RUNING HEAD: RESTORING THE PEACE 1

Restoring the Peace:

Restorative Justice Practices in an Elementary Classroom
and their Effect on Classroom Culture
Marian Pintar
Alverno College

Introduction
In August of 2014 I stepped into my career in education as I stepped into room 19 at the

end of the hallway in Milwaukee College Preps Lloyd Street campus: a brand new 2 nd
grade teacher whose utter lack of training and educational experience was matched
only by naive idealism. Milwaukee College Prep is a high-performing charter school in the
inner city of Milwaukee. While there are now 4 campuses, I teach at the Lloyd Street
location which is now in its fifth year as a take-over model chartered through Milwaukee
Public Schools. I am very fortunate to have received a placement at a school with such
strong commitment to unified culture. Milwaukee College Prep takes great pride in its

RESTORING THE PEACE 2

character education, and it is only because of this strong, school-wide commitment to

achieving a collaborative and supportive culture that I was able to pursue this topic so
extensively with my students.
As with nearly every other teacher who enters a classroom without firsthand teaching
experience, my idealism was shaken swiftly and sharply. Within minutes of greeting my
class of twenty six 7 and 8-year-old students, Dante was on his chair yelling, I hate this
school, I hate these teachers! I wish they would fire some of them! Moments later Shyanne
was crying because someone had called her bald-headed. It was not long before the first of
what would become a daily cascade of chairs was thrown. My classroom culture was
destructive, and the traditional reward-and-punishment system in place was insufficient to
support the drastic emotional needs of many of my students.
Research conducted by Sally Varnham of Massey University Wellington Campus in
New Zealand states that, Traditionally, the main feature of the student/teacher relationship
is control. School principals, teachers and administrators make, administer and enforce the
rules. Where students engage in anti-social behavior which results in a breakdown of
relationships within a school community and school safety is threatened, school authorities
react by imposing sanctions on the culprit exclusion from school for example (2005).
What I saw in my classroom was exactly this. Power struggle after power struggle resulted
in loss of learning time, damaged relationships, and ineffective, punitive consequences.
When I stepped back and reevaluated my classroom culture, I realized that what my
students needed wasnt punishment, it was a place they wanted to be every day. They were
being systematically isolated and shunned from their classroom and school community, and
thus, felt no connection to their peers and no investment in succeeding academically. I was
watching the cycle of how students get to 6 th grade unable to read, hating school and
resentful toward teachers unfold in my classroom, and it terrified me. Varnham notes this
progression in her study: Research into school exclusion, particularly in relation to zero

RESTORING THE PEACE 3

tolerance practices in the US, suggests that if students are disengaged from school, there is
a strong likelihood of their going down the path which has been referred to by researchers
as the schoolhouse to jailhouse track. (2005).
Milwaukee College Prep utilizes a school-wide behavior management system which
does a great job of providing continuity from year to year for students. Each classroom
teacher is responsible for making either a color chart with clips or individual envelopes
which hold colored cards for each student. Each color corresponds to a particular dollar
amount in a students personal bank account (Blue=$5, Green=$4, Yellow=$3,
Orange=$2, Red=$1). The personal bank account analogy is central to this system and
the idea that student actions either deposit into their accounts or withdrawal from them is
carried throughout the behavior management system. Students who have retained most or
all of their scholar dollars by the end of the week receive incentive time for their hard work
on character.
During the 2013-2014 school year, students began each day on blue. As students
needed redirections throughout the day, they would make withdrawals from their account
from blue to green, green to yellow and so forth. If a student reached red and continued an
undesired behavior, s/he had no more money in his/her personal account and their
account would be considered, overdrawn. The student would then be issued a Discipline
Deposit and would need to fill out the reflection portion of the Deposit in order to return to
class. Often, the student would be expected to apologize in front of the class, a process
which, in my classroom, often caused more conflict than it brought closure.
However, I altered my system midway through the 2013-2014 school year after
recognizing that the physical act of making withdrawals (removing a colored dollar from
their envelope and placing it back in the bank) for my students was highly emotional and not
conducive to returning to class ready to learn. I switched from using individual envelopes
with cards (many of which had been torn down repeatedly in fits of anger and frustration by

RESTORING THE PEACE 4

students as they yanked color cards out) to a clip system in which I physically moved each
students clip up or down the chart. I experienced a great deal of success with this change
which I attribute to two variables: 1, it kept students who needed to make withdrawals for
off-task behavior seated, minimizing additional classroom disruption and 2, it deescalated
the emotional stress of the consequence because it enabled me to issue withdrawals as
privately as possible while simply moving their clip once they were back on task.
The second major change to my behavior system was adding a color above blue on
our chart for scholars to work toward: gold. (The color was chosen because each classroom
is named after a university and, after my alma mater, we are the Marquette Golden Eagles).
I explained this as getting a bonus for working hard at a job, and it motivated students to
have a goal to work towards rather than working in a deficit system in which the only
behaviors that were publically given attention were negative. A large body of research and
numerous observations of much more experienced teachers informed these decisions as
well, however, I will not discuss it further here. For more information on this topic, use
search terms Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports (PBIS), student motivation &
color charts, and behavior management cycle.
An additional alteration was made to the school-wide behavior management system
at Lloyd Street between the 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 school years. Students now start
each day on green rather than blue and all classrooms were required to integrate a beyond
blue color. This decision was based largely on a shift toward recognizing positive behaviors
rather than emphasizing negative behaviors. This provided all students multiple
opportunities to be publically recognized for positive behaviors.
Now armed with a behavior management system that emphasized positive behaviors
and minimized the opportunity for emotional outbursts, it was with serious resolve that I
began my research into alternative forms of classroom conflict-resolution with the goal of
creating an environment that encouraged positive peer interactions, validated emotional

