Tag: <span>Restorative Justice</span>

Successful Children & Youth Policy Team (SCYPT)

(Oct. 22, 2018) Catherine Read sits down with Megan McLaughlin (Braddock District) and Tamara Denerak-Kaufax (Lee District) of the FCPS School Board. Their wide-ranging discussion covers a variety of topics, but focuses on the work being done by the Successful Children and Youth Policy Team (SCYPT). This joint effort of the Board of Supervisors and the School Board, established in 2013, utilizes a collaborative approach to ensure that children and youth in Fairfax County thrive and reach their fullest potential.

Prior to 2013, the Board of Supervisors and the School Board operated virtually independent of one another, even though there was often overlap in the services that were being delivered. SCYPT was created to bring these two organizations together, and look at services that need to be delivered in a more strategic way. This ensures efficiency in the operations for both agencies. The collaborative approach allows them to be align objectives and initiatives, as well as work together in forming strategic plans and think about shared goals.

Over the past 10 years Fairfax County has seen big changes in demographics. There are pockets of deep poverty in certain regions, which pose challenges to teachers and administrators. FCPS has the goal of offering a world-class education to all students, no matter where they live in the county. In order to do this, the county recognizes that certain needs must be met. For example, children are not able to thrive if they are hungry, or do not have access to medical care. Therefore, part of the SCYTPT program is to identify what the needs are and think about how services are delivered to students and families.

The SCYPT committee is comprised of 2 School Board Members, 2 Board of Supervisors members, local police and community representatives as well as Fairfax County government employees. The committee covers a range of issues, including early childcare and school readiness, racial and social equity, access to mental health resources, attendance policies and the prospect of expanding the use of community schools. They have been very busy since the committee was formed in May of 2013.

Pre-Kindergarten Initiatives

Beginning with some of the youngest students, SCYPT has taken a multi-pronged approach to early childcare and school readiness. They have successfully cut the wait time for student’s access to Pre-K in half. In the last six years FCPS has opened 30 new pre-K classrooms, and they continue to look for any opportunity that they have to expand. They know that for every $1 invested in high quality Pre-K, they can save $10-15 later on the child’s education.

Currently there are 3 ways for Pre-K to be delivered. Students can attend center-based programming in schools funded by Head Start or the Virginia Pre-K initiative, through licensed in-home daycare providers who receive strong support and guidance from the county to ensure that these children are ready for Kindergarten, and private preschool for families who are able to afford this.

For students who are not able to access the centers or in-home programs, FCPS has established a free 3-week “Bridge to Kindergarten” program offered in August of each year, which gives students an introduction to school and a basic education on how to thrive in a Kindergarten classroom.

Attendance and Discipline

McLaughlin and Derenak-Koufax both agree that it is important to look at creative ways to solve problems. They continually are looking to other jurisdictions for success stories, and to see if those practices can be replicated in Fairfax. One initiative regarding attendance and discipline reform revolves around Restorative Justice practices. Having alternative accountability in place for students, that recognizes some of the challenge that they face and inspires the students to improve and do better, is just one of the areas that is being worked on. Allowing students some space to learn from their mistakes, without facing automatic suspension, can go a long way in making them better students and citizens. It has been documented that students of color are disproportionately disciplined in a harsh way.

Social Services and Mental Health

When considering social services related issues, SCYPT aims to have a wrap-around approach to delivering care. Over the past few years there have been a record-number of cases of students reporting higher levels of stress and anxiety, leading to an uptick in attempted suicides. FCPS is addressing this through a new behavioral health model that employs a multi-pronged approach to this challenge.

Mental health services are delivered in the school by increasing the number of substance abuse counselors, health advisors and contracting with outside providers to help deliver care and to keep students healthy and ready to learn. Programs directed at students are designed to assist them in identifying signs of depression in their friends, and ensure that they know where to turn if that does happen. Additionally, a crisis text line was established so that teens can easily and anonymously access support when they most need it

The school system now runs a Mental Health and Wellness Conference as a resource for students, families and school personnel. The school system is also working side by side with PTA’s to help make sure that they are meeting the ever-changing needs of the community. This wrap-around approach to social services is intentionally designed to meet the students and families where they are and deliver services in a timely and efficient manner.

