Restoring the professor and the students: a circle process and contemplative practices in a restorative justice seminar

Limited research is published on teaching restorative justice in the criminal justice or justice studies curriculum in higher education. This article contributes to the discourse on restorative justice pedagogy by discussing a restorative justice seminar that is taught in a circle process with contemplative practices. Students learn the process of circles, one of the major processes in restorative justice practice, by modeling the practice with participation and leadership. Contemplative practices enhance the learning of restorative justice with meditation and reflection.     

Responding to academic dishonesty in universities: a restorative justice approach

The implementation of restorative approaches in schools has been commonly seen in elementary and high schools, yet the development of restorative approaches in post‐secondary institutions has not been fully explored. In respect to university education, a more restorative approach to student discipline can be a proactive educational response mediating the response of student discipline boards to instances of student wrongdoing. Existing practices are explored, and critiqued from a restorative justice perspective. The rationale behind moving to a restorative response is outlined, and the experiences of student discipline boards that currently employ restorative approaches are assessed to determine how effective this paradigm shift could be. How university responses to student misconduct might function if aspects of the academic environment were built on restorative values and principles is explored, in particular, through looking at the benefits accruing to the development of restorative practices in the classroom, in distance education and for students who experience language difficulties.     

Real-world assignments for restorative justice education

Academic coursework on restorative justice is rapidly emerging in professional schools. As members of applied disciplines entrusted to serve the public good, students must be readily able to transfer classroom-based learning into real world application. This paper describes a weekend intensive, multidisciplinary graduate school course and how three ‘real world’ assignments are used to integrate restorative justice values, principles, and practices. The assignments include interviews with criminal justice representatives, group projects that propose restorative justice practices for addressing social issues and legal cases, and participation in community-based programs. The assignments use processes grounded in experiential learning theory to underscore various dimensions of restorative justice. They also convey and deepen the understanding of restorative justice principles and practices while at the same time develop a sense of moral agency in students.     

Teaching restorative justice: developing a restorative andragogy for face-to-face,online and hybrid course modalities

Teaching restorative justice in an academic setting is different from teaching almost any other academic course. Courses taught in the context of academic criminal justice programs tend to reinforce the structural inequalities in society, replicated and reinforced by instructor driven classroom experiences. In contrast, effective teaching of restorative justice should emulate the values of principles of restorative justice in the organization and management of the course. Teachers of restorative justice must ‘walk the talk’ and apply restorative principles and values to the design and delivery of the course itself. A conceptual framework for ‘restorative andragogy’ is developed that blends principles and values of adult learning with those of restorative justice. Four principles of this approach are identified and applied across three instructional modalities – face-to-face, online only, and hybrid courses. This approach provides a theoretically grounded model for effective teaching of restorative justice courses.     

Frenemies: restorative justice and customary mechanisms of justice

More often than not, restorative justice is said to take roots in Indigenous practices. In fact, Indigenous and other traditional mechanisms of justice are often described as examples of restorative justice practices. In New Zealand, the government equates the Mãori approach to doing justice with family group conferences (FGC); a restorative justice mechanism which it claims embodies Mãori values and preferences. This article contends, however, that the type of ‘justice’ embodied in customary mechanisms, has often been taken out of context, and rendered universal and ahistorical through its representation as restorative justice mechanisms. Using fieldwork evidence, an analytical comparison between principles of restorative practices, New Zealand’s FGCs and the Mãori approach to justice was conducted. It concludes that this tendency to equate restorative justice with Indigenous approaches to law and justice is harmful and dangerous for it risks rendering the scholarship homogenizing and universalizing restorative justice, to the detriment of local preferences and practices.     