RESTORING THE PEACE 5

experiences, and provided healthy solutions for coping with and resolving peer to peer
conflict.
I first came across the term restorative justice as a college freshman in a social
justice course. I hadnt considered its use in education until years later when, during a
Teach for America professional development session, the use of community circles was
brought up as a potential problem-solving tool. In my search for more productive, positive
and community-oriented methods of addressing problematic behaviors, restorative justice
became the object of my focus.
There exist a myriad of definitions for Restorative Justice, however, I have found the
following excerpts from my literature review to be most helpful in conveying the true heart of
this practice:
[Restorative justice] focuses on renouncing the anti-social act while supporting both the victim
and the offenderRestorative justice describes a response to wrongdoing which focuses on
people and relationships rather on punishment and retribution (Varnham, 2005).
Restorative justice sees things differentlyCrime is a violation of people and relationshipsIt
creates obligations to make things right. Justice involves the victim, the offender and the
community in a search for solutions which promote repair, reconciliation and reassurance (Zehr,
1990).
[There exists] empirical evidence about the effectiveness of restorative justice under three
hypothesis, which are relevant in consideration of restorative justice practices in schools. These
are, firstly, that restorative justice restores and satisfies victims better than existing criminal justice
practices. Secondly, restorative justice restores and satisfies offenders better than existing
criminal justice practices. Thirdly, restorative justice restores and satisfies communities better
than existing criminal justice practices (Braithwaite, 2002).

Connection to Research & Theory

When thinking about the problems in my own classroom, I began by seeking research to
support the systems of reward and punishment already in place through my school.
Psychological research from the behaviorist perspective dates back to B.F. Skinners

RESTORING THE PEACE 6

studies on conditioning in the 1920s. This body of work shows that behaviors can be taught
with reinforcements. However, while Wilson and Hernsteins 1985 study demonstrates that
individuals will learn social responsibility by learning to fear undesired consequences, I was
unable to locate a single modern study proving that behavioral conditioning increases social
responsibility, empathy or citizenship. It seems that while reward and punishment are
effective in eliciting and subduing behaviors, they do little to motivate intrinsically or bring
about shifts in attitude. Indeed, the Youth Justice Board which oversees the youth justice
system for all of England and Wales concluded that, the evidence that rewards and
punishments raise the level of social responsibility in society has not been supported by a
decrease in the proportion of the population who are excluded from schools or who go
through the criminal justice system (2004). After coming up empty-handed, I began looking
more deeply into how to build supportive communities where conflict is addressed
thoroughly and in a positive manner.
As a species, humans have an innate drive to belong and cooperate. Behaviors that
facilitate conflict resolution are vital for a highly social species whose ability to cohabitate
and collaborate dictates our survival (de Waal, 2000). Many species enact post-conflict
rituals devised to restore damaged bonds between individuals for the good of the collective.
These behaviors range from symbiotic grooming to embracing and other forms of positive
physical contact (Aureil & van Schaik, 1991; de Wall & van Roosmalen, 1979). Such
restorative behaviors are also needed in human communities where individualist desires
clash and threaten the good of the community. One of the most widely-utilized practices for
negating harm and restoring balance post-conflict is apology. The use of apology in conflictresolution has been extensively studied and, according to a study conducted by Craig E.
Smith and Paul L. Harris through Harvard University, its efficacy in appeasing upset
feelings and generating forgiveness (McCullough et al., 1998; Ohbuchi, Kameda, & Agarie,

RESTORING THE PEACE 7

1989) is proven throughout a variety of situations (Ely & Gleason, 2006; Tavuchis, 1991)
and across a wide variety of cultural groups (Fry, 2000; Hickson, 1986; Pirie, 2006; Shook,
1985) (2011).
Restorative justice (RJ) practices have been utilized for thousands of years in tribal
communities and collectivist societies where high value is placed on unity and family (Gade,
2013). According to Gade, the term itself did not appear in writing until the latter half of the
nineteenth century when it was called upon by the post-apartheid Truth and Reconciliation
Commissioner. Indeed, RJ has deep historical roots in African indigenous cultures by virtue
of its congruence both with Ubuntu [communal family] and with African indigenous justice
systems (pgs. 11-12). The prevalence of these practices in the African community was
particularly interesting to me given that a majority of my students are of African descent, and
even those who are not are classified racially as African American by the district. Varnham
writes that RJ practices have been embraced by the Maori [indigenous New Zealand tribe]
community as an alternative to traditional western criminal justice practices because RJ is,
a means of investing decision-making processes with cultural values (2005).
Additionally, a comparative study was conducted by Maxwell and Morris at Victoria
University in New Zealand in 1993. This study explored the effectivity of RJ compared to
traditional European justice systems and concluded the following:
A distinction must been drawn between a system which attempts to re-establish the indigenous
model of pre-European times and a system of justice which is culturally appropriate. The New
Zealand system is an attempt to establish the latter, not to replicate the former. As such, it seeks
to incorporate many of the features apparent in whanau [Maori extended family] decision-making
processes and seen in meetings on marae [Maori community centre] today, but it also contains
elements quite alien to indigenous models.

The possibility of a more culturally-relevant justice framework was exciting to me, and I
believed it would lend itself well to the complex task of integrating parental and community

RESTORING THE PEACE 8

value influences into the more rigid, Kantian school values at MCP; two philosophical
systems which were frequently at odds when addressing student anti-social behaviors.
RJ was first introduced in the United States through the prison system as an alternative
conflict-resolution model to traditional zero-tolerance policies and punitive justice practices
(Alberecht, 2011). Prison Fellowship International Center for Justice and Reconciliation
defines restorative justice as a theory of justice that emphasizes repairing the harm
caused or revealed by criminal behavior. It is best accomplished through cooperative
processes that include all the stakeholders. Though numerous iterations of the RJ model
now exist, all models include at least the following two characteristics:
1. Identifying and taking steps to repair harm
2. Involving all stakeholders
While these may seem intuitive, they are often at odds with the traditional Western manner
in which problems are addressed in the classroom: offender harms victim, victim tells
authority figure, authority figure doles out punishment to offender. In this scenario, there is
no opportunity for reconciliation, no reparations are made, and both victim and offender are
denied the agency to solve their own problems. This ultimately breeds dependence on
others to resolve emotional strife, rather than encouraging ownership of ones own emotions
and providing strategies for reaching consensus on next steps and reparations. In this
traditional scenario, the offender is considered in violation of a law or rule, and therefore
receives punishment from an authority whose position it is to enforce laws or rules.
Occasionally, the offender may be expected to apologize to the victim, however, this
process almost always lacks sincerity. I observed and enforced this practice in my own
classroom during my first few months. Thus over time, the phrases, Im sorry and I forgive
you are robbed of their meaning and instead become a pantomime for the sake of avoiding
further consequences from an authority figure. Both parties are left emotionally stressed,