Community Schools

McLaughlin and Denerak-Kaufax acknowledge that due to the great diversity of our school system, that the same approach will not be effective in every community. Therefore, they look to other jurisdictions and models to see if successful best practices can be employed in Fairfax. One of those models is the use of community schools. A community school can be defined as both a place and a set of partnerships between the school and other community resources. Its integrated focus on academics, youth development, family support, health and social services and community development leads to improved student learning, stronger families and healthier communities.

This year, FCPS and SCYPT is piloting this model in two schools, Mt. Vernon Woods Elementary School and Whitman Middle School, two of the schools in FCPS that are faced with the highest rates of poverty and face some of the biggest challenges. A high percentage of students in these schools are living in poverty and also qualify for ESOL (English Speakers of Other Languages), which pose great challenges to teachers and administrators.

The idea behind this type of approach is that the school and the county would bring wrap-around social services to the families via the school, in order to ensure that they are meeting the needs of these families, as opposed to asking the families to find these services out in the community. It is a shift in mindset, and the work of SCYPT is to bring together the county resources and use them strategically in partnership with the school to make them accessible to children and families.

United Community Ministries is slated to manage the program, and each of the schools will have a community organizer assigned to them. The school system recognizes that the greatest opportunity for upward mobility is through public education. For the most vulnerable students, who are living in poverty and don’t have a strong support network, a community school can offer them the things that they might not be able to find at home. Both McLaughlin and Derenak-Kaufax are excited about this new endeavor and are eager to see positive outcomes in these schools that can be replicated elsewhere in the county.

by William Zuhl

Restorative Justice – Inside Scoop

(Feb 26, 2018) On this episode of Inside Scoop, Catherine Read talks to Restorative Justice experts Vickie Shoap, Bill Casey and Dave Deal about what Restorative Justice (RJ) is and how it is being applied in Fairfax County Public Schools and by the Northern Virginia Mediation Services. Vickie Shoap is a Restorative Justice specialist working for FCPS, on their Restorative Justice Initiative which deals with the school system’s disciplinary process. Bill Casey and Dave Deal are co-directors of the Northern Virginia Mediation Service Restorative Justice Program, and work with the county on the Alternative Accountability Program, which provides an alternative to criminal charges for first time offenders.

Restorative Justice is a philosophy of dealing with misdeamors and minor crimes by examining the situation through a different lens. Where traditional justice does an investigation then punishes the responsible party exactly according to the law. Restorative Justice examines individual harm, who and how were they harmed, then bringing them together with the one who did the harming. In school, they use it for all forms of conflict, using it to prevent the escalation of situations. They also use it to respond, letting those who were harmed talk about what they experienced and what exactly it meant to them. It brings offenders face-to-face with the realities of what they did. It creates a conversation which can be very difficult to have, especially for children. All of that is with the ultimate goal of repairing the harm and making the situation right and prevent the situation from occurring again.

Restorative Justice is an old method of seeking to address wrongs which was suppressed under zero-tolerance policies. The traditional method was, when an offense had occurred, to gather the community and discuss how to repair the harm and restore relationships. They built upon a notion that everyone is connected, ultimately, it’s about developing empathy.

In modern society its hoped that by applying Restorative Justice techniques that there can be a reduction in recidivism and a reduction in punishments which don’t actually achieve their goals. For example, it has been suggested that out-of-school suspensions fail to serve anyone’s needs, the student who is suspended simply gets free days, while they fall behind their school work and does nothing to solve the underlying issues. That idea has gained enough traction that the Virginia State Legislature is looking at addressing an excessive number of suspensions.

Traditional punitive methods create a stigma around the offender, preventing them from properly integration back into the community even if they have done their time and learned from their offenses. Restorative Justice focuses on the victim as well as the offender, then those who were affected by the fallout. The needs and harm done to the victim is addressed, which traditional methods frequently ignore in favor is just punishing the offender. Restorative Justice is about making the offender acknowledge their offense and contribute in some manner to repairing the harm done by their actions. Generally, students will still be in the same class together, so it is important to work out their differences and resolve the issues before things escalate.