Making space for restorative justice in criminal justice and criminology curricula and courses

Restorative justice, rooted in the practices of indigenous people across the globe, has grown exponentially in both theory and practice since its beginnings in Canada in the 1970s. Restorative justice has influenced the interactions between offenders and victims, helped community members address crime and develop self-efficacy, and changed the way some countries rebuild after a history of oppression. Despite these restorative justice influenced changes, many criminology and criminal justice programs pay scant attention to restorative justice in curricula. This paper will examine ways to include restorative justice in criminal justice and criminology curriculum and the challenges involved in the process. The paper will then examine how the Law and Justice Department at Central Washington University has incrementally added restorative justice components to its curriculum, culminating most recently with the addition of a Community and Social Justice course. The paper will conclude with several examples of classroom activities and assignments that have helped connect students with the theory and practice of restorative justice.     

Toward a restorative justice pedagogy: reflections on teaching restorative justice in correctional facilities

Restorative justice is currently practiced in a variety of ways inside correctional facilities. One such way is the facilitation of restorative justice education. If grounded in restorative values, such education can contribute to outcomes similar to other restorative practices, such as victim offender dialogue. These outcomes include opportunities to speak to personal experiences, personal change, and growth, and a desire to engage in positive relationships and give back to the community. This paper draws on the teaching and facilitation experiences of the author and incarcerated peer facilitators to develop a restorative justice pedagogy. This pedagogy, based on restorative values, aims to inspire individual and social transformation; build community among participants; give voice to the unique experiences of participants; offer opportunities for real-life problem solving; provide a creative learning environment that is co-created by students and facilitators; view students as practitioners, theorists, and educators; and invite instructors to view themselves as students and share in the learning process. Implications of the restorative justice pedagogy for teaching outside the prison context and with course material other than restorative justice conclude the article.     

Anonymously restored: the natural partnership and mutual instruction of Alcoholics Anonymous and restorative justice

Today, western academicians continue to examine, learn from, and respect the many indigenous forms of what is often deemed ‘restorative justice.’ The following paper presents a similar process of learning through the Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) program. AA is a time-tested practice that persists because of its ability to promote personal and group harmony. It is isolated as a western subgroup that, like many indigenous justice traditions, contains a restorative fabric and may serve as an instructive case study. As a living model of restorative practice, AA is able to sharpen aspects of restorative justice theory, though this theory is also used to comment upon perceived weaknesses in the AA program. More generally, this paper seeks to raise awareness for restorative practice that occurs naturally in many western contexts. It is important that proponents/advocates of restorative justice begin to consider the ways in which unseen or anonymous allies may support the development and expansion of restorative justice.     

Restorative Justice in India

‘Restorative Justice’ reflects a crimino-victim balanced justice system where equal justice to offenders and victims is ensured. There are four potent features of Restorative Justice: repair, restore, reconcile, and reintegrate the offenders and victims to each other and to their shared environments and communities. There are many examples within Indian criminological literature that thoroughly explain the practice of restorative justice in India. The kings who ruled in various parts of the country had practiced restorative justice in a well thought out and traditional manner. Much of Gandhian philosophy and practice is based on restorative justice principles including the participatory practices of fairness and equality. Though there is a limited amount of literature on the present restorative justice practices available in India, this paper attempts to explain restorative justice practices across the continent from the view point of society and legal provision.     

Behind the Walls and Beyond: Restorative Justice,Instrumental Communities,and Effective Residential Treatment

Although restorative justice principles and practice have been applied extensively in community‐based juvenile justice settings, implementation in residential treatment facilities has been far less common. We describe recent experimentation and possibilities for broader application to disciplinary infractions, the response to harm and crime, promoting community and citizen input, “community building” for conflict resolution skill development and changing the culture of facilities, and reentry. We conceptualize three “communities” as most relevant to addressing needs of incarcerated youths, their victims, and support groups, and then discuss theoretical frameworks and empirical research supportive of restorative practice in this context. Challenges to implementation of restorative practice, compatibility with other treatment and disciplinary agendas, and concerns about preserving the integrity of the model are also considered.     

