What makes restorative justice equitable? “It’s a practice, not a program.”

Abstract

PurposeThis study facilitated restorative coordinators in co-constructing and proposing solutions to common problems in RJ implementation.Design/methodology/approachThis study used grounded theory to examine barriers to equitable restorative justice (RJ) implementation in the US. Drawing on interviews and focus groups with restorative coordinators, we used a combination of inductive and deductive coding consistent with the grounded theory approach.FindingsCoordinators distinguished between RJ as a top-down, isolated “program” versus RJ as a collaborative “practice” among all stakeholders. Only the latter was equitable, in their view, and required a consistent principal commitment to building and maintaining an inclusive school culture. Participants recommended that teacher and principal preparation provide opportunities to cultivate critical consciousness and participate in RJ practices.Originality/valueExisting research on discipline reform tends to focus on outcomes, such as suspension rates. Instead, participants focused on the reform process, viewing equitable RJ as an ongoing “practice” to improve school culture. Our findings also open new discussions about leadership preparation content and pedagogy: participants called for preparation programs to cultivate critical consciousness and facility with RJ. Lastly, the study’s recruitment and focus group design raise important considerations for future RJ research.