Dr. Reid replacing school discipline with “restorative justice” ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you vote for democrat endorsed SB, you are voting for equity and restorative justice efforts. They have made their positions on the future of FCPS crystal clear.

I don't support those efforts and will vote for anyone else.

reddit.com/r/accidentallybased

DP. You may think this was some self-own by PP, but "equity" has just become an excuse in FCPS for dumbing down academics and sharing less information with parents. Brabrand started out with good intentions and turned into a stooge when he became aware that's what the all-D School Board wanted; Reid has been a stooge from Day One.

To each his own. I AM voting for equity. If we're not working towards making education equitable, what's the point?!

We used to work towards making education excellent. Now we're working towards making education equitable. If education is not excellent, what's the point?

Do you think the two are mutually exclusive? If education isn't equitable, can it really be considered excellent?

Equity ignore the fact that humans are unique individuals, with different strengths, weaknesses, drive, ability, interests, family histories, mental histories, intellect and goals.

Equity works in direct contrast to excellence. They are incompatible.

NP. Agreed. Equity as it is being understood and implemented, is a push to the middle. We care about bringing people up to average, and partially accomplish this by pushing down to the average. AAP is viewed as "inequitable" because it helps students who were going to be fine anyway achieve what they are capable of. The goal becomes "fine" for everyone, which means you don't have to bother with achievement or excellence. Instead of doing the work of differentiating and teaching to different levels, we are villainizing achievement. As a result, this sort of equity is incompatible with excellence.

No, it's giving all kids a chance to rise up, not just those who were identified by a couple of tests in 2nd grade.

Then why are gen ed classes increasingly dumbed down? No homework, no reading assignments, low expectations. No one rises up like that. But it's equitable.

Homework is generally worthless, but my kids do still have some homework.

And my kids have reading assignments and high expectations.

You are misinformed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you vote for democrat endorsed SB, you are voting for equity and restorative justice efforts. They have made their positions on the future of FCPS crystal clear.

I don't support those efforts and will vote for anyone else.

reddit.com/r/accidentallybased

DP. You may think this was some self-own by PP, but "equity" has just become an excuse in FCPS for dumbing down academics and sharing less information with parents. Brabrand started out with good intentions and turned into a stooge when he became aware that's what the all-D School Board wanted; Reid has been a stooge from Day One.

To each his own. I AM voting for equity. If we're not working towards making education equitable, what's the point?!

We used to work towards making education excellent. Now we're working towards making education equitable. If education is not excellent, what's the point?

Do you think the two are mutually exclusive? If education isn't equitable, can it really be considered excellent?

Equity ignore the fact that humans are unique individuals, with different strengths, weaknesses, drive, ability, interests, family histories, mental histories, intellect and goals.

Equity works in direct contrast to excellence. They are incompatible.

What? No, that's exactly what equity addresses and considers.

How are equity and excellence incompatible?

Excellence is in comparasion to the other people or thing. Thus if something has excellence, it is excellent compared to average or below average.

Equity focus on the bottom with more resource and opportunity. It not focus on making excellent kid even better in the application of resource allocated

It nice idea to make people feel good

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you vote for democrat endorsed SB, you are voting for equity and restorative justice efforts. They have made their positions on the future of FCPS crystal clear.

I don't support those efforts and will vote for anyone else.

reddit.com/r/accidentallybased

DP. You may think this was some self-own by PP, but "equity" has just become an excuse in FCPS for dumbing down academics and sharing less information with parents. Brabrand started out with good intentions and turned into a stooge when he became aware that's what the all-D School Board wanted; Reid has been a stooge from Day One.

To each his own. I AM voting for equity. If we're not working towards making education equitable, what's the point?!

We used to work towards making education excellent. Now we're working towards making education equitable. If education is not excellent, what's the point?

Do you think the two are mutually exclusive? If education isn't equitable, can it really be considered excellent?

Equity ignore the fact that humans are unique individuals, with different strengths, weaknesses, drive, ability, interests, family histories, mental histories, intellect and goals.

Equity works in direct contrast to excellence. They are incompatible.

