The Importance Of Restorative Justice In Schools

Although the literature to support college campus based restorative justice practices is limited, recent studies have shown schools and post-secondary institutions across the country are beginning to realize that it can be effective for handling student misconduct and school policy violations (Kara & MacAlister, 2010). Traditional systems of justice have been found to be cumbersome, ineffective, and even re-victimizing for those harmed (Teasley, 2014). Zero tolerance policies have had multiple negative effects on student behaviors and are said to increase future disciplinary offenses (Gonzalez, 2012; Skiba et al., 2003). There is an increasing interest in implementing restorative justice programs, rather than traditional punitive approaches,
for colleges and universities (Teasley, 2014). Incorporating restorative justice programs provides an alternative structure to help correct negative student behavior, harmful actions, and to build accountability and community in schools along in the process.
The underlying principles for restorative justice hold students who harm accountable for their actions, provide those harmed with a safe place to share how the incident impacted them, give students, faculty and residence hall staff a voice in helping the offender make things right with the victim, develop an effective alternative to the traditional system of judicial affairs, and create a culture of belonging and caring where community standards are relied upon for setting and correcting behavior (Zehr, 2002). Restorative justice processes allow participants (victim-offender) to be more satisfied, recidivism rate lower because offenders feel a greater sense of ownership of the problem and participation in its solution and feel less likely to recommit an offense (Waltman-Spreha, 2013). As a result, it can give the campus a stronger sense of community development in the restorative process.
Very little literature on examining how restorative practices have been reflective or effective based on race or gender. We know
school discipline disparities contribute to the academic marginalization of minority Blacks. Relevant studies have predicted less restorative practices for schools that has had a greater percentage of Black students in response to reported misbehaviors (Payne, 2015). Schools with a larger proportion of Black students are more likely to use punitive discipline action. A greater percentage of Black students decreased a school’s odds of using student conferences, peer mediation, restitution, or community service in response to student violations. In addition, a greater percentage of Black students decreased the likelihood that a school would use an overall restorative justice model of discipline (Payne, 2015). HBCUs hold steadfast enrolling a larger percentage of minorities desiring to attend college. Many times, students come from exposed environments or with records of violence, minor criminal acts, poverty, etc. and often these institutions give chances to those to redeem themselves in life. Another study did not find any differences in learning development based on gender, class year, or the seriousness of the violation. However, impact of race was significant for learning development and restorative practices. It was reported that white students had higher levels of learning than students of color as a result of their participation in the conduct -restorative process (Karp 2014). Compared to findings from other international studies, U.S. college students enrolled at a public university reported being more supportive of restorative programs and having less punitive attitudes towards offenders in considering reintegration. Findings showed those students with a higher social capital and women were more likely to find restorative practices beneficial (Alhin, Gibbs 2015). This further shows people have different perceptions and that there is a growing support for restorative practices.
People who are exposed on alternative approaches to criminal justice system are more likely to perceived positive support for restorative justice programs.
Students living in campus housing believed restorative practices are good techniques for developing residential community relationships and resolving conflicts. Again, positive perceptions for restorative justice programs were dependent on educating and training residents within university housing. In order to create a restorative community, student residents, staff, and directors must be involved in the training process. Findings suggest that residents exposed to restorative concepts during held workshops were more likely than non-attenders to listen to the perspectives of others regarding conflict situations. The results indicated that a number of the residents within the university housing shared and utilized restorative justice practices with others following participation in a restorative educational workshop (McDowell, Crocker, Evett & Cornelison, 2014). Restorative justice can be complementary to the student judicial and residence life
processes.