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

[Anonymous]

Question for those with RJ experience:

- if my child is the victim, I understand we can request remediation and or restitution type factors.

What if at the end of the process, we request the bully be expelled from school?

If my daughter were sexually assaulted by a classmate, I would expect nothing less; wouldn’t you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

It’s voluntary. If the victim doesn’t opt-in - or if the victim’s parents don’t opt-in - or of the “perp” doesn’t acknowledge fault - then they don’t use the RJ program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

It’s voluntary. If the victim doesn’t opt-in - or if the victim’s parents don’t opt-in - or of the “perp” doesn’t acknowledge fault - then they don’t use the RJ program.

It would be better if school officials and SROs were allowed to do their jobs and hold bullies accountable rather than have Gatehouse equity warriors imposing their RJ babble on people and asking families to make decisions they shouldn’t be forced to make.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When can we fire Dr Reid and send her back to Washington State where she belongs? Keep her PNW to herself.

+ 1000. Why Republicans are needed on the school board.

Hey, hey, hey. Liberal Dem here and I hate this BS too. Don’t drag ugly national politics into local school board politics. Just look for reasonable people who think!

DP. You do realize others are smearing Republican SB candidates due to “ugly national politics,” right? I agree, reasonable people are desperately needed on this SB.

They smear themselves by participating in the Insurrection and pushing RWNJ propaganda.

Now tell us about LWNJ propaganda.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Restorative justice is traumatic to the victims whether the victims are students or teachers.

Victims only participate voluntarily. No one is forced to do it. Parents must agree to it.

That is not how it is proposed to the parent. It is presented as "this is what we are doing". Parents whose kids are never in trouble do not know the system - but the problematic parents have problematic kids, and you bet they know the system well - they certainly work it to their advantage. The victim loses out, obviously. Something has to change.

The perp should not be allowed to walk around school as if they are not a liability, because they are.

+100
I'm simultaneously amused and revolted by the idiot liberal here who keeps insisting the rest of us couldn't possibly understand what RJ "really means."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s a torrent of words but the intent is to serve as a diversion program, so that bullies and others who cause trouble and can’t follow the rules aren’t held accountable. That will then allow FCPS to manipulate statistics and claim it’s making progress towards meeting “equity” goals.

No one who really wades through all the verbiage and Reid’s statements as to the goal will come away believing for one second that this is really “victim-centered,” so please just cut out the BS.

Ding ding ding, we have a winner! Well said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reid is another in a long line of stooges for the School Board.

Fire the School Board in the elections and then fire Reid.

Naw. The last thing we need is Republican right wing types overseeing public education.

I know, right?! We really need a continuation of the status quo; that is, Democratic left-wing types overseeing public education. Except that "education" is merely an afterthought to them. Their number one priority is equity, social justice, and dumbing down any academics as much as possible. No thanks.
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Restorative justice is traumatic to the victims whether the victims are students or teachers.

Victims only participate voluntarily. No one is forced to do it. Parents must agree to it.

That is not how it is proposed to the parent. It is presented as "this is what we are doing". Parents whose kids are never in trouble do not know the system - but the problematic parents have problematic kids, and you bet they know the system well - they certainly work it to their advantage. The victim loses out, obviously. Something has to change.

The perp should not be allowed to walk around school as if they are not a liability, because they are.

This is the change. Previously, the victim had no ability to affect the outcome. Now, they and their parents have a voice. Show up. Participate if you don't like the outcomes.

The "perps" (WTF?) don't just walk around with no consequences. There are consequences, including disciplinary actions, if appropriate.

I was bullied in middle school and the only thing I wanted was for the bullying to stop and for the bullies to behave better. The last thing I wanted was to be in a room with the bully and a bunch of adults expecting me to articulate my feelings.

This stuff strikes me as utter BS and it's not for the benefit of victims. Victims make "victim impact" statements in court in criminal cases that can affect sentencing. Restorative justice in a K-12 environment will just teach bullies how to game the system and make victims feel like they somehow triggered the bullies.

+1
And who wants their bully to see them break down crying? Good grief. That's exactly what a bully wants - to see how his/her actions have damaged the victim. Who comes up with this garbage?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MAGA Trolls are going crazy in the FCPS forum. I'm done here.

Speaking of troll ^^^. You clearly can't take anyone disagreeing with you. Bye, now!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MAGA Trolls are going crazy in the FCPS forum. I'm done here.

+1

They are so irrational that it's impossible to have a real conversation about our schools. But I guess that's the point. They just want to tear it all down.

The all-Democrat SB is already making real strides in that direction, don't you worry.

[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.

Same poster. To clarify for the "MAGA trolls" accuser, I assure you I have always voted D, and don't plan to stop any time soon -- except perhaps in the next FCPS School Board election.

Agree with you, and the pendulum has swung way too far. I basically dismiss anyone who rants about “MAGA!” Do they even realize how ridiculous and simplistic when they whine “MAGA!l about everything, and expect it’s enough for persuade me to vote for them?

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

DP. Exactly what is incorrect in the PP's post?? Are you actually claiming having a kumbaya moment with your bully/attacker will make everything better? Think that'll go over well with Israel and Hamas? JFC, you are so deluded it's impossible to take you seriously.

[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?

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.

+ a million

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MAGA Trolls are going crazy in the FCPS forum. I'm done here.

+1

They are so irrational that it's impossible to have a real conversation about our schools. But I guess that's the point. They just want to tear it all down.

Wrong thread?

It's many of the threads, including this one. So irrational.

Please. This thread is about restorative justice - there is no "tear it down" on this thread.

Who is engaging in hyperbole? That would be you.

Stopping all serious conversation with hysterics and political propaganda is one way of tearing it down.

Republicans don't want to fix anything. They just want chaos.

Please do tell us what you mean by "political propaganda." Be very specific. We'll wait while you spin something up.
DP

[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.

So that girl who choked the boy on the bus - she shouldn't be punished harshly for the heinous thing she did because perhaps she comes from a low-income family and just "didn't know better"? Are you for real? Do "clear that up" for us.
DP