bs_bs_banner

Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing

ISSN 1073-6077

Commentary

Talking Circles: An Approach to Discipline in Schools

Schools have a fundamental place in the lives of children, families, and society. Among their many functions, schools are charged with providing a safe learning environment. Recent school-based tragedies highlight the importance of safety measures and responses to violence and threats of violence, and there is little argument that extreme measures are necessary and justifiable in dangerous situations. However, ways to intervene when students engage in less dangerous, but still problematic, behavior are not universally accepted. There is a tension between the obligation to provide a safe learning environment and the need for young people to have opportunities to learn social rules, solve problems, and work through conflicts. Over the past 20 years, many schools and school districts have implemented zero tolerance discipline policies (Walker, 2009). While zero tolerance policies are implemented with the safety of students and adults in the environment in mind, a negative aspect is that a student who is not dangerous to others can be excluded from the school environment through suspension or expulsion. Suspension from school has been linked to school dropout (e.g., Lee, Cornell, Gregory, & Fan, 2011). In addition, there is a lack of evidence that zero tolerance strategies are effective in improving the school climate or increasing academic achievement (American Psychological Association [APA], 2008). Restorative justice is one alternate approach that has been found to be promising in reducing school violence or disruption (APA, 2008). As described by Cremin, Sellman, and McCluskey (2012), restorative justice involves the notion that people are connected with one another and that this connection needs to be restored when it is broken. Using a restorative approach, a student is held accountable for behavior and makes some sort of amends or reparation for that behavior. Conversation and dialog are an important part of the restorative process (Karp & Breslin, 2001). One specific example of a restorative approach is a talking circle, which was described by Umbreit (2003) as rooted in the practices of First Nations people of Canada and numerous Native American tribes. The circle process establishes a very different style of communication than most from European tradition are used to. Rather than aggressive debate and challenging each other, often involving only a few more assertive individuals, the circle process establishes a safe nonhierarchical place in which all present have the opportunity to speak without interrupdoi: 10.1111/jcap.12100

60

tions. Rather than active verbal facilitation, communication is regulated through the passing of a talking piece (an object of special meaning or symbolism to the circle facilitator who is usually called the circle keeper) (Umbreit, 2003). Speaking honestly, listening without interrupting, and maintaining confidentiality are also important aspects of the talking circle (Schumacher, 2014). As noted by Cremin et al. (2012), restorative approaches require a reassessment of power relations between teachers, other adults in school, and students. When implemented as designed, talking circles allow all parties to discuss the problem and potential solutions. In a school setting, talking circles may be an appropriate alternative to suspension or expulsion in some situations (Bintliff, 2014). Bintliff (2014) noted that talking circles create safe spaces for students and help them build connections through strategies such as sitting in a circle, creating group norms, and using a talking piece to indicate whose turn it is to talk. She also uses talking circles as part of her middle school classroom activities. Pavelka (2014) endorsed circles as a way to proactively manage classroom behavior, facilitate difficult conversations, and resolve problems. She noted that this is in keeping with the restorative justice model, which provides an opportunity to improve school culture by addressing behavior standards and creates a peaceful forum for dealing with conflicts and behavior problems. Schumacher (2014) described use of talking circles with girls at a high school with scarce resources and high rates of suspension. The circles were not a response to a particular conflict, but rather an opportunity for the students to spend time together. Data from participant observation and semistructured interviews highlighted relational themes of being together, feeling safe, expressing genuine emotions, and cultivating empathy. Another theme that emerged was emotional literacy skills, including learning to listen, managing anger, and developing interpersonal sensitivity. Interviews with school administrators included a decrease in “drama” and a decrease in discipline problems since the talking circles began. Before using restorative approaches such as talking circles, certain conditions are necessary. It is important that facilitators be properly trained, and the school culture must support a restorative approach. In addition, these approaches take time (Karp & Breslin, 2001), which is a precious commodity in schools. It can be argued, however, that a great deal of time is spent on disciplinary processes and appeals. Furthermore, suspensions and expulsions set students back in terms of Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing 28 (2015) 60–61 © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Commentary

schoolwork, and these setbacks can lead to future problems in school and create additional work for teachers. Therefore, time spent on preventive action can be a worthwhile investment in keeping students on track and engaged in school. While not appropriate in all situations, restorative practices such as talking circles are an approach to prevent and respond to problem behaviors, with the potential to contribute to a collaborative and safe school environment. Elaine Walsh, PhD, RN Associate Professor Psychosocial and Community Health School of Nursing University of Washington Seattle, WA, USA Author contact: [email protected], with a copy to the Editor: [email protected] References American Psychological Association. (2008). Are zero tolerance policies effective in the schools? An evidentiary review and recommendations. American Psychologist, 63(9), 852–862. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.63.9.852

Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing 28 (2015) 60–61 © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Bintliff, A. V. (2014). Talking circles: For restorative justice and beyond. Teaching Tolerance. Retrieved from http://www .tolerance.org/blog/talking-circles-restorative-justice-and -beyond Cremin, H., Sellman, E., & McCluskey, G. (2012). Interdisciplinary perspectives on restorative justice: Developing insights for education. British Journal of Educational Studies, 60(4), 421–437. doi:10.1080/00071005.2012.738290 Karp, D. R., & Breslin, B. (2001). Restorative justice in school communities. Youth & Society, 33(2), 249–272. Lee, T., Cornell, D., Gregory, A., & Fan, X. (2011). High suspension schools and dropout rates for Black and White students. Education and Treatment of Children, 34(2), 167–192. Pavelka, S. (2014). Practices and policies for implementing restorative justice within schools. The Prevention Researcher, 20(1), 15–17. Schumacher, A. (2014). Talking circles for adolescent girls in an urban high school: A restorative practices program for building friendships and developing emotional literacy skills. Sage Open, 4, 1–13. doi:10.1177/2158244014554204 Umbreit, M. (2003). Talking circles. Center for Restorative Justice and Peacemaking, University of MN. Retrieved from http://www.cehd.umn.edu/ssw/rjp/resources/rj_dialogue_ resources/Peacemaking_Healing_Circles/Talking_Circles.pdf Walker, K. (2009). Zero tolerance: Advantages and disadvantages. Principals’ Partnership. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/ fulltext/ED539007.pdf

61

Talking circles: an approach to discipline in schools.

Talking circles: an approach to discipline in schools. - PDF Download Free
87KB Sizes 4 Downloads 9 Views