NP. Agreed. Equity as it is being understood and implemented, is a push to the middle. We care about bringing people up to average, and partially accomplish this by pushing down to the average. AAP is viewed as "inequitable" because it helps students who were going to be fine anyway achieve what they are capable of. The goal becomes "fine" for everyone, which means you don't have to bother with achievement or excellence. Instead of doing the work of differentiating and teaching to different levels, we are villainizing achievement. As a result, this sort of equity is incompatible with excellence.

No, it's giving all kids a chance to rise up, not just those who were identified by a couple of tests in 2nd grade.

Then why are gen ed classes increasingly dumbed down? No homework, no reading assignments, low expectations. No one rises up like that. But it's equitable.

Homework is inequitable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you vote for democrat endorsed SB, you are voting for equity and restorative justice efforts. They have made their positions on the future of FCPS crystal clear.

I don't support those efforts and will vote for anyone else.

reddit.com/r/accidentallybased

DP. You may think this was some self-own by PP, but "equity" has just become an excuse in FCPS for dumbing down academics and sharing less information with parents. Brabrand started out with good intentions and turned into a stooge when he became aware that's what the all-D School Board wanted; Reid has been a stooge from Day One.

To each his own. I AM voting for equity. If we're not working towards making education equitable, what's the point?!

We used to work towards making education excellent. Now we're working towards making education equitable. If education is not excellent, what's the point?

Do you think the two are mutually exclusive? If education isn't equitable, can it really be considered excellent?

Equity ignore the fact that humans are unique individuals, with different strengths, weaknesses, drive, ability, interests, family histories, mental histories, intellect and goals.

Equity works in direct contrast to excellence. They are incompatible.

NP. Agreed. Equity as it is being understood and implemented, is a push to the middle. We care about bringing people up to average, and partially accomplish this by pushing down to the average. AAP is viewed as "inequitable" because it helps students who were going to be fine anyway achieve what they are capable of. The goal becomes "fine" for everyone, which means you don't have to bother with achievement or excellence. Instead of doing the work of differentiating and teaching to different levels, we are villainizing achievement. As a result, this sort of equity is incompatible with excellence.

No, it's giving all kids a chance to rise up, not just those who were identified by a couple of tests in 2nd grade.

Then why are gen ed classes increasingly dumbed down? No homework, no reading assignments, low expectations. No one rises up like that. But it's equitable.

Homework is inequitable.

Exactly.

You cannot be “in favor of equity” while also supporting the practice of giving homework.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you vote for democrat endorsed SB, you are voting for equity and restorative justice efforts. They have made their positions on the future of FCPS crystal clear.

I don't support those efforts and will vote for anyone else.

reddit.com/r/accidentallybased

DP. You may think this was some self-own by PP, but "equity" has just become an excuse in FCPS for dumbing down academics and sharing less information with parents. Brabrand started out with good intentions and turned into a stooge when he became aware that's what the all-D School Board wanted; Reid has been a stooge from Day One.

To each his own. I AM voting for equity. If we're not working towards making education equitable, what's the point?!

We used to work towards making education excellent. Now we're working towards making education equitable. If education is not excellent, what's the point?

Do you think the two are mutually exclusive? If education isn't equitable, can it really be considered excellent?

Equity ignore the fact that humans are unique individuals, with different strengths, weaknesses, drive, ability, interests, family histories, mental histories, intellect and goals.

Equity works in direct contrast to excellence. They are incompatible.

What? No, that's exactly what equity addresses and considers.

How are equity and excellence incompatible?

Excellence is in comparasion to the other people or thing. Thus if something has excellence, it is excellent compared to average or below average.

Equity focus on the bottom with more resource and opportunity. It not focus on making excellent kid even better in the application of resource allocated

It nice idea to make people feel good

Are you saying that "excellence" is a ranking not a rating?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dr. Reid says she is implementing “restorative justice.”

This is a portion of Michelle Reid’s weekly update sent to FCPS parents:

"The second initiative is our Restorative Justice Program’s new Responsible Pathway to Restorative Justice Facilitation. This pathway program will enable trained and endorsed members of Team FCPS to operate as school-based restorative justice facilitators. By this time next year, our goal is to have two of these facilitators in each of our schools. I’m thrilled about this program and how it will support us to provide excellence, equity, and opportunity for each and every one of our students, especially those impacted by discipline disparities. [i] As I shared with the principals on Thursday, I know there likely are a lot of questions about these two initiatives! More information on our Instructional Rounds and the Responsible Pathway to Restorative Justice Facilitation will be made available in the coming weeks; stay tuned!"

