Rotary Global Grant Blog August 2017

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

August has been another full and exciting month in Wellington!

At the beginning of the month, I competed in Victoria University’s Three Minute Thesis Competition. The Three Minute Thesis competition challenges postgraduate students to explain their thesis research to a non-specialist audience in just 3 minutes. The goal is to clearly outline your research, engage the audience, and make them want to learn more.

I competed last year and was surprised and honored to win first place. You can read about that experience and see the video of my presentation here.

Because I had so much fun last year, I decided to participate again! This year, I won first place for International Students. You can watch the video of my presentation here.

This term, I have taken on the role of tutor for the Graduate Certificate course in Restorative Justice at Victoria University. I have enjoyed answering questions, marking papers and hosting tutorial sessions. This month, I was a guest lecturer for the course and delivered an interactive workshop on Restorative Circle practice. The content was well received and I enjoyed the opportunity to share with the class. To read more about designing restorative circles and how I am using this practice in the university context, see “How do you design a circle process?”

I have continued to interview facilitators for my research throughout the month and am learning so much from these conversations. To hear more about a recent insight, see “How does restorative justice counter biases?”

This month, I also received further training to be a facilitator in a pilot project using restorative practices to respond to elder harm issues. I am excited to be part of this new application of restorative practices.

Finally, this week I attended my first meeting with the Rotary Club of Wellington. It was a wonderful experience and I met so many great people! The speaker was Dr. Bronwyn Wood, whose speech was titled “Young people today: active or apathetic?” She suggested that these categories need to be challenged and outlined the ways in which youth and young adults are politically active in a different way than previous generations. It was an insightful and thought-provoking talk. As the Rotary Four Way Test was recited for the new members joining the club that day, I felt immense gratitude for this committed and passionate international community and for my place as part of it.

“Service above self.”

How does restorative justice counter biases?

Over the last couple months, I have started interviewing restorative justice facilitators as part of my research.  The insight I have gained from these conversations has been incredible and I look forward to sharing more as I write up my findings.

Most of the facilitators I have interviewed are in New Zealand, but I am also reaching out to a few facilitator friends from Colorado. Recently, during one of those conversations, a facilitator told the story of a case she appreciated in part because of the role she saw the restorative justice process play in countering biases and stereotyping.

I was the case coordinator for this incident, so I remember it well. It was two young boys who had been throwing rocks over the fence in their backyard into the busy street beside their house. One large rock hit the windshield of a young woman’s car, causing significant damage to the car and fear and stress for the woman.

The facilitator talked about how she thought if this case had gone through court, any bias the woman held about Latino boys would have been reinforced, and the same would be true for the boy’s families in regards to the young white woman. Instead, an open, honest conversation created the opportunity for those biases to be challenged and for the people involved to encounter each other as complex fellow human beings with shared needs and experiences.  The quote I captured from the interview explains this dynamic better than I can, so I will share it here.

“The boys, they were both from Latino families. The conversation about racial difference or bias or any of that wasn’t part of the conference, but I know that inherently because there was a Latino and white family on different sides of the conference and they were meeting each other and there was a police officer there, that there is so much opportunity to prevent bias entrenchment and further stereotyping.

I think about the restitution process this would have gone through in court. Whether it was criminal court or small claims court even. These people would know, even if they never met each other, they would know this is the name of the hooligan who damaged my car that I worked so hard to buy. And any already held stereotypes a person had about youth, or about Latino youth, or about male Latino youth, this would be an opportunity for this woman and her mother to say ‘Oh, these awful kids, who I now have to go to court to get money back from.’ And ‘Oh look there is more Latino youth on the street and maybe they are going to get up to the same type of mischief and I never received an apology and they don’t care about how it impacted me.’ All of those thoughts that people have naturally about people they are in court with just have the opportunity to flourish and there is nothing to stop that, nothing to counter that in a court process that I know of.

And then on the other side, here are two very young boys who could be taken to court and their parents held accountable for this dollar amount that they owe. And those parents then have the potential to be like, ‘This mean white woman taking our sons to court, don’t they know how hard our family works for this money?’…. Any interaction just has the potential to escalate and entrench those biases and stereotypes people hold already.

And at the root of all of this is that interaction with the police officer. People might feel like the officer targeted their kids or spoke to them unfairly in that brief interaction, but then they have this opportunity to talk about it and for the police officer to share his gratitude for their honesty. It isn’t about targeting your sons because they are Latino boys who did something wrong, it is because someone’s car is damaged and he is commending them for telling the truth. All of those things have the potential to go a very different way.”

How do you design a circle process?

For some conflicts and wrongdoings, a traditional restorative justice conference process with clear victim and offender roles may not be appropriate or necessary. Sometimes multiple people are both responsible for harm and have experience harm.

For example, at the university, there is a lot of conflict around every day things like a messy shared apartment or a rowdy group of students who frequently have noisy parties that bother neighbors and leave a mess in common areas. These day-to-day conflicts can expand into larger conflicts or can slowly drive a wedge between people, corroding feelings of connection and contentment.

Even when a restorative justice conference isn’t the best response, it is still possible to use a restorative approach.

One way of doing this is through a circle process. The circle is a simple and adaptable restorative practice that can be used to build relationships, establish group norms, process community trauma, or respond to conflict and behavior issues. For more information about how the circle is used in different contexts, check out “Building a Restorative University” or “Restorative Practices in the Workplace.”

Before jumping into using circles to respond to conflict, I recommend familiarizing yourself with the facilitator role. Circles have a profound power to create a space of connection and empathy, but in order for the process to be effective, the facilitator must be capable and comfortable holding and encouraging that space. The good news is circles are a lot of fun to practice! Try facilitating relationships building connection circles with your friends, family and co-workers to help you get used to the facilitator role. You’ll find that beautiful things come out of creating that intentional space with your loved ones!

Once you are ready to design a circle to respond to a specific conflict or issue, use the following steps to help you think through the process. Remember that it is most often helpful for the facilitator to not be an involved party in the conflict being discussed in the circle that he/she is facilitating.

Step 1: Look through a Restorative Lens

When we look at the world through the Restorative Lens, we shift our focus from rules and punishment to impacts and repair.

Remember the Guiding Restorative Questions and approach the conflict through that framework of understanding.

  1. What happened?
  2. Who was affected?
  3. What can be done to make things right?

Step 2: Pre-Conference

Meet with the involved parties individually to build relationships and trust and talk through how each individual person has been impacted and what his/her needs are moving forward.

Step 3: Identify Needs

In addition to the information gained through the pre-conference meeting, clues for needs are found in two places:

  1. Wrