the Allegany

County Public Schools System. This school is in its second year of implementing the county-

wide positive behavior intervention strategies (PBIS) program. The county also requires the

school to complete and analyze the Student Risk Screening Scale (SRSS) data. This data is

generated from teachers and completed three times a school year. The teachers are to complete a

survey answering questions about students’ internal and external behaviors. This data eventually

categorizes the students into three separate sections; low risk, moderate risk, or high risk. Low-

risk students are labeled green within the system, the moderate risk is yellow, and high risk is

red. After analyzing the schools’ SRSS data as well as office discipline referral (ODR) data, a

few students became very prevalent as to consistently having a high rate of ODR’s and also

screened as either highly moderate at risk or high at risk on the SRSS results. To help reduce the

number of ODR's these particular students were receiving, a restorative practice system will be

put in place and analyzed. This Restorative Practice strategy implemented is check-in and check-

out system with students that were selected to be in the participating sample.

Research Question

The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of Restorative Practices Model on

elementary students who have frequent office referrals and flagged through the SRSS data. Does

implementing restorative practices with students who are frequently receiving office referrals

help to reduce the number of office referrals the student gets? Do restorative practices, such as

holding individual check-in and check-out meetings with each student, help students reduce the

number of office referrals or disruptive classroom behavior? Will a check-in and check-out

system help to reduce the number of students at high or moderate risk for internalizing and
3
Running head: RESTORATIVE PRACTICES
externalizing behaviors? Will using a check-in and check-out system of restorative practices help

moderate and high-risk students become more self-aware of their disruptive actions, helping to

reduce office referrals?

Literature Review

Students are coming into schools with dynamic and complex issues that occur outside of

the school setting and impact student's educational success significantly. The Scottish Executive

funded and researched a restorative practices (RP) pilot program in 2008, showing the

connection between student's lives outside of school and their success in school. “They are often

also aware of the complex pressures on children and young people: the numbers of young carers,

of looked after children, of children coping with a range of family and personal difficulties, of

increasing concern about wellbeing and mental health among the young” (McClusky, Lloyd,

Kane, Riddell, Stead, & Weedon, 2008, p. 406). These issues are still current and are impacting

student’s ability to develop impactful relationships within the school system. McClusky, Lloyd,

Kane, Riddell, Stead, and Weedon also concluded that RP is compatible with similar initiatives

that schools are already working on. Some of these initiatives include social skills, peer

mediation, and cognitive reasoning programs. They acknowledge that all of these outlets are an

excellent opportunity for restorative practices to implement to enhance the experience

(McClusky, Lloyd, Kane, Riddell, Stead, & Weedon, 2008). The Scottish Executive took

advantage of this area of interest in their pilot program.

Gonzalez points out another need for restorative practices in the school setting by

connecting the school's discipline system to the criminal and juvenile justice system. Gonzalez

reflects on current school discipline systems in place, “Further, they determined that

exclusionary practices, such as suspension, interfered with educational progress and perpetuated
4
Running head: RESTORATIVE PRACTICES
a cycle of failure. This research on suspensions indicated that despite frequent use, such

exclusionary discipline practices are not effective in reducing problematic behaviors" (Gonzalez,

2012, p. 288). Gonzalez relates restorative practices to a more proactive and preventative

approach to school discipline as opposed to the discipline system that she compares to the

juvenile and criminal justice system that lacks rehabilitation.

Gonzalez also relates the school to prison pipeline for a need for restoration and

relationship development in schools (Gonzalez, 2012). Gonzalez reports that early predictors for

student dropout rates have a direct relationship to an unsatisfactory behavior grade in early

grades or suspensions (Gonzalez, 2012). Gregory, Clawson, Dabis, and Gerewitz also connect

the need for restorative practices to a flawed discipline system, “Suspensions remain a widely

utilized approach to school discipline despite a lack of evidence that they prevent future

misbehavior or make schools safer (American Psychological Association Task Force, 2008)”

(Gregory, Clawson, Dabis, & Gerewitz, 2014, p. 1). The school suspension system has proved to

be ineffective. Restorative practices provide a much more optimist approach to similar discipline

challenges.

Previous research involving restorative practices has been hugely successful. There are

many forms of restorative practices. However, the end goal and purposes of restorative strategies

are all similar. "The focus of these practices is working with people to seek resolution of a

conflict or difference that has arisen” (Kaveney & Drewery, 2011, p. 5). Restorative practices are

an opposing approach to zero-tolerance policies and encourage students to engage in

conversations through developed relationships about problems that they may face. The basis of

restorative practices, regardless of the method used, is creating a safe environment that engages a
5
Running head: RESTORATIVE PRACTICES
student's emotional intelligence while also resolving conflict. Hendry explains that restorative

practices provide alternatives to the typical discipline system by enabling students to interact

with one another through disputes that arise (Hendry, 2009). Wachtel agrees that restorative

practices are a social science that helps enhance decision-making skills within students (Wachtel,

2016). There is a dire need for these social skills and rehabilitation in the schools, and restorative

practices can help to support the entire school climate.