RESTORING THE PEACE 9

frustrated with one another, and generally dissatisfied with the overall event. This, in turn,
creates rifts in a community which spread and cause more conflict as parties who seemed
initially uninvolved are roped into taking sides.
However, if an offense is categorized as a violation of a community rather than
violation of a law or rule, the justice process is immediately humanized and an offender is
now accountable to members of his/her own community, rather than to an authority figure.
Martin Buber (1958) speaks to the importance of coming to conflict-resolution with full
recognition of the other person as a whole being. Buber stresses that when those in conflict
perceive it to be an I-it relationship, conflict will be characterized by objectifying and
stereotyping whereas when an I-Thou relationship is perceived, sensitivity and empathy
are more likely to surface.
The purpose of this RJ practices in prison systems was to assist with inmates
rehabilitation and reintegration back into society. RJ opens a space for dialogue in which
offenders are given an opportunity to make reparations to those who were wronged by a
crime and to ones own community. Victims have an opportunity to express their feelings in
a setting in which emotional vulnerability and honesty are valued. Additionally, others who
may have been unintentionally affected by a violation are given an opportunity to express
how it impacted them and are invited to weigh in on the decision-making process (involving
all stakeholders). By including all affected parties, offenders often come to the conclusion
that their offense caused far greater emotional damage than s/he initially considered.
Arguably the most important step then occurs: victim(s) and offender(s) must reach a
consensus on what should be done to repair the damage done. Existing research on the
use of RJ with prison populations points to a great potential for reduction in recidivism rates
(Alberecht, 2011). Though little research exists on recidivism in classrooms where RJ is
used with fidelity, this is a promising finding for its use in decreasing repeat offenses.

RESTORING THE PEACE 10

While the potential of RJ to heal and restore in a community is evident, there is very little
research on its use in elementary schools. Existing research on its use in educational
settings is limited to high schools, middle schools and special programs or schools
dedicated specifically to utilizing this process. According to a study of RJs use in an
alternative secondary school in New Zealand and a review of its use in education
elsewhere, Sally Varnham, a senior lecturer at Massey University in Wellington, New
Zealand writes that there is overwhelming evidence that, when used properly, RJ has a
measurable positive effect on school culture as indicated by teacher, student-offender,
student-victim and peer survey data (2005). Additionally, Vanham cites numerous benefits
from RJ practices:

Participants were highly satisfied with the process and its outcomes
High compliance rate with the terms of the agreement by offenders
Low rates of reoffending
A majority of offenders felt they were more accepted, cared about and more closely

connected to other conference participants following conferencing

A majority of victims felt safer and more able to manage similar situations than

before conferencing
The majority of conference participants had closer relationships with other

participants after conferencing.

All school administrators felt that conferencing had reinforced school values
Most family members expressed positive perceptions of the school and comfort in

approaching the school on other matters

Nearly all schools in the trial reported that they had changed their thinking about
managing behavior from a punitive to a more restorative approach.

These trials, while overwhelmingly positive, were conducted with older children. Existing
research on the use of RJ practices in lower elementary classrooms is in its infancy, and as
a result, less intensive, more age-appropriate iterations of such practices have been studied

RESTORING THE PEACE 11

in its place. The above cited study by Smith and Harris looked specifically at the effects of
post-offense apologies on child-child relationships. In this study, facilitators told child
participants that a student from another school had sent an envelope with attractive stickers
inside for them. The control group received stickers while the other two groups, one of
which received a written apology from the fictional student and one which received only an
empty envelope, did not. Participants were then asked to rate their own emotions about the
situation, their emotions toward the other child and the perceived niceness of the other
child. Participants who received no stickers but did receive the apology condition 1)
reported feeling better; 2) viewed the other child as more remorseful; and 3) rated the other
child as nicer. (2011). It can be concluded, then, that the presence of a voluntary apology is
meaningful to a child who feels that injustice has been done unto him/her. The chart below
illustrates the degree to which these findings are significant.

This chart illustrates that, across both age groups, victims perceived their transgressor as
having more negative feelings (i.e. regret) about their actions when an apology was present.
As depicted above, the calculated mean emotion that younger children (4-5 year olds)
assigned to transgressors was quite positive (3.27). This perception in young children has
been referred to as the perception of the happy victimizer. In other words, young children
perceive a child who causes harm to another to have strong positive emotions about the

