| Making
progress The school executive
then adopted two principles:
- It was important to look for new ideas
as more of the same would produce more of the same results.
- We should change those things that
were within our control and we would seek outside solutions
for things outside our control.
As a result, a formal School Program Review
on student and staff welfare was requested. The review was
managed by a steering committee of school stakeholders and
it aggregated and clarified the concerns of the school community.
The problems needed to be tackled simultaneously
on a multitude of fronts, all centering on strong teacher-student
relationships. A plan was then drawn up, with four areas of
focus:
1. Revitalising the principles
on which our discipline schemes were based
By this time, the concepts of ‘Real
Justice’ and the work of Terry O'Connell in Australia
and Ted Wachtel in America had come to the attention of the
school.
Visit
the Real Justice website...
Advice from the local Student Welfare
consultant then led to the engagement of a suitably qualified
person to in-service staff on the principles of Real Justice
in January 2003. This was then adopted on a trial basis and
the results were to be monitored.
Real Justice focuses on restitution and
is based on a carefully structured ‘conference’
involving the student and all those affected by a particular
incident. All investigations into incidents are prefaced by
the question ‘What happened?’ This takes the focus
from the individual to the behaviour and reassures every child
that their version of events will be listened to. Teachers
were to be consistent in their use of these strategies, from
major playground incidents to minor classroom problems.
2. Upskilling our students
We felt it to be important that we give
students some assertiveness training and anti-bullying strategies.
When threatened, a child was to state in a loud voice: ‘Stop
it, I don't like it’, and walk away. In many minor situations,
this is more than enough to de-escalate potential physical
violence.
This was implemented in all classrooms
in Term 2 of 2003, and evening sessions were conducted to
inform parents. Weekly lessons were also written up in the
school newsletter to keep parents informed.
3. Revamping our policies and
strategies
It was important that all teachers worked
within the same framework, albeit at age appropriate levels.
We considered that even if some teachers had not embraced
the concepts, if at least their actions were in concert with
their peers, commitment would come over time as they saw the
effects. For some, it was difficult to give up the seductive
appeal of 'swift justice'. Real Justice took up time.
The Student Welfare committee collated
and updated all welfare policies to reflect the focus on restitution
and the following of relational questioning procedures. New
teachers were inducted in the procedures, and the same facilitator
invited to revisit for monitoring and troubleshooting.
4. Modifying our organisation
to cater better for challenging students
The organisation needed to change to reflect
the change in focus. We felt that some students were 'victims
of our organisation', and it needed to change to better meet
their needs.
Among the changes were:
- A specialist class of six students
was established to cater for students who did not fit into
normal school classes.
- We established a lunchtime ‘Positive
Playground’, for students who had difficulty socialising,
were bullying or could not play happily together or take
turns. This was supervised by the school executive and teacher
volunteers and had a high teacher:student ratio.
- The lunchtime Detention Room was now
the 'Conference Room' where executive teachers took students
through the Real Justice procedures.
- We gained a grant for a Breakfast
Program that gave all students an opportunity to have a
healthy breakfast and some friendly interaction with some
adults before school. This is staffed by a teacher and community
volunteers.
Paul Britton
discusses Real Justice in practice:
 The
way we used to think about ‘discipline’ was
in terms of punishment. Sure the child has committed something
that is offensive to particular people or to the system,
but it seems that in society first there’s blame and
then there’s punishment. So in schools we seem to
reflect that a bit too… if a child does something
wrong then they must be punished. And we forget why we punish.
Usually it’s as a deterrent. But too often it just
alienates and the same kids are in trouble time after time.
Real Justice is a way of trying not
to get them to do it again without necessarily alienating.
I think it goes back to Indigenous ideas about bringing
extended families together when someone has done something
wrong. Anyway, it’s good for all kids, but it’s
definitely good for Aboriginal kids here, because (when
there’s a big, important incident) you bring in family
members and that helps to reduce alienation.
The old way was about labelling, and
as soon as you start to label you are alienating…
Read on... |
