Does Restorative Justice Work?
How Effective Is the Restorative Justice Program?
Understanding the Effectiveness of Restorative Justice Programs in Schools
Restorative Justice programs in schools aim to create a more communicative and supportive environment where students and staff address conflicts through relationship-building and accountability, rather than singularly punitive discipline. Schools that integrate Restorative Justice with fidelity report fewer suspensions, decreased alternative setting referrals, decreased arrests, improved student-teacher relationships, and improvements to other culture and climate measures. But how effective are these approaches when compared to traditional discipline?
For context, the terms Restorative Justice and Restorative Practices are often used interchangeably, but we don’t consider them to be the same. Restorative Justice is considered the responsive aspect that focuses on repairing harm after an incident has occurred, whereas Restorative Practices Training includes both proactive and responsive strategies that build relationships, prevent harm, and foster accountability. For the purposes of this blog, however, we’ll broadly use the term "Restorative Justice" to include both proactive and responsive restorative approaches in schools as this tends to be a common search term.
Reviewing Statistics on Restorative Justice Effectiveness
The research on Restorative Justice in schools consistently shows positive outcomes when implemented with fidelity. According to a study by the University of Chicago Education Lab, schools that adopted Restorative Justice saw significant reductions in suspensions and arrests. Notably, these outcomes were not a result of mechanical changes, such as changing the code of conduct or response to infractions, but rather a result of the rigorous use of Restorative Justice programming.
Another large-scale study by the RAND Corporation found that schools using Restorative Practices saw improvements in student behavior, school climate, and discipline. While some schools feared that reducing punitive discipline would lead to increased classroom disruption, the research showed the opposite: schools using RP saw fewer repeat incidents and improved student engagement.
Comparison with Traditional Disciplinary Actions
Traditional disciplinary models primarily rely on punishment as a deterrent—students misbehave, receive a consequence (such as suspension or detention), and are expected to change their behavior. However, decades of research suggest that punitive discipline alone is ineffective at changing behavior and often exacerbates underlying issues.
Punitive discipline often leads to cycles of exclusion. When students are removed from the classroom through suspensions or expulsions, they often fall behind academically and are more likely to disengage from school.
Traditional discipline does not address the root causes of behavior. Without a process for reflection, repair, and accountability, students who have caused harm may not fully understand the impact of their actions or learn alternative ways to handle conflict.
Punishment does not restore relationships. Traditional discipline often focuses solely on consequences for the student who caused harm, without addressing the needs of the person harmed or the larger community.
In contrast, Restorative Justice centers both accountability and repair. It creates opportunities for students to reflect on their actions, hear from those they’ve impacted, and take meaningful steps toward making amends. Schools that use RJ report stronger student-teacher relationships, stronger staff-admin relationships, more engaged classrooms, and a reduction in repeat disciplinary incidents. The Rand study of Pittsburgh Public Schools, which had control schools and RJ schools, was able to detail these outcomes.
Case Studies Highlighting Successes in Some School Districts
Specific case studies underpin the statistics, offering qualitative insights into the benefits of Restorative Justice programming. For example, within the Oakland Unified School District, schools saw a 31% reduction in number of suspended students following the implementation of Restorative Practices. Such results underscore the capability of Restorative Justice to address behavioral issues while simultaneously strengthening the fabric of the school community. Additionally, these stories highlight the importance of well-executed training and support to achieve these outcomes.
The effectiveness of Restorative Justice in schools is contingent upon several factors, but the data and case studies indicate a strong potential for positive impact when properly implemented. These programs not only address immediate behavioral issues but also contribute to cultivating a more caring and connected school environment for both students and staff.
What Are the Negatives of Restorative Justice?
While Restorative Justice has shown tremendous promise, it is not a quick fix. Schools that struggle with RP implementation often face:
Inconsistent Implementation
Restorative Justice implementation requires input from staff, clear communication from leaders, and an integration into school systems. It also can’t be used singularly as an alternative to punishment. Some schools attempt Restorative Justice without training or clear procedures, leading to inconsistent or ineffective use. This inconsistency can undermine trust in the process and reduce its potential impact on school culture.
Challenges in Training and Resource Allocation
Many schools lack the necessary professional development, coaching, and resources to implement RJ well. Effective implementation requires:
Training for educators to facilitate restorative circles, conversations, and conferences.
Time and space to allow meaningful dialogue to take place.
Administrative support to integrate RJ into school policies and procedures.