RESTORING THE PEACE 12

incident due to the perceived net gain (transgressor got to play with the toy, the
transgressor got to keep something for them self, the transgressor got to be first in line).
Young children typically do not account for the unintended emotional dissonance that may
result when a transgressor harms another, even for the purpose of personal gain. This
perception, uniquely found in young children, is usually attributed to the fact that children of
this age demographic lack empathy. Specifically, they lack the ability to put oneself in
anothers position and imagine how their perception would shift. This skill typically develops
more concretely between the ages of 7-9.
It is also interesting to note that children in the older age group (7-8 years of age),
also perceived a significantly lower emotional state when the apology condition was
present. While the control group (no apology) rated transgressors as experiencing a nearly
perfect neutral mean score of 2.48 (2=slightly negative and 3=slightly positive), the
apology condition group attributed a mean score of clearly negative emotional value 1.71
(1=strongly negative and 2=slightly negative) to transgressors. It appears that the presence
of an apology alerts victims to the emotional toll that causing harm to them has had on their
transgressors. The perception of remorse, guilt or regret then, in turn, humanizes the
transgressor in the eyes of the victim, making them more likable.
Additionally, victims perceived their own feelings to be more positive when an
apology was present. The young childrens self-evaluation of emotion jumped up from a
mean of 1.14 to a mean of 2.68, just over a one and a half point difference. This shift moves
young childrens self-evaluation of emotion from nearly strongly negative (a score of 1) to
between slightly negative (a score of 2) and slightly positive, (a score of 3) leaning
slightly more toward a positive perception. The data from older children shows a similar
trend. The control group who received no apology self-evaluated their emotions with a
mean score of 1.19. When an apology was present, however, scores jumped up to a mean
of 2.62, a near 1.5 point increase. These results mirror those of young children; when an

RESTORING THE PEACE 13

apology is present, victims actually perceive their experience of the incident to be between
neutral and slightly positive.
The implications of this research are truly exciting for teachers looking to resolve
peer-peer conflict peacefully and rebuild strong community bonds after conflict occurs. The
data suggests that conflict can actually have an overall positive effect on classroom culture
and peer relationships if a sincere apology results. If an apology is present, it may cause
students to view peer transgressors as having more remorse and being kinder individuals,
while bringing victims to feel valued through the process.
Recognizing the limitations of implementing comprehensive RJ practices in my own
classroom, I opted to implement peer-to-peer and peer-to-class mediation systems that
strongly resemble RJ systems instead, while echoing the age-appropriate adaptations seen
in my research on elementary school children. Many of the adaptations I made centered on
the presence and process of apology.
Description of Change Process
Classroom culture is not born out of one spectacular team-building activity, nor can it be
broken with one thoughtless instance of name-calling between students. Rather, it is grown
in the ordinary interactions, the micro-moments that live in the in-betweens of a school day.
It is in the line to Music Class when two students vie for the same spot and one steps back
to let the other pass. It is on the playground when one student calls another, stupid. It is
when a student lends another an eraser without being asked to. It is in the instant when a
student sticks his/her tongue out behind a teachers back. It is in the silent comfort of a pat
on the back in support of a classmate who is upset. It is in the hurt when students exclude
someone because of how they look. The true culture of a classroom is most visible in the
moments that are nearly invisible to a teacher.
For numerous reasons, including my employment of RJ practices prior to designing
this project, lack of consistent data points from year to year, alterations to classroom and

RESTORING THE PEACE 14

school behavior tracking systems, changes in individuals who compose each class from
year to year (including an adult Educational Assistant) and the observational and anecdotal
nature of classroom culture, readers will note that the implementation and success
measures of this endeavor are largely qualitative.
The summer between my first and second years of teaching felt like the first time Id
been able to pause and take breath since accepting my placement in Teach for America
Milwaukee. I used the time very purposefully to reflect on what I wanted my next year to be
like. There were innumerable things I knew I wanted to do differently, and I began planning
the logistics of making them happen. While I was (and still am) working hard to advance the
rigor and relevance of my teaching, my classroom culture was of paramount importance to
me. Because the classroom climate during the beginning of my first year was so toxic, I
knew that without a strong foundation of shared respect, my students would not be
equipped for the kind of collaborative learning I wanted to challenge them with.
I came to my second year of teaching with a plan for establishing the kind of environment
that would be conducive to students problem-solving independently and holding one
another accountable, rather than relying on me or a substitute authority to provide solutions
to daily minor conflict.
I intended to see a shift in student behavior and attitude that would result in a
decrease in negative peer-to-peer interactions (name calling, eye rolling, cutting in line,
talking over one another, etc.) and an increase in affirming peer-to-peer interactions
(voluntary sharing, unsolicited apologies and forgiveness, nonverbal signals of support,
tracking peer speakers with eyes, cooperation and turn taking, etc.). Additionally, I looked
for a reduction in major classroom disruptions due to student outbursts, an attitudinal shift
toward viewing Discipline Deposits as a positive tool, and an increase in student
understanding of the effects of their actions on the community. The time frames utilized for
comparison are the 2013-2014 school year and the 2014-2015 school year. The project was

RESTORING THE PEACE 15

implemented beginning on the first day of school in the 2014-2015 school year and has
continued to develop over the past eight months.
My process began in August of 2014 with our first Community Circle. Community Circles
are a widely-used tool for facilitating RJ-style practices within classrooms across all grade
levels. Because the practice of uniting a community around issues has been evolving for
centuries, significant variation in the execution of Community Circle programs exists.
However, the following five key principles have been provided by Canadian researcher
Susan Sharpe in a 1998 study on the use of RJ practices in schools.
1. Restorative justice invites full participation and consensus. This means that not only
those who are directly involved in the actions but others who feel that they are also
affected in some way may voluntarily participate.
2. Restorative justice seeks to heal what is broken, not only for the victim but also for
the offender.
3. Restorative justice seeks to make the offender fully and directly accountable, by not
only facing up to their offending but by confronting those who have suffered as a
result.
4. Restorative justice seeks to reunite what has been divided. This goes further than
positive interaction between the offender and the victim, to include reintegrating both
into the wider community.
5. Restorative justice seeks to strengthen the community in order to prevent further
harm. (This step has been further extended by some researchers like Morris (1994)
to include addressing inequities within the community in order to make it a more just
and safe society)
While these five key principles are crucial to the establishment of a healthy community
rooted in RJ, we began introducing these concepts proactively through Community Circles
so that they could be called upon later when restoration was needed.

