Abstract:
Many school leaders with decision-making authority over discipline have been
historically traditional in their approach to misbehavior with the default consequences involving
classroom removals and the wide-spread use of zero-tolerance policies (Skiba et al., 2014; Skiba,
2015). Unintended negative consequences have emerged as a result of these ineffective policies
(Costenbader & Markson, 1998; Curan, 2016; Skiba et al., 2014; Skiba, 2015). Some building
leaders have evolved over time to the use of restorative practices in lieu of traditional
consequences (Skiba & Losen, 2015; Zehr & Gohar, 2003). The problem is that emerging data
and success stories from the use of restorative practices around the world have not been enough
to encourage or increase the speed at which resistant school administrators have made this shift.
The factor that is not well-identified in literature is what the characteristics are of leaders who do
choose to embrace and sustain restorative practices. Since building leaders are the front-line
decision-makers with discipline, the personal experiences and professional development
opportunities they have been provided could have the potential to be critical factors when it
comes to supporting students punitively or in a restorative manner.
The purpose of this study was to examine the experiences and knowledge that inform the
decision-making of school administrators who uphold restorative practices in their schools.
The questions that guided my study are:
1. What knowledge and experiences shaped P-12 building administrators’ commitment to
restorative practices?
a. How does knowledge of constructs such as Adverse Childhood Experiences
(ACEs) contribute to their commitment to restorative practices?
2. How does a school leader’s lens change over time when it comes to approaching school
discipline?
This general qualitative study identified nine building leaders who have made the shift to
using restorative practices for non-expellable offenses as defined by the district code of conduct,
and the individual building leaders were selected to participate in semi-structured, open-ended
interviews. Lederach’s Conflict Transformation Theory (2003) framed the study, explaining that
conflict is a natural part of life. Human beings naturally bring a variety of life experiences and
“lenses” to situations, and they grow and change over time.
The four (4) overarching themes identified were: (1) Importance of Professional
Development for Leaders, (2) Shift in Leader’s Thinking to Student-Centered, (3) Understanding
of Importance of Time, and (4) Commitment Driven by Positive Outcomes.