Although there are many different methods on how to implement restorative practices,

there are crucial elements that are required. Teacher's from Kaveney and Drewery's study reflect

on their experiences restorative practices, "There was a range of skills/learning that participating

teachers felt were necessary to make the most of class meetings, including the ability to listen, to

be reflective, and clear about the issue" (Kaveney & Drewery, 2011, p. 8). Implemented within

this study, whole class restorative circle meetings. Teachers also felt that it was essential to

explain their role as a facilitator within the process to students involved. Kaveney and Drewery

also discuss that other forms of restorative practices found to be successful in their study; peer

mediations, classroom circles, restorative conferencing, restorative chats, reflection rooms,

student leadership training, and parent education (Kaveney & Drewery, 2011). All of these

methods or models have the same goal in mind, with the settings altered. Within this study, all

teachers also indicated that they noticed improvements in student’s self-awareness of behaviors

as well as student’s interactions with others.

How conversations and dialogue articulated to students during restorative meetings is

essential in challenging their reflection as well as the success of the restorative session. Wachtel

claims that, “… letting the student know how he or she has been affected by the student’s
6
Running head: RESTORATIVE PRACTICES
behavior: “When you disrupt the class, I feel sad” or “disrespected” or “disappointed.” Hearing

this, the student learns how his or her behavior is affecting others” (Wachtel, 2016, p. 9). By

prompting students with these higher thinking questions, it helps to enhance their reflection and

yields the most success through restorative practices. Morrison also suggests that "Restorative

justice, at the personal level, is about enabling mechanisms that discharge negative feelings, such

as shame and anger, and building positive feelings, such as interest and excitement (Morrison,

2003, p. 694). Restorative practices are in place as a positive behavior management system that

supports student’s development to become self-sufficient and self-aware of behaviors as well as

relationships with others.

Participants and Sampling

After analyzing the first quarter’s SRSS data, the students chosen for this study are

students who have had various office referrals or were flagged red through the SRSS data from

the first quarter. Also used is the data to determine areas of improvement and determine each

student’s needs. Listed below are the data collected from quarter one to decide which students

were considered highly moderate or high risk in either the internalizing behaviors screening or

the externalizing behaviors selection. A student felt highly moderate or high risk for either

behavior qualified in this study. Six students from the school were flagged as being under the red

or high-risk category. However, some of the students flagged as being highly moderate risk were

pulled into this sample as well. Thus, the total number of participants, eight students. Also

important to note, students with disabilities with close adult support, and screened as moderate or

high risk and nonparticipants, due to the extra support of their close adult support personnel who

completed daily check-in and check-out meetings. The goal is to follow these students through

the next few SRSS screenings as well as document the number of office referrals after the
7
Running head: RESTORATIVE PRACTICES
restorative practices are in place. The tables below are the first quarter SRSS data that helped to

determine the eight students that are in the participating sample. The following tables also depict

the criteria used to develop the data that categorized the students.
8
Running head: RESTORATIVE PRACTICES
9
Running head: RESTORATIVE PRACTICES
Methodology

To meet the diverse needs of all eight students, delegating restorative practices to other

staff members to implement was most impactful. Student 7 visits the nurse every morning and

has already begun to build a different relationship with her. Based on this knowledge, I decided

to meet with the nurse and have her implement the check-in and check-out model with this

student to help him grow and become accountable for actions. There was a similar approach to

Student 3. She had developed an energetic and dynamic relationship with the principal as she

interacted with her most mornings as she entered the school building. Another great match-up

because not only was there already a previous connection, they both already have this interaction

built-into their routine. Student 1 participated in the morning announcements. During this time,

he interacts with the school secretary. The opportunity for a check-in and check-out restorative

practice. Students 2, 5, and 6 matched with the guidance counselor. I met with student's 4 and 8

and practiced restorative strategies. Once students' placement established, a meeting for the

implementation of restorative check-in and check-out system, students engaged in a dynamic

check-in and check-out model with their mentors for the remainder of the first quarter and the

entire second quarter.

Results and Analysis

All student's SRSS data decreased. Student 1, Student 2, Student 7, and Student 8 made

significant strides. Student 1 and Student 2, both went from screening at high external risk to at

low risk by the second quarter. A considerable accomplishment for a short time. Student 7

transitioned from high internal risk to moderate risk, and Student 8 progressed from highly
10
Running head: RESTORATIVE PRACTICES
moderate risk to low risk in Quarter 2. Again, these are massive achievements for the time of the

implementation of the practices. Student 6 also shifted from being at high risk to moderate risk.

If this student would have been able to experience intervention for the entire school year, data

predicts that the growth would have been significant.

Student 3 and 4 both made improvements from their Quarter 1 SRSS screening; however,

attendance became an immense barrier when implementing the check-in and check-out system. I

believe that attendance impacted the data yielded of these two students. Although they both

made progress, their progress could have amplified if they participated in the same amount of

restorative practice sessions as the other students involved. Student 5's progress notable from a

more extended intervention period. Student 4 and Student 5 are both in fifth grade, and I believe

their results related to the restorative practices implemented showed as delayed.