RESTORING THE PEACE 16

During our first Community Circle, students gathered on the carpet and the use of
Circles in our classroom was explained in the following manner. This is a time and place
where we will meet to talk about our classroom community. Each one of us is important to
our community, and our actions affect everyone in this circle. This is a safe space. That
means that we will respect everyones opinion, even if we disagree with it. Numerous other
norms were explained briefly. Student were then asked about what kind of a classroom
community they wanted to have this year. The class took a moment to think before each
student shared one word that came to mind. Each students response was recorded as it
was said aloud. Some of the most frequently shared words included happy, kind, fun,
and learning.
Students were then asked what community norms or rules we should have in place
to ensure that we have that kind of a classroom. Suggestions were given by students who
called on one another by passing a small pillow, or talking piece, around the circle
indicating that it was that students turn to speak. After a suggestion, the next few students
would use the sentence stem, I agree/disagree with __________ because If the
suggestion was generally agreed upon, it was added to a Community Contract by the
teacher. Consequences for violating norms were also discussed and agreed upon. These
included apologizing after hurting another scholar and almost always a withdrawal (see
above). At the end of the Community Circle, each student signed the Community Contract
which was then hung above the entryway to the classroom and referred to frequently during
both moments of class success (demonstrating adherence to the contract) and moments of
struggle (particular students and/or most students failing to adhere to the contract).
It is important to note that during this process, as well as during Community Circles
throughout the rest of the year, I acted only as a facilitator. I spoke less than 5% of the time,
offering only the initial explanation of Community Circles and prompting questions for each
step of developing community norms. Many classroom teachers attempt to utilize

RESTORING THE PEACE 17

Community Circles, but fail to see results because they place themselves at the apex of the
practice rather than allowing students to drive the conversation. According to Stern and Hill,
when RJ is implemented effectively through Community Circles it will, shift schools along
the continuum from the authoritarian, paternalistic and punitive culture with the
characteristic trademarks of excessive bullying and resentful students to a mediation culture
in which respect and empowerment are the hallmarks (1996). However, when teachers
focus student attention on themselves rather than on their peers during Circles, the
foundation of authoritative culture remains, and any shifts toward a collectivist culture are
diminished.
Over the next few weeks, we met regularly in our Community Circles for check-ups.
Frontloading the use of Community Circles as a proactive tool for maintaining a healthy
community rather than a reactive tool when something went awry helped students to
associate our Circles with positivity so that when we did call our first Circle in response to a
name-calling incident that involved numerous students, scholars brought solutions-oriented
mindsets.
During several early Circles, we also practiced modelling conflict-resolution. As the
above research indicates, the presence of an apology after a child feels wronged serves to
restore a sense of community much more effectively than an authority figure-provided
consequence. We discussed instances in which a teacher should be told and when it could
be solved between students. Initially, in a vast majority of instances, students stated that it
was a problem a teacher should solve. However, after modelling the process, nearly all
scenarios were determined unanimously to be solvable between peers.
Students were provided sentence stems, but were encouraged to personalize their
conversations by being honest about their feelings. It was also paramount that we agreed
that while the script was an ideal outcome, it would not always necessarily happen. While
an apology ought to be offered after an offense, an offender was not obligated to do so

RESTORING THE PEACE 18

immediately if s/he was not ready to do so with sincerity. Similarly, while meeting an apology
with forgiveness was established as ideal, accepting an apology immediately was not
mandatory. The following two concepts are absolutely necessary to facilitating truly
independent student problem-solving:
1. when you apologize, you are not only apologizing for the harm youve caused but are
pledging to refrain from it in the future and
2. when you offer someone your forgiveness you are telling them that you have put the
incident behind you
The script below was introduced and referred often as the process of peer-peer conflict
resolution was normalized. When a student experiences a solvable problem, s/he will
approach the offender and state, It hurt me when The offender may offer an explanation
if it was unintentional or as to why s/he committed the offense. However, if harm or
perceived harm has still transpired, the offender will then apologize with the stem, I
apologize for _______. In the future I will _______. Do you accept my apology? The victim
may choose to accept the apology or not. If s/he feels that s/he is not yet ready, then s/he
will offer a specific expectation that needs to be met before accepting and will specify a later
time when they may revisit the apology for closure.
The following represents this dialogue in a flow chart. Blue boxes indicate successful
resolution pathways. Red boxes indicate moments when resolution may be temporarily
halted and how it can be redirected using RJ practices.
Initially, students brought nearly all problems to my attention. Tajiana pushed me in line!
Demeir took my pencil! Marcus called me a name! When each of these transgressions
was brought to my attention, rather than offering a punitive solution or ignoring it, I would
ask the offending student to join the victim and me. The offender was typically frazzled and
defensive and would often approach saying something like, I didnt do nothing! or I didnt

RESTORING THE PEACE 19

RESTORING THE PEACE 20

even ________. I would respond by reminding the offender that s/he wasnt in trouble, but
that there was a classmate who was hurt and had something they wanted to tell them. Once
both students were facing one another with respectful body language, I would prompt using
our sentence stems. It hurt me when The victimized student would repeat and finish the
prompt. Occasionally, the victimized student would fail to use the provided stem and would
instead, simply state the offense, usually in a highly emotional tone. When this happened, I
would re-prompt with the I statement and the student would correct him/herself in a much
calmer tone.
At first, offending students simply stood quietly or emotionally shut down and sighed.
If this was the case, I would prompt with, I apologize for and the student would restate
the prompt and finish it with his/her own words. Other times, the offending student would
take an argumentative tone and retort, Well you ________ to me first! If this was the case,
I would either allow the victim to explain or would interrupt with, So it seems like youve
both been hurt, am I understanding that right? I think we can solve this together. I would
follow it up with an encouraging nod and one of the two students would begin an apology,
then the other student would respond with an apology.
On rare occasions, the offending student would completely shut down and refuse to
apologize. In those instances I would offer them the option to apologize now or to take
some time to calm down first and then come back and apologize. I would always emphasize
that I was sure there was a reason that the transgression had occurred, but that it wasnt
okay to leave our classmate and teammate hurt by our actions. (I made a point to use
universal language, that is, language that emphasizes the collective. Universal language
highlights we statements instead of you statements. This creates a sense of unity and
support, we need to apologize to make this right, instead of emphasizing the innate
teacher-student power struggle when an authority figure says, you need to apologize.)