Do you think this is a good idea? Will this new approach increase or decrease crime in your child’s school?

What exactly is “restorative justice”?

I thought Dr. Reid’s update was sufficient and the precepts of restorative justice to be common knowledge. But apparently there remains a certain lack of understanding here. Allow me to clarify the issue further, and explain, beginning with:

- what exactly does restorative justice entail?

There is no one definitive answer to this question. Restorative justice is a burgeoning philosophical framework that asks people to rethink the best way to respond to harmful behavior. Perhaps the most expansive definition comes from Griffith University criminologist Kathleen Daly, who calls restorative justice “a set of ideals about justice that assumes a generous, empathetic, supportive, and rational human spirit.”

Is that quote for real? Or are you trolling? Because it's hard for me to imagine there are people so deluded, so cocooned in their ivory towers, that they believe most people, let alone kids, are "generous, empathetic, supportive, and rational." That could be disproven by spending 10 minutes perusing the comment section anywhere on the web (ok, only 5 minutes on DCUM!)

I don't have any knowledge or prior ideas about restorative justice, but if the philosophy is based on the ideals in the Kathleen Daly quote, it's doomed to failure.

Oh, wait, I know! Let's get the Ukrainians and Russians together for some restorative justice! We'll let Kathleen Daly moderate, supported by Michelle Reid, and they can try out these ideas for real.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dr. Reid says she is implementing “restorative justice.”

This is a portion of Michelle Reid’s weekly update sent to FCPS parents:

"The second initiative is our Restorative Justice Program’s new Responsible Pathway to Restorative Justice Facilitation. This pathway program will enable trained and endorsed members of Team FCPS to operate as school-based restorative justice facilitators. By this time next year, our goal is to have two of these facilitators in each of our schools. I’m thrilled about this program and how it will support us to provide excellence, equity, and opportunity for each and every one of our students, especially those impacted by discipline disparities. [i] As I shared with the principals on Thursday, I know there likely are a lot of questions about these two initiatives! More information on our Instructional Rounds and the Responsible Pathway to Restorative Justice Facilitation will be made available in the coming weeks; stay tuned!"

Do you think this is a good idea? Will this new approach increase or decrease crime in your child’s school?

What exactly is “restorative justice”?

I thought Dr. Reid’s update was sufficient and the precepts of restorative justice to be common knowledge. But apparently there remains a certain lack of understanding here. Allow me to clarify the issue further, and explain, beginning with:

- what exactly does restorative justice entail?

There is no one definitive answer to this question. Restorative justice is a burgeoning philosophical framework that asks people to rethink the best way to respond to harmful behavior. Perhaps the most expansive definition comes from Griffith University criminologist Kathleen Daly, who calls restorative justice “a set of ideals about justice that assumes a generous, empathetic, supportive, and rational human spirit.”

Is that quote for real? Or are you trolling? Because it's hard for me to imagine there are people so deluded, so cocooned in their ivory towers, that they believe most people, let alone kids, are "generous, empathetic, supportive, and rational." That could be disproven by spending 10 minutes perusing the comment section anywhere on the web (ok, only 5 minutes on DCUM!)

I don't have any knowledge or prior ideas about restorative justice, but if the philosophy is based on the ideals in the Kathleen Daly quote, it's doomed to failure.

Oh, wait, I know! Let's get the Ukrainians and Russians together for some restorative justice! We'll let Kathleen Daly moderate, supported by Michelle Reid, and they can try out these ideas for real.

What a sad worldview. You're right, endless wars are better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dr. Reid says she is implementing “restorative justice.”

This is a portion of Michelle Reid’s weekly update sent to FCPS parents:

"The second initiative is our Restorative Justice Program’s new Responsible Pathway to Restorative Justice Facilitation. This pathway program will enable trained and endorsed members of Team FCPS to operate as school-based restorative justice facilitators. By this time next year, our goal is to have two of these facilitators in each of our schools. I’m thrilled about this program and how it will support us to provide excellence, equity, and opportunity for each and every one of our students, especially those impacted by discipline disparities. [i] As I shared with the principals on Thursday, I know there likely are a lot of questions about these two initiatives! More information on our Instructional Rounds and the Responsible Pathway to Restorative Justice Facilitation will be made available in the coming weeks; stay tuned!"

