Understanding restorative justice will help make good policy and reduce school violence

Clark County schools are facing a frightening rise in the frequency and severity of violence, leading students, parents, teachers and administrators to struggle with physical injury, fear and anxiety, often on a daily basis. This is a matter of mutual and urgent concern.

School disciplinary data also shows that some practices may be disproportionately sending Black, brown, LGBTQ students and students with disabilities into the criminal system. This is also a matter of mutual and urgent concern.

“Restorative justice” (RJ) offers an antidote to disproportionate disciplinary policies and has increasingly entered conversations around school violence. Critics attribute the uptick in violence to the 2019 passage of RJ legislation and lawmakers are seeking to lift the mandate for RJ action plans prior to expelling a student. After all, our intuition might ask: If students don’t face consequences for bad behavior, what will keep them from acting out with impunity?

Restorative justice is hard to understand at first and there are important differences between restorative justice in education (RJE) and restorative justice traditionally associated with the criminal system.

The latter is a response to criminal offenses that encourages intrinsic accountability and repair through dialogue. The underlying rationale — supported by neuroscience and empirical evidence — is that when individuals are accompanied through a nonpunitive process of storytelling, they come to understand the impact of their actions and are inspired to act to meet the needs of those harmed.

RJE uses this insight to offer alternatives to suspension or expulsion that better meet the needs of the harmed individuals and address the root causes of the harm. A restorative meeting may allow the harmed individual to receive acknowledgment, an apology or their stolen iphone back. The harming individual may agree to counseling or other supports, learning self-regulation techniques, and a plan for avoiding the same behavior. Suspension, by contrast, is not designed to address needs or root causes, nor encourage the sincere taking of responsibility.

RJE also blends these “responsive” practices with “proactive” ones that build trust and relationships — the invisible glue that prevents most harm from happening in the first place. Classroom activities instill a sense of belonging in the community and develop social emotional skills that are essential for resolving conflicts nonviolently.

The most effective uses of RJE, however, don’t just employ these practices with students, but rather engage all members of the school community. This “whole school” approach transforms school culture and climate toward greater inclusion, belonging and empathy, leaving students, families and staff more satisfied, engaged and resourceful.

Prior to the pandemic, I met with the Clark County School District team responsible for implementing the RJ legislation. I emphasized the importance of taking a whole school approach, making a long-term commitment to implementation, and starting with schools that are ready and willing. I advised them that the power of responsive practices lies in the encounter, not just in imposing a plan. However, despite the good intentions of those making and implementing the policy, the legislation focused on an incomplete vision of RJE, which the team was then mandated to bring to all 380 CCSD schools with insufficient time and resources.

What this means is that notwithstanding the state Department of Education’s concerted efforts to provide needed RJ training and support, comprehensive RJE has not been implemented at most Las Vegas schools. Simultaneously, we have not dedicated the time or resources to understand how the pandemic and other shocks contributed to the surge in violence and other behavioral challenges in our schools. These are alarming trends witnessed by school districts across the nation, not just in states that implemented RJ.

Instead of simply rolling back RJ, policymakers need to better understand the root causes of current behavior and how legislation and funding can support effective RJE. And the public needs to understand what effective RJE means and what to expect when implementation is rushed, incomplete or underresourced.

Tarek Maassarani is a former CCSD student and Las Vegas resident. He is a restorative practitioner, professor of restorative justice, and co-founder of Restorativedc and Restorativenv (see Restorativenevada.com). He has trained thousands of educators, supported “whole school” implementation in dozens of schools, and advised school districts on RJE across the country.