RESTORING THE PEACE 21

In less than half a dozen instances, a student would still refuse to apologize after calming
down. In these cases I offered students the option to solve the problem without a
consequence with their peer, or to make a withdrawal. In all but one instance students opted
to solve the problem with their peer. While the apologies may not have come out as sincere,
the victims were at least then able to offer a later time and concrete actions that would
result in their sincere acceptance of the apology. Often, this meant that later in the day, the
offender would apologize again with sincerity and it could be accepted.
Over time, students needed less and less scaffolding in facilitating this process. I
was able to ask victims to bring the offender over and simply nod to the victim once the
offender was present for the dialogue to begin and to prompt apologies and acceptances.
Next, I was able to simply say, Oh, Im sorry that happened. Do you think you can solve
that problem with (student offender)? and walk beside the victimized student and observe.
Later, I could simply prompt students by saying, Do you think this is a problem you and
your teammate can solve? Finally, student pairs of victims and offenders would approach
me and ask to borrow the hour glass (a small, 5 minute sand timer, the amount of time we
had agreed upon could be taken from class to solve a problem with certain direct instruction
times excluded) as they sat at the back of the room and reached a solution. When the time
was up, they would return the timer and I would ask if they both felt the problem had been
solved. Between 9.5 to 10 times out of 10, the answer from both parties is yes. If it is not,
then I would set up a time for both parties to meet with me and we would re-scaffold the
process together. Though the process is not 100% effective, a 95% reduction in minor
issues that can be solved between peers is an enormous behavioral shift that leaves
teachers with more time to give attention to positive student behaviors, relationship building
and academic feedback.
The below flow chart illustrates the process of conflict resolution between peers as it
was implemented in my classroom. Red indicates unideal solutions in which the emotional

RESTORING THE PEACE 22

needs of at least one involved participant are neglected. Green indicates ideal solutions in
which restoration occurs as a part of the process. It can be noted that over time, students
will not need to go through the steps of alerting an authority figurehaving agency
reclaimedmastering a skill set before reaching the RJ-style route of seeking a peer to
address conflict. Instead, they will seek a peer as a primary means of conflict resolution.

RESTORING THE PEACE 23

One addition portion of RJ that I integrated was involving the community every time a
Discipline Deposit was needed. After a student filled out his/her Discipline Deposit, I would
read through it 1:1 with them and would ask them, so how are you going to make it right
now? The student would almost always offer to apologize. If not, I would ask, Do you think
your actions were fair to our classroom community? This line of questioning would then
lead them to offer to apologize. S/he would come to the front of the room and apologize to
the class before returning. The class would then have the choice to say accept or not yet
accept the apology. Typically, if it was the first offense within a week, all students will accept
an apology. If, however, it is the second time in a week, some students would say not yet.
If this was the case, I would ask the class what they would need to be ready to accept the
apology and we revisit it at the end of the day before leaving.
After an apology was accepted, however, the student would remain standing at the
front of the room. I would then ask the class, What do you think (student name) should
know that we appreciate about him/her? What does (student name) bring to our class that
helps us be a strong community? The scholar at the front would choose 3-5 students who
would state things like, When I am sad, they always make me laugh, They are usually
leading by example and help me when I get off track, and At recess, when I was playing
by myself, they asked me to play with them. This step of reintegration is a valuable one, as
it brings the positive attributes of the apologizing student to the forefront of their classmates
minds, decreasing the likelihood that they will be stigmatized and shunned upon return.
Additionally, it reaffirms to the individual student who is apologizing that s/he is valued in our
community, thereby strengthening their accountability to their peers and reducing the
likelihood that they will act out in an anti-social manner that they see as harming their peers
again.

RESTORING THE PEACE 24

In addition to the visible transformation in peer-peer conflict that I observed over the
course of this process, there are numerous other anecdotal and observational data points
worth noting.
First, the shift in class climate. Though I cannot truly convey on paper the nature of my
classroom culture during the first few months of the 2013-2014 school year, as noted above,
it was highly destructive. In thinking about the shift in climate from then to the 2014-2015
school year, students:

appear happier (it is unusual for a student to be in tears in our classroom, where last

year, it was unusual if a day passed without a meltdown).

reintegrate into the classroom after making a Discipline Deposit more effectively (I
attribute much of this success to the additional step of complementing the

apologizing student before they return as discussed above).

visit administration for discipline issues less frequently (during a mid-year
evaluation, an administrator noted the difference saying, Last year there was a
stream of students coming from your room to the office, this year I hardly see any of

them.).
use more universal language (students will say things like, We got a complement in
the hallway! instead of I got a complement in the hallway! and We can try harder
on controlling our bodies in (special class like Music, Art, Gym or Information
Technology) next week instead of, so-and-so kept getting out of his seat, so we

didnt get a 10 out of 10.).

voluntarily apologize more frequently (as stated above, this process has become

automatic for many students).

seldom laugh at or make fun of scholars who receive consequences and when it
does occur, tell those who have laughed, that isnt funny, they need support.
Alternatively, they may give the silent signal for support to a scholar they see
struggling with a consequence.