Do you think this is a good idea? Will this new approach increase or decrease crime in your child’s school?

Correction: FCPS already has restorative justice in schools.

To clarify, what is novel is the responsible pathway to restorative justice facilitation program, to enable trained and endorsed members of Team FCPS to operate as FCPS school-based restorative justice facilitators.

Hope that clears things up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you vote for democrat endorsed SB, you are voting for equity and restorative justice efforts. They have made their positions on the future of FCPS crystal clear.

I don't support those efforts and will vote for anyone else.

reddit.com/r/accidentallybased

DP. You may think this was some self-own by PP, but "equity" has just become an excuse in FCPS for dumbing down academics and sharing less information with parents. Brabrand started out with good intentions and turned into a stooge when he became aware that's what the all-D School Board wanted; Reid has been a stooge from Day One.

To each his own. I AM voting for equity. If we're not working towards making education equitable, what's the point?!

We used to work towards making education excellent. Now we're working towards making education equitable. If education is not excellent, what's the point?

Do you think the two are mutually exclusive? If education isn't equitable, can it really be considered excellent?

Equity ignore the fact that humans are unique individuals, with different strengths, weaknesses, drive, ability, interests, family histories, mental histories, intellect and goals.

Equity works in direct contrast to excellence. They are incompatible.

NP. Agreed. Equity as it is being understood and implemented, is a push to the middle. We care about bringing people up to average, and partially accomplish this by pushing down to the average. AAP is viewed as "inequitable" because it helps students who were going to be fine anyway achieve what they are capable of. The goal becomes "fine" for everyone, which means you don't have to bother with achievement or excellence. Instead of doing the work of differentiating and teaching to different levels, we are villainizing achievement. As a result, this sort of equity is incompatible with excellence.

No, it's giving all kids a chance to rise up, not just those who were identified by a couple of tests in 2nd grade.

Then why are gen ed classes increasingly dumbed down? No homework, no reading assignments, low expectations. No one rises up like that. But it's equitable.

Homework is inequitable.

Do you think it’s ok for children to participate in after school clubs and sports?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dr. Reid says she is implementing “restorative justice.”

This is a portion of Michelle Reid’s weekly update sent to FCPS parents:

"The second initiative is our Restorative Justice Program’s new Responsible Pathway to Restorative Justice Facilitation. This pathway program will enable trained and endorsed members of Team FCPS to operate as school-based restorative justice facilitators. By this time next year, our goal is to have two of these facilitators in each of our schools. I’m thrilled about this program and how it will support us to provide excellence, equity, and opportunity for each and every one of our students, especially those impacted by discipline disparities. [i] As I shared with the principals on Thursday, I know there likely are a lot of questions about these two initiatives! More information on our Instructional Rounds and the Responsible Pathway to Restorative Justice Facilitation will be made available in the coming weeks; stay tuned!"

Do you think this is a good idea? Will this new approach increase or decrease crime in your child’s school?

Correction: FCPS already has restorative justice in schools.

To clarify, what is novel is the responsible pathway to restorative justice facilitation program, to enable trained and endorsed members of Team FCPS to operate as FCPS school-based restorative justice facilitators.

Hope that clears things up.

I'd prefer that FCPS require students to comply with the SR&R and discipline them when they don't. Instead, we'll be spending oodles of money to draft school employees to be trained not as educators, but as conflict mediators. Meanwhile, academics, operations, and facilities will just continue to deteriorate. Shame on Dr. Reid and this wretched School Board.

[Anonymous]

Families are inequitable and because families are inequitable, punishments are too. So restorative justice is about equity and disproportionate outcomes and punishments of inequitable families.

The same goes for grades and test scores.

Being a family is hard work and because kids don't choose these things, it is unfair to assign them grades or punishments that are a result of things they can't control.

Hope this clears everything up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Families are inequitable and because families are inequitable, punishments are too. So restorative justice is about equity and disproportionate outcomes and punishments of inequitable families.

The same goes for grades and test scores.

Being a family is hard work and because kids don't choose these things, it is unfair to assign them grades or punishments that are a result of things they can't control.