Ensuring that educators receive high quality, engaging, in-person training and the right resources to get started from experts in RJ can mitigate these challenges and support successful implementation.
Potential for Perceived Leniency
Another concern is the perception of leniency. Traditional disciplinary methods are often seen as more straightforward and punitive, which some believe to be more effective in deterring negative behavior. Without proper communication, some students, staff, or parents may view Restorative Justice as a "soft" approach to discipline. However, Restorative Practices do not eliminate consequences—they make them meaningful. Restorative accountability involves taking responsibility, repairing harm, and making amends— a much harder process than simply serving a suspension. In addition, Restorative Justice and traditional consequences are NOT mutually exclusive! However, schools that use Restorative Justice see a decline in the need for suspensions over time.
By addressing these negatives head-on, schools can create a more supportive and consistent environment where Restorative Justice can thrive. At Collaborative School Culture, we offer tailored training to help schools overcome these challenges and fully realize the potential of Restorative Practices.
What Offenses Does Restorative Justice Work Best For?
Restorative Justice is most effective when both the person harmed and the person who caused harm are willing and able to engage in the process.
A Restorative Conference or Restorative Conversation is not advised when:
The person harmed does not want further engagement. Some students or staff who experience harm may prefer to move on rather than participate in a restorative process. RJ should never be forced.
The person who caused harm is unwilling or unable to take responsibility. Without genuine accountability, RJ loses its integrity and risks further harm.
Examples of Successful Resolution Through Restorative Means
There have been multiple instances where schools have successfully utilized restorative approaches to resolve conflicts that might otherwise result in extended suspensions or expulsions. For example, in some schools, incidents of bullying have been addressed through structured restorative conversations and circles, allowing students to express their feelings, understand the impact of their actions, and collaboratively seek resolutions. This not only helps to mend relationships but also fosters a wider school culture of empathy and support.
Analysis of Community Building and Reconciliation Effectiveness
One of the critical aspects of Restorative Justice is its potential to enhance community building and promote reconciliation. By focusing on dialogue and shared understanding, these practices can transform adversarial situations into opportunities for growth and learning. As educators, facilitating such engagement can help students develop vital skills such as active listening, conflict resolution, and empathetic thinking. Implementing these approaches with the support of trained professionals can amplify their benefits, making it essential to engage with experts who have firsthand experience applying Restorative Justice in school settings.
Conclusion: Balancing the Advantages and Disadvantages
Restorative Justice is not a silver bullet, but when implemented with fidelity, it improves school climate, reduces suspensions, and fosters stronger relationships. However, schools must invest in training, build staff capacity, and systematize their approach to ensure it works.
Summarizing the Balance of Benefits and Challenges
Restorative Justice fosters empathy, accountability, stronger relationships, and the resolution of conflicts by centering conversations on repairing harm rather than simply punishing wrongdoing. Schools that integrate Restorative Justice programming system-wide see improved school climate, reduced exclusionary discipline, and stronger teacher-student relationships. However, successful implementation is not as simple as swapping out traditional consequences for a restorative alternative. Without a clear, well-supported rollout plan, schools risk inconsistent implementation, frustration among staff, and a failure to achieve the long-term benefits that research has shown Restorative Practices can offer. Schools that approach Restorative Practices as an “alternative to suspension” program rather than a culture shift often struggle with sustainability. The key is not just learning the practices but embedding them into daily routines, policies, and schoolwide systems so that they become the foundation of how the community interacts.
Importance of Expert-Led Training and Resources
The cornerstone of a successful Restorative Justice program is expert guidance. With the guidance of skilled trainers, schools can avoid common pitfalls and create a cohesive, well-integrated approach that aligns with their unique community needs. In-person training sessions offer the irreplaceable opportunity to engage deeply, ask questions, and participate in role-playing applications, ensuring that all staff are well-equipped to apply restorative techniques in their daily interactions.
Encouragement for Schools to Consider Tailored Implementation
Ultimately, the key to balancing the benefits and challenges of Restorative Justice lies in customizing the approach to fit your school's unique context. Each educational community has different needs and dynamics, making it crucial to tailor the implementation process. By championing a bespoke strategy, schools can effectively harness the benefits of Restorative Justice while addressing potential drawbacks.
With Collaborative School Culture, you can transform your school's environment by embracing Restorative Practices tailored to your specific needs. Our team provides end-to-end support, offering comprehensive training sessions and resources that pave the way for meaningful change. Join us in cultivating a school culture that empowers educators and students alike, making a lasting impact on your community. Contact us today to learn more!