1. 1

2. 2014 IBPA WORLD CONFERENCE (Preventing) and Responding to Bullying with Restorative Practices Beth Smull Lee Rush 2

3. DEFINING RESTORATIVE Restorative practices is a social science that studies how to build social capital and achieve social discipline through participatory learning and decision-making. Incorporates the use of informal and formal processes that precede wrongdoing, those that proactively build relationships and a sense of community to prevent conflict and wrongdoing. Supporting Framework: Social Discipline Window, Restorative Justice Typology, Restorative Practices Continuum, Nine Affects, Compass of Shame and Fair Process (Wachtel, 2012) 3

4. FUNDAMENTAL HYPOTHESIS The fundamental hypothesis of restorative practices is that human beings are happier, more cooperative and productive, and more likely to make positive changes in their behavior when those in positions of authority do things with them, rather than to them or for them. 4

5. AIM OF RESTORATIVE PRACTICES IN SCHOOL COMMUNITIES To develop community and to manage conflict and tensions by repairing harm and restoring relationships. 5

6. 6

7. 7

8. 8

9. BRAITHWAITE’S HYPOTHESIS Separating the ‘deed from the doer’ Restorative Practices allow: The act (unacceptable behavior) to be rejected because they failed to meet expectations or standards While: Acknowledging the intrinsic worth of the person and their potential contribution to society 9

10. 10

11. 11 AffectMotivation Enjoyment-JoyAffiliate Interest-ExcitmentEngage Surprise-StartleStop, look and listen Shame-HulmilationSeek to restore Distress-AnguishComfort DisgustGet rid of Fear-TerrorRun Anger-RageFight DismellStay away Affects and Motivation (Abramson, 2013)

12. 12

13. COMPASS OF SHAME » Withdrawal Isolating oneself running and hiding » Avoidance denial drug and alcohol abuse distraction through thrill-seeking Nathanson, 1992 11

14. COMPASS OF SHAME » Attack Others “turning the tables” blaming the victim lashing out verbally or physically » Attack Self self put-down masochism Nathanson, 1992 14

15. RESPONDING TO SHAME Respond to others experiencing shame by: » Listening to what they have to say » Acknowledging their feelings » Encouraging them to talk about their experience 15

16. TOMKIN’S BLUEPRINT Individuals are at their best when they: » Maximize positive affect » Minimize negative affect » Freely express emotion » Do as much of the above three as possible Nathanson, 1992 16

17. INTIMACY Intimacy is when two people agree to: » Maximize positive affect » Minimize negative affect » Freely express emotion » Do as much of the above three as possible Nathanson, 1992 17

18. COMMUNITY Community is when multiple people agree to: » Maximize positive affect » Minimize negative affect » Freely express emotion » Do as much of the above three as possible Nathanson, 1992 18

19. 19

20. ACTIVITY: RESTORATIVE QUESTION CARDS Think about a time in your life when you were harmed by someone. 20

21. Restorative Questions Side Two (To help those harmed by other’s actions) What did you think when you realized what had happened? What impact has this incident had on you and others? What has been the hardest thing for? What do you think needs to happen to make things right? Source: International Institute for Restorative Practices ACTIVITY: RESTORATIVE QUESTION CARDS

22. Think about a time in your life when you harmed someone. 22

23. Restorative Questions Side One (To respond to challenging behavior) What happened? What were you thinking of at the time? What have you thought about since? Who has been affected by what you have done and how where they affected? What do you think you need to do to make things right? Source: International Institute for Restorative Practices ACTIVITY: RESTORATIVE QUESTION CARDS

24. CASE 24

25. 25 “AN ELEGANT PROCESS” (O’Connell, 2014)

26. School Disposition of Cases FLOW CHARTS

27. Police Disposition of Cases FLOW CHARTS

28. Juvenile Court (Intake Level) FLOW CHARTS

29. Juvenile Court (Adjucation Level) FLOW CHARTS

30. Lorraine Amstutz (VA) + Eastern Mennonite University John Bailie (PA) + International Institute for Restorative Practices Kenzi Bisbing (MI) # Oakland Mediation Center Susan Blackburn (PA) # PA Juvenile Court Judges Commission Leah Galkowski (PA) # Center for Safe Schools Robert Garrity (VA) # Garrity Mediation Consulting Susan Limber (SC) + Clemson University Stacie Molnar-Main(PA) * Center for Safe Schools Cynthia Morris (PA) # School District of Lancaster Jane Riese (SC) + Olweus Bullying Prevention Program Lee Rush (PA) # International Institute for Restorative Practices Jon Singer (PA) # Center for Community Peacemaking Marlene Snyder (MT) + Olweus Bullying Prevention Program *Primary Author #Contributor +Reviewer INTEGRATING BP AND RP WORKGROUP (2012- 2014)

31. The school and its staff work in consultation with professionals with training in a specific model of bullying prevention and restorative practices. The school and its staff emphasize preventive activities, systemically, making restorative practices and bullying prevention integral to the culture of the school. All school staff are trained in both RP and BP. As a result, staff can apply best practices in bullying prevention, along with RP strategies in their day-to- day work. RECOMMENDED PRACTICES

32. School staff emphasize the needs of the harmed person at the forefront of every question, consideration, and step. The needs of the person who caused the harm are also prioritized. The school and its staff adhere to the guiding principle that participation in restorative conferencing is voluntary for all involved or affected. When RP is implemented with an evidence-based BP program, high levels of implementation fidelity to the evidence-based program are maintained. RECOMMENDED PRACTICES

33. School leaders ensure that face-to-face meetings between students are conducted by adults who are trained and experienced in conducting restorative meetings. The school and its staff seek feedback and use data on an ongoing basis to guide and improve practices related to BP-RP integration. RECOMMENDED PRACTICES

34. THE HERO’S JOURNEY

35. URA, BUMTHANG VALLEY, BHUTAN (April 20, 1999)

38. Optimism vs. Hope

39. 39 SO WHAT ABOUT MEETING FACE-TO-FACE?

40. 40 UPCOMING WEBINARS

41. 41FOLLOW-UP Beth Smull bethsmull@iirp.edubethsmull@iirp.edu Lee Rushleerush@iirp.eduleerush@iirp.edu www.iirp.edu 610.807.9221