RESTORING THE PEACE 25

display random acts of kindness far more frequently and without seeking teacher
approval such as:
o Ensuring mutual physical and emotional safety-when a student trips and falls
in the coatroom where there is no adult present and I hear voices and peek
in, I will see two or three other students helping the scholar up and asking if
they are okay without being prompted.
o Sharing personal materials-when student a loses his/her pencil, they must
use a crayon instead, and when a student hears a neighbor ask me for a
crayon, often they have lent the student a spare pencil before Ive returned
with a crayon.
o Inclusive behaviors-when students are playing and see a scholar alone, I
almost always hear a student say, (student name)! Do you want to come
play with us? before I can approach them.
o Offering positive praise to others for specific behaviors rather than because
they are close friends-scholars will shout out peers for behaviors like
working hard, leading by example, and helping me get back on track,
noting that these behaviors helped others or the class.
o Offer silent support and encouragement when others struggle both
academically or emotionally-scholars will give the silent signal for support if a
scholar struggles with a word or will pat a neighbor on the back if they are
upset.
Secondly, discipline data is worth reviewing. For numerous reasons including the

change in how and when Discipline Deposits are administered between school years, it is
difficult to utilize this data accurately. However, it is worth mentioning that in the 2013-2014
school year, there were multiple instances in which more than 5 Discipline Deposits were
issued on in one day (the elementary school goal is to have less than two for each

RESTORING THE PEACE 26

classroom for a week). During the 2014-2015 school year, the number of Discipline
Deposits in my classroom is less than half of what it was the previous year. While there are
other factors that influence this number, I do attribute at least a portion of this decrease to
the shift in classroom culture due to peer-peer conflict resolution which leads more students
to feel heard and gives them agency to solve problems while holding them accountable to
their community for their actions.
Third, I gathered focus groups of 6 students at a time to gauge their perceptions of
the use of RJ practices in our classroom. I opted for the use of focus groups because I
deeply desired accurate and honest feedback rather than tallies, templated responses, or
responses students though I wanted to hear. The focus group method provided minimal
teacher voice and maximal student voice, and, due to the emphasis we have placed this
year on discourse in academics, students had the vocabulary needed to appropriately take
turns and build off, agree with and disagree with one another.
Because with young children the exact phrasing of a question can greatly alter their
response, I began with a set of predetermined questions, but restated them or prompted
with phrases like, tell me more, if I felt that students had misunderstood or that I was
misunderstanding their response.
Though much of this data reiterates the observations I noted above, several
interesting responses stood out as tributes to the dramatic shift in classroom culture after
the implementation of Restorative Justice.
When each group gathered, my first question was always, What is your favorite part
about our class? I had written this question largely as a warm up question. It was
deliberately broad while subconsciously informing students that this group was going to be
focusing on our time together as a class. I fully expected to hear responses like, going
outside for recess and getting to sit on our desks during Phonics. Instead, the very first
student from my very first focus group shocked me. When I asked the question, What is
your favorite part about our class, Lamar raised his hand and said, My favorite part about

RESTORING THE PEACE 27

our class is that we support each other. While this comment may seem trivial, it struck me
because out of every moment of every day that we spend together, that was the one thing
that stuck out to him more than anything else. It was also particularly interesting to me
because I had deliberately avoided probing for responses like this by using the word class
instead of the phrase classroom community.
A second moment of affirmation came when later when I reviewed student
responses to a fairly straightforward question: Do you like apologizing to someone when
you hurt them? The table below illustrates student responses. Percentages are taken out of
the 25 students who participated in focus groups. Please note: there are 26 students in my
class, but due to 6 consecutive weeks of absences from one student, I was unable to
include him in the data.
Student Response to the Question: Do You Like Apologizing After Hurting Someone?
Response
Yes
No
Sometimes/I dont
Total Number
Know

Surveyed

2 (8%)

25 (100%)

# of students
(percentage who

23 (92%)

0 (0%)

gave that answer)

While students almost all indicated enjoying the process of apologizing to restore
(92%), the free responses I got when I prompted with, tell me more or tell me about that
were even more fascinating. When I asked one student who had apologized to another
student earlier that day to, Tell me more, he responded that, When I hurt someone it
makes me feel bad, and when I get to apologize it gives me a way to feel better. Another
girl offered the explanation that, When someone gets hurt and we apologize, we help their
hearts to feel better so we can be friends again. A third student added that, It makes our
community strong again when someone breaks trust.

RESTORING THE PEACE 28

When asked if students liked being apologized to after they were hurt, 100% of
students indicated that they appreciated it.
Student Response to the Question: Do You Like When Someone Apologizes After Hurting You?

Response

Yes

No

Sometimes/I dont

Total Number

Know

Surveyed

0 (0%)

25 (100%)

# of students
(percentage who

25 (100%)

0 (0%)

gave that answer)

When asked to elaborate with the prompt tell me more, one student stated that, It
makes me feel [like] they still care even though they made a mistake. A majority of other
answers reiterated the idea that, It makes me feel better.
It was compelling to see such overwhelmingly positive responses from my students
around apology. This was particularly interesting to me because the body of research on
children and the effects of apologies did not demonstrate such a landslide conclusion. In
thinking about potential causes in this disparity, I attribute much of the attitudinal change to
the extended emphasis on the purpose of apology and the importance of it being both
sincere and voluntary. The studies referred to above did not prime students by explaining
how apology is intended to function, and thus, students may not have attributed quite the
same level of positivity to the presence of an apology.
Due to the elongated implementation of this project, there has been no final closure
in the use of apologies and restoration in our classroom. It is a practice I am still mastering
and one I absolutely intend to repeat next year with my new group of second graders.
Analysis and Implications
Much of the qualitative data I collected over the course of this project pointed to the
significant positive ripple effects of RJ practices and peer-peer conflict resolution. Not only
are my students treating one another with higher levels of respect, but they are more
concerned with the well-being of our community as a whole and are connecting personal

RESTORING THE PEACE 29

actions with effects on others. Additionally, I have noticed that far fewer minor instances are
brought to my attention which allows me more time to support my students academically
and with personal feedback.
Students are motivated to come to school, treat our classroom with more respect
and take pride in being a Golden Eagle. I attribute much of this to the way they are treated
by their peers in their classroom and the emphasis we have placed on the community as a
whole.
Though there is still much more I would like to accomplish with RJ in my classroom,
this process has undoubtedly moved the culture in my classroom along the continuum from
authoritative and punitive toward a more communal and restorative one.
Questions and Further Research
I have learned a great deal over the course of this project, but it has raised at least as many
questions as it has answered. As I continue looking toward integrating more RJ practices
into my classroom, there are several at the forefront of my mind.
A significant body of research exists on the use of circles with academic content,
however, we utilized them exclusively for character education. Would integrating direct
academic instruction in circles be mutually beneficial because the routines and procedures
are pre-established? Or would using them so regularly sap them of their significance and
cause students to take our time in them less seriously?
There are a small handful of case studies that look specifically at the effects of RJ
when implemented with fidelity on a school-wide level. While Milwaukee College Prep
certainly utilizes elements of RJ purposefully, I would be very curious to see what a fully
integrated RJ program would look like and how it would impact a high-performing charter
school system. Would the increased time spent on community development take from
academic growth or would the shared base for problem solving and respect increase
student desire to be at school and intrinsic motivation?