Applying Restorative Justice to various situations turns punishment into an educational process, especially for students. In Fairfax County, the school system has been applying Restorative Justice to their correctional process in aid of developing social skills and empathy. They feel that traditional out-of-school suspensions teach students that simply staying at home is better than facing situations where they come into contact with those they may have harmed and further that the traditional suspension is based upon the idea of isolation, something which modern technology makes a near impossibility and does nothing to solve potential ongoing conflicts or prevent escalation. Data has shown that repeated suspensions in middle school triples the probability those students will be involved in the juvenile justice system. By having face-to-face conversations with those they wronged, students are taught exactly what their actions have caused and about resiliency, social responsibility and empathy. Discipline is supposed to be educational, to teach students how they can be better, rehabilitation, not necessarily about the punishment itself.

Zero tolerance policies came to the fore in the 1980s initially relating to the drug issues in society, but over time became too rigid. Juvenile offenders and school offenses became lumped in to the need for punishment and created a situation where offenders became isolated from the community. They also made no allowances for children acting as children sometimes do, turning relatively minor learnable situations into larger situations. The policies were about punishing offenders but did nothing to address restoring the damage done. It became so harsh that offenders failed to learn while those harmed did not have their needs met.

FCPS has been working on a Restorative Justice policy for almost ten years. Initially the program was piloted using the services of the Northern Virginia Mediation Service (NVMS) in Westfield High School. In the 2010-2011 school year FCPS committed itself to a system-wide implementation of Restorative Justice policies in every school, elementary, middle and high school. Over 200 schools implemented the system with the aid of seven full-time restorative justice experts, including Vickie Shoap.

FCPS has been applying Restorative Justice techniques to more than just their disciplinary process. Teachers have been trained in using the techniques to encourage students to talk with one another, share information and create a community, preventing incidents before they can happen in the first place. By getting students used to Restorative Justice Practices they also allow the process to move more smoothly when an incident does occur, as students are familiar with the concepts behind restorative justice, or even allow teachers to resolve incidents without escalating matters higher up.

By cooperating with each other FCPS and NVMS have, with the aid of the Fairfax police, the county juvenile court and the county Neighborhood and Community Services office, expanded Restorative Justice programs for police referral. Over time law enforcement officials have become more excited at being able to refer offenders to the program and out of juvenile court, allowing minors to avoid tarnishing their records, provided they participate in good faith. Initiating a Restorative Justice case is far simpler than going through the criminal system. Generally two 30 minute meetings are needed, each party involved, the victim and the offender, individually, followed by a longer group session involving everyone, including the police, victim and perpetuator, which answers three questions, what happened, who was impacted and how, and what should happen. The victim starts with laying out what they think should be done. At the end of the process there is a written agreement, reached between the offenders and the victims, where the perpetrator agrees to restitution ranging from apologies, to payment, to community service as well as agreeing to not reoffend. After the meeting is over the Restorative Justice Mediators keep a copy of the agreement and make sure that the perpetrator has followed through on what they agreed to. If the perpetrator fails to do what they agreed to then the case is sent to juvenile court. Restorative Justice is an entirely voluntary process one which a student or parent can chose to forgo, but data has shown that restorative justice tends to lead to better outcomes, even though it can not be applied to every situation.

For example, when dealing with a shoplifting case the Restorative Justice program will bring the offenders together with the store owners and answer the three questions, what happened, who was affected and how to resolve the situation. The offender is told exactly what happens when they steal, even as little as one item, the whole process of checking inventory, loss of money having to employ security and other knock on effects. Then they ask, what are you going to do next time? They create a hypothetical situation where the offender is encouraged to think about what they will do if a similar situation occurs again, what if a someone encourages them to shoplift again, or other encouragement. Creating a plan, where rather than having to make a decision on the spot, the person knows ahead of time exactly what they would do in a given situation. They also create a space where the parents of the perpetrator can discuss what their experiences are, how hearing that their child had broken the laws and the morals they had attempted to teach made them feel.