Overall, despite the shortened period, all students made progress from the implementation of the

restorative practice strategies. The graph below shows the development of each student as their

SRSS scores decreased in Quarter 2, reducing their level of risk.

11
Running head: RESTORATIVE PRACTICES

Student SRSS Quarter 1 and Quarter 2 Data

16
15
14 14
13
12 12
SRSS Interna;/External Scores

11 11
10 10
9 9
8 8 8

6 6

4 4

2 2
1 1
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Student Number

Quarter 1 Quarter 2
12
Running head: RESTORATIVE PRACTICES

Discussion and Reflection

Although this study was impactful and successful, it is also a testament to the amount of

time needed to make a substantial impact. This study also brings to light the barrier that

educators and school leaders face every day, which is attendance. Attendance is a significant

barrier and impacted the results for some of the students within the sample. Teacher's from

Kaveney, and Drewery's study reported on their findings after implementing restorative

practices, “This criterion reflects our growing understanding that the effects of the meetings may

not become apparent until after a significant number of meetings with the same class” (Kaveney

& Drewery, 2011, p. 7). This study used a whole class model; however, they still noticed a

difference based on the number of meetings implemented.

Time, exposure, and the number of implementations were one of the most impactful

variables within a study relating to restorative practices. A three-year restorative practices

program implemented within diverse schools throughout the United States had similar successes,

"…in an urban largely African American high school, violent acts and serious incidents were

reduced by 52% compared with the year before. In a rural high school, there was a 50%

reduction in suspensions. Finally, in a large suburban high school, the number of incidents of

''disrespect to teacher'' and ''classroom disruption'' reduced by 70% after one year of the

intervention" (Gregory, Clawson, Dabis, & Gerewitz, 2014, p. 2). There has been a success
13
Running head: RESTORATIVE PRACTICES
through restorative practices all across the United States in diverse settings. This is a practice and

model that can be successful in different settings.

Significance

This study is incredibly significant and can sustain within the school, as well as many

others. This check-in and check-out system allowed many individuals within the school to build

relationships with students. These relationships provided an opportunity for a student to interact

with a mentor that they may have never had the chance of engaging with consistently. These

relationships helped to hold the student accountable, while also helping them engage in strategies

that they can use themselves to help them become self-sufficient in behavior management. Not

only was this beneficial for the students, after reflecting with staff involved in the practices, but

they also noted that this study helped them get to know student's that they wouldn't typically

develop a healthy relationship within the school. This study was also significant because it

portrayed the time and consistency required to foster these essential trusting relationships with

students. Impactful results not yielded right away because it took time for the student to trust the

person that they were checking-in or out with as a mentor. If sustaining this practice over a more

extended period, it would yield even more positive, impactful results.

Thus, these practices increase by implementing restorative circles within entire

classrooms within a whole group setting. The one on one approach used in this study was

successful, but research shows that all students can benefit from restorative practices. An entire

group setting restorative practice method recommended through research is a circle meeting. "A

circle is a versatile restorative practice used proactively, to develop relationships and build

community or reactively, to respond to wrongdoing, conflicts and problems. Circles allow people

to speak and listen to one another in an atmosphere of safety, dignity, and equality. The circle
14
Running head: RESTORATIVE PRACTICES
process allows people to tell their stories and offer their perspectives" (Wachtel, 2016, p. 8). The

study conducted can be continued and enhanced by having students engage in these practices

together. Studies have shown that these circle meetings not only improve student behavior but

help with classroom management. Sometimes students learn most from one another, which is

why these whole group settings can also be beneficial in reaching students who are at moderate

or high risk. Restorative practices continued throughout the entire school can help to improve

school climate, student behavior, while reducing the number of office referrals.

References

Gonzalez, T. (2012). Keeping kids in schools: Restorative justice, punitive, discipline, and the

school to prison pipeline. Journal of Law and Education, 41(2), 281-335.

Gregory, A., Clawson, K. Dabis, A., & Gerewitz, J. (2014). The Promise of restorative practices

to transform teacher-student relationships and achieve equity in school discipline. Journal

of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 26(4), 325-353.

doi:10.1080/10474412.2014.929950

Hendry, R. (2009). Building and restoring respectful relationships in schools: a guide to using

restorative practice. London: Routledge.

Kaveney, K., & Drewery, W. (2011). Classroom meetings as a restorative practice: A study of

teachers' responses to an extended professional development innovation. International

Journal on School Disaffection, 8(1), 5-12. doi: 10.18546/ijsd.08.1.02

McClusky, G., Lloyd, G., Kane, J., Riddell, S., Stead, J., &Weedon, E. (2008). Can restorative
15
Running head: RESTORATIVE PRACTICES
practices in schools make a difference? Educational Review, 60(4), 405-417. doi:

10.1080/00131910802393456

Morrison, B. E. (2003). Regulating safe school communities: being responsive and restorative.

Journal of Educational Administration, 4(6), 690-704. Doi: 10.1108/09578230310504661

Wachtel, T. (2016). Defining restorative. International Institute for Restorative Practices, 1-12.