Hope this clears everything up.

Sit down

[Anonymous]

Restorative justice in schools works extremely well, according to a recent survey of violent and disruptive students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a good idea because it works.

https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/jstc-rcdvs/index-en.aspx
The offenders who participated in the restorative justice program had lower recidivism rates than the matched group of probationers. With each year during the follow-up the differences in recidivism rates for the two groups widened. At the first year, the restorative justice offenders had a recidivism rate of 15% compared to 38% for the probation group. At the second year the respective rates were 28% and 54% and by the third year the rates were 35% and 66%.

https://thedcline.org/2018/07/27/restorative-justice-program-for-juveniles-aims-to-foster-empathy-heal-trauma/
In the 60 juvenile cases that have gone through this program since its inception in 2016, 48 have had successful outcomes, according to Gajwani. Success is measured by the rate of rearrests. Nationally, the rate of recidivism for youth who opt for restorative justice as opposed to a traditional court proceeding is at 40 percent.

You're citing juvenile court cases. Taking restorative justice from that concept to schools is like using a blowtorch for weeding. Wrong tool, wrong setting.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/07/15/restorative-justice-montgomery-county-schools/
"A recent report by Sean Darling-Hammond, assistant professor of health and education at UCLA, indicates that restorative practices improve middle school students’ academic achievement, while reducing suspension rates and disparities, misbehavior, substance abuse and student mental health challenges."

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED596786.pdf
"The earlier discussion about RJ theory suggests that a well-implemented program could
reduce punitive disciplinary actions and problem behavior over time (Tyler, 2006). All the
empirical studies we reviewed report a decrease in exclusionary discipline and harmful
behavior (e.g., violence) after implementing some type of RJ program. "

"But, across the studies, school attendance tended to improve after
RJ implementation. Baker (2009), for example, reports that students who participated in
an RJ program12 experienced a 50-percent reduction in absenteeism during the first year of
implementation and a decrease in tardiness of about 64 percent. "

"70 percent of staff reported
that RJ improved overall school climate during the first year of implementation."

It’s voluntary and it works. What’s the problem?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a good idea because it works.

https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/jstc-rcdvs/index-en.aspx
The offenders who participated in the restorative justice program had lower recidivism rates than the matched group of probationers. With each year during the follow-up the differences in recidivism rates for the two groups widened. At the first year, the restorative justice offenders had a recidivism rate of 15% compared to 38% for the probation group. At the second year the respective rates were 28% and 54% and by the third year the rates were 35% and 66%.

https://thedcline.org/2018/07/27/restorative-justice-program-for-juveniles-aims-to-foster-empathy-heal-trauma/
In the 60 juvenile cases that have gone through this program since its inception in 2016, 48 have had successful outcomes, according to Gajwani. Success is measured by the rate of rearrests. Nationally, the rate of recidivism for youth who opt for restorative justice as opposed to a traditional court proceeding is at 40 percent.

You're citing juvenile court cases. Taking restorative justice from that concept to schools is like using a blowtorch for weeding. Wrong tool, wrong setting.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2023/07/15/restorative-justice-montgomery-county-schools/
"A recent report by Sean Darling-Hammond, assistant professor of health and education at UCLA, indicates that restorative practices improve middle school students’ academic achievement, while reducing suspension rates and disparities, misbehavior, substance abuse and student mental health challenges."

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED596786.pdf
"The earlier discussion about RJ theory suggests that a well-implemented program could
reduce punitive disciplinary actions and problem behavior over time (Tyler, 2006). All the
empirical studies we reviewed report a decrease in exclusionary discipline and harmful
behavior (e.g., violence) after implementing some type of RJ program. "

"But, across the studies, school attendance tended to improve after
RJ implementation. Baker (2009), for example, reports that students who participated in
an RJ program12 experienced a 50-percent reduction in absenteeism during the first year of
implementation and a decrease in tardiness of about 64 percent. "

"70 percent of staff reported
that RJ improved overall school climate during the first year of implementation."

It’s voluntary and it works. What’s the problem?

How is it voluntary? If a bully beats your child into a bloody pulp, does the victim have the right to "opt out" so that the perp is actually punished? Or does the bully just get away with fluffy talk and hand-holding circles no matter what the victim wants?