RESTORING THE PEACE 30

I would also be very curious to hear from parents which discipline processes they
prefer and why. Parental involvement was either mentioned only peripherally or was
altogether excluded from the research I found on RJ. I would be very interested to hear
what parents prefer and which system they feel best serves their child: a traditional punitive
system, a fully RJ system or a blend of the two.
For teachers who, like me, found themselves in a classroom where the community
has broken down and feel like they spend a significant portion of their time putting out fires,
I would highly recommend looking into implementing RJ or some derivation thereof in your
classroom. While it does require more time in the beginning, much of its implementation
occurs in the moments of conflict as they arise rather than during direct instructional times.
While it will require the occasional break during the day to bring the community together
around a major issue, in the long run, the benefits are tangible for students, the health of
your classroom and for you as the instructional leader.
I would recommend starting small by introducing scripts and processes that it is
easy to monitor, and from there building to incorporate it more holistically. Emphasizing
community and students as stakeholders in their classroom takes much of the burden for
keeping and restoring the peace off of your shoulders and places the responsibility in their
hands. It will require bravery as you take healthy risks and give your students more control,
but if you are truly invested in creating an environment where students want to come each
day, RJ is an incredible tool to begin with.
I am so grateful to have had the opportunity to experiment with this compelling
body of research in my classroom. I have been supported by numerous administrators,
parents, students and fellow teachers and without their cooperation, this would not have
been possible. I am incredibly excited to continue integrating RJ practices into our
classroom community, and I look forward to beginning the next school year with a more

RESTORING THE PEACE 31

focused method for conflict resolution and community development to support the academic
and social growth of each of my wonderful students.
References

Albrecht, Berit (2011). "The Limits of Restorative Justice in Prison". Peace

Review 23 (3): 327334.

Aureli, F., & Van Schaik, C. P. (1991). Post-conflict behaviour in long-tailed

macaques (Macaca fascicularis): II. Coping with the uncertainty. Ethology, 89, 101
114.

Bitel, M. (2004) Preliminary findings from the evaluation of restorative justice in

schools (London, UK, Youth Justice Board).

Braithwaite, J. (2002) Restorative justice and responsive regulation (Oxford, Oxford

University Press), p. ix.

Buber, M. (1958). I and Thou (2nd edition). Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark.

Dinsmore, Terri Sue. (2003). Classroom Management.

Ely, R., & Gleason, J. B. (2006). Im sorry I said that: Apologies in young childrens
discourse. Journal of Child Language, 33, 599620.

Fry, D. P. (2000). Conflict management in cross-cultural perspective. In F. Aureli, & F.

B. M. de Waal (Eds.), Natural conflict resolution (pp. 334351). Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press.

Gade, C.B.N. 2013. Restorative Justice and the South African Truth and
Reconciliation Process, ''South African Journal of Philosophy'' 32(1), 10-35" (PDF).
Retrieved 2015-03-10

Hickson, L. (1986). The social contexts of apology in dispute settlement: A crosscultural study. Ethnology, 25, 283294.

Maxwell, G. & Morris, A. (1993) Family, victims and culture: youth justice in New
Zealand (Victoria University, Wellington, NZ, Social Policy Agency and the Institute of
Criminology), p. 4.

McCullough, M. E., Rachal, K., Sandage, S. J., Worthington, E. L., Brown, S. W., &
Hight, T. L. (1998). Interpersonal forgiving in close relationships: II. Theoretical

RESTORING THE PEACE 32

elaboration and measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75,

15861603.

Morris, R. (1994) A practice path to transformative justice (Toronto, Rittenhouse).

Ohbuchi, K., Kameda, M., & Agarie, N. (1989). Apology as aggression control: Its
role in mediating appraisal of and response to harm. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 56, 219227.

Pirie, F. (2006). Legal autonomy as political engagement: The Ladakhi village in the
wider world. Law & Society Review, 40, 77104.

Sharpe, S. (1998) Restorative justice: a vision for healing and change (Alberta,
Edmonton Victim Offender Mediation Society), p. 7. 26.

Shook, E. V. (1985). Hooponopono. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.

Smith, Craig E. & Harris, Paul L. (2011). He Didnt Want Me to Feel Sad: Childrens
Reactions to Disappointment and Apology. Harvard University.

Stern, F. & Hill, M. (1996) Peer mediation in schools, Mediation News, 4(2), 45.

Tavuchis, N. (1991). Mea culpa: A sociology of apology and reconciliation. Stanford,

CA: Stanford University Press.

de Waal, F. B. M. (2000). The first kiss: Foundations of conflict resolution research in

animals. In F. Aureli, & F. B. M. de Waal (Eds.), Natural conflict resolution (pp. 15
33). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

de Waal, F. B. M., & van Roosmalen, A. (1979). Reconciliation and consolation

among chimpanzees. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 5, 5566.

Wilson, L.J. (1998) Conflict resolution and the Houston independent school district:
peer mediation vs non-peer mediation approaches for resolving student conflict in
elementary and middle schools 5, unpublished MA thesis, University of Houston,
Clear Lake, pp. 191.

Zehr, H. (1990) Changing lenses: a new focus for crime and justice (Scottdale, PA,
Herald Press), p. 181.