Role-taking and restorative justice: Social practices of solidarity and community in Shakespeare's measure for measure

This article examines to what extent role-taking inspired characters in Shakespeare's play Measure for Measure to new modes of consciousness and concomitant social practices of restorative justice. The play's main character, Duke Vincentio, engages in a series of role-taking episodes through which he undergoes a self-transformation. He subsequently enacts the social practice of restorative justice. However, the play is neither a paragon case of self-transformation nor of restorative justice, especially since (1) manipulation and power are employed in the reintegrative shaming ceremony; (2) some characters are stigmatized and humiliated; and (3) the Duke still practices duplicitous, power-based, and punitive measures. Nevertheless, through the process of self-discovery and the recognition of others as like himself, the Duke reconceives his kingly role from that of an executor of law violators to that of a mediator of troubled relationships. The Duke's character reflects in part the cultural contradictions and social transformations ongoing in Shakespeare's Renaissance England.     

“And focused upon victims’ needs”: towards an assessment of the victim-friendly principles of restorative justice practice

Scholars and policy-makers typically laud restorative justice as being ‘victim-friendly’ in its rules and practices. High levels of victim satisfaction with its outcomes are put forward to substantiate this claim. However, there has been little research that engages with the constitutive role of restorative justice in shaping conceptions of identities, practices and needs. To address this gap, this article develops an analytic framework through which to assess the victim-friendly approach of restorative justice processes across social and legal contexts. In so doing, it engages with three key elements of restorative justice processes: firstly, how this justice approach conceives victims; secondly, how it shapes its practices (and not just outcomes) to address their concerns; and thirdly, how it responds to individual needs. The paper argues that engagement with the constitutive processes can bring a fresh perspective to the relationship between victims and restorative justice.     

What restorative justice might learn from administrative theory

Two administrative ideal‐types related to competing forms of justice: retributive and restorative include ontological and epistemological foundations and associated organizational theory. The alternate understandings are coherently linked with the principles of justice informing retributive and restorative practices. Retributive justice is linked to formal organization based on instrumental rationality and individualist ontology, while restorative justice is linked to substantive organization based on ethical reasoning and relational ontology. Once constructed, ideal‐types can be used both to assess actual conditions on key characteristics as well as to make recommendations for organizational design. Therefore, conclusions are drawn about the importance of matching context to purpose, pointing toward further empirical research that will inform system design for restorative justice practices.     

Co-option,coercion and compromise: challenges of restorative justice in Victoria,Australia

Restorative justice (RJ) encompasses a widely diverging set of practices whereby those most affected by crime are encouraged to meet, to discuss the effects of harms caused by one party to another, and to agree upon the best possible redress of harms when appropriate. In its inception in the late 1970s, RJ was conceptualized and developed as an alternative to formal criminal justice practices. Since this time, however, RJ has largely moved from being an alternative to criminal justice practices to an ‘alternative’ practice within criminal justice systems. This institutionalization has resulted in the significant growth of RJ practices, but has also resulted in RJ being used for criminal justice system goals that are at odds with the needs of victims or offenders. This paper examines the use of the Youth Justice Group Conferencing Program in Victoria, Australia. Drawing from interviews with conference conveners, our research highlights problems related to administrative ‘constraints’ and ‘co-options’ in conferencing in terms of referrals, preparation of conference participants, and victim participation. Following presentation of findings, we conclude with a discussion of implications for the use of RJ within a highly institutionalized setting.     

Connecting restorative justice with gender-responsive programming

Despite the encouraging results of public opinion assessments on restorative justice, people are not likely to spontaneously suggest restorative measures after a crime. Restorative justice thus seems in need of a public relations strategy. This paper discusses the strategy labeling victims as the universal remedy to promote restorative justice, and the proposal of promoting restorative justice through the media by foregrounding crime victims in media reports on crime. This strategy stems from a belief that the most appealing aspect of restorative justice to the public is its thoughtfulness to victims. However, I will argue that there are three problems with this approach. These concern: (1) the victim’s position in both restorative justice theory and practice; (2) the characteristics of media reporting on crime in general and victims in particular; and (3) the risk of attaining a result opposite to the initial objective (i.e. increasing punitive attitudes instead of promoting restorative justice).     