The Restorative Justice system is not available to every offender. The perpetrator only qualifies if they have no other criminal record, only first offenders. Offenses which lead to the restorative process commonly include thief, damage, trespassing and vandalism, but never capital offenses. The process only applies where there was a victim and an offender who has recognized that they have done something wrong.

According to data collection since Restorative Justice becoming official police policy in June of 2017 the recidivism rate of offenders who go through the Alternative Accountability Program (AAP) is approximately 4-5 percent in comparison to the court system’s 40+ percent. NVMS maintains a database of what cases have been through the system and hope to use the information to improve outcomes even further. The FCPS Restorative Justice Initiative’s own data shows a far lower rate of repeat suspensions for students who go through the program, as well as a rising rate of students themselves asking for conflict resolution services.

Every case is different, and the reactions of parents, victims and perpetrators vary greatly, but sharing viewpoints allows every side of the story come out and provide paths to a better outcome.

For more information on the FCPS Restorative Justice Initiative visit https://www.fcps.edu/resources/student-safety-wellness/restorative-justice. For more information on NVMS and their Restorative Justice Program and the Alternative Accountabiliy Program visit http://nvms.us/restorative-justice/.

by Rachel Simon

Restorative Practices in Schools – Robin McNair

(Dec. 18, 2017) Catherine Read speaks with Robin McNair, Educator and Restorative Practices Practitioner. Robin teaches 9^th grade history at Dr. Henry A. Wise Jr. High School in Upper Marlboro, Maryland. She has been trained in the use of restorative practices in schools, which is a framework for building community and responding to challenging behavior through authentic dialogue, coming to understanding, and making things right.

The use of restorative practices in schools was born from the idea of restorative thinking, which is a shift away from punishment-oriented approach to discipline. People, including students, who are invited into restorative dialogue are sometimes confused by the concept of “making things right”. Their default response to the question “What can we do to make things right?” often has to do with punishment. It is said that children live what they learn. When what they have learned is that troublesome behavior demands a punishment-oriented response, then that is how they will live. Restorative practices invite different ways of responding.

Restorative Justice, as used in the criminal justice environment, brings persons harmed by crime and the person who harmed them, along with affected family and community members, together in dialogue that aims to build understanding, explore how the crime has impacted those involved, and collectively develop agreements for what will be done to make things right. These dialogues take place with participants sitting in a circle, so they are sometimes called circle dialogues.

In a school setting, restorative practices cultivate a culture in which everyone feels like they belong. They build a particular sense of community in which every member – students, teacher, parent volunteers, aids feel like they are seen, heard and respected.

McNair shares that school discipline has for the most part taken its cue from the criminal justice system. The focus is on the punishing wrongdoers with the aim of enforcing behaviors that are safe and non-disruptive. When punishment does not work, misbehaving students may be excluded through suspension or expulsion, with the possibly serious long-term harmful consequences to them and to society. There is little or no opportunity for social an emotional learning. McNair notes that minority students are disproportionately affected by these harmful practices.

As outlined in Nancy Reistenberg’s book Circle in the Square, the use of circle dialogue in the classroom gives each student the opportunity to be heard. High quality prompts are questions that give the circle its energy and focus. The circle keeper invites everyone in the circle to participate and respond to the prompts. This both builds trust and encourages the class to work together to identify and solve problems that interfere with learning. While the teacher is still in charge, there is a shift to shared responsibility for behavior management. Solving problems and coming up with solutions becomes more of a team effort. This approach encourages a dialogue where understanding is reached and there is opportunity for creating mutually acceptable agreements about how to make things right.

There is a growing body of research supporting the effectiveness of restorative practices in schools. Evidence shows that restorative practices can result in reductions of suspensions and expulsions, less instructional time lost to managing student behavior challenges, and fewer disciplinary referrals to principals, especially for minority students. The use of restorative practices can also increase teacher morale and teacher retention, along with improved academic outcomes. Ms. McNair shared that the book Restorative Justice in Education (a Little Book Series) is a wonderful resource for educators who are interseted in getting started with learning about restorative practices.