Science,art and alchemy: best practice in facilitating restorative justice

This paper explores the role and process of facilitation in restorative justice (RJ). Drawing from a victim offender conferencing program used after serious crime in New South Wales Australia, 84 interviews with restorative facilitators were thematically analysed. The skills, techniques and strategies used to prepare, conduct and de-brief cases are considered including managing complex cases where participants present with intense anger and grief, poor insight into offending and cognitive and mental health issues. While good facilitation is in part the result of knowledge, training and experience, the art of great facilitation relates to the interplay of the facilitator’s inherent characteristics, capacities and world-views alongside this knowledge, skill and experience. While facilitating well is premised on an appreciation of the alchemy that exists within RJ, advanced facilitators use the alchemy to shape the process. Good practice is further enabled through workplace structures that support a team approach where there is open deliberation around needs, risk and harm. Because good facilitation is paramount to the best practice of RJ this paper has implications for current policy debates concerning RJ standards and the training and accreditation of RJ practitioners.     

Procedural Justice for Victims and Offenders?: Exploring Restorative Justice Processes in Australia and the US

Sociolegal research indicates that when citizens perceive that legal processes and procedures are fair, both positive and negative legal outcomes will be viewed as acceptable. However, little is known about perceptions of fairness in informal contexts such as in restorative justice (RJ) practices and with victims (and offenders) who participate in these programs. Drawing on interviews with key actors engaged in post-conviction RJ programs for serious crimes in Australia and the USA, this paper asks, do post-conviction therapeutic RJ programs for violent crimes enhance procedural justice for victims and offenders? The data reveal that RJ is compatible with procedural justice for both victims and offenders. Specifically, RJ aids in correcting the harms created by the formal criminal justice system and, thus, satisfies and even greatly enhances procedural justice goals for both victims and offenders.     

Socrates in Aotearoa: teaching restorative justice in New Zealand

Much introductory material on restorative justice presents the subject from an idealistic point of view, in which assertions of its ethical superiority and advantages over retributive justice systems frequently go unchallenged. In New Zealand, this problem is particularly pronounced, as there is often a naïve acceptance that restorative justice is more culturally appropriate for offenders and victims with indigenous backgrounds. This article argues for a more nuanced approach to the teaching of restorative justice, using critical investigation of claims concerning its efficacy and examination of its problems in order to explore its promises and realities. One possibility for such an approach is the use of the Socratic Method, a teaching method with a demonstrated ability to engage students and foster critical thinking, but one that has also received criticism for its ability to intimidate and demean students. This method is widely used in law schools, but much less so in the social sciences. This article explores the use of this method in a New Zealand university class on restorative justice, examining both student perceptions of the use of the Socratic Method, as well as the efficacy of this approach in terms of knowledge retention and critical engagement.     

Engaging students on the topic of restorative justice and serious offenses

Within contemporary society, there is a prevailing sentiment that our criminal justice system leaves much to be desired in its responses to the offender, the victim, and the community. As a potential answer to these conceded shortcomings, restorative justice has earned significant recognition and consideration. While restorative justice principles and programs have received increasing support, for many individuals this is limited to cases involving relatively ‘minor,’ first time, and/or juvenile offenses. When it comes to situations with more ‘serious’ and violent offenses, acceptance of restorative responses dissipates. Gaining broader acceptance can be particularly challenging with current college students. With many students raised in the ‘get tough on crime’ era, embracing this alternative approach to serious crimes can be a difficult paradigm shift. This article will provide a framework for approaching the feasibility of applying restorative justice with serious offenses in the college course. In addition, suggestions for readings, projects, and assignments that will further assist in effectively engaging students with these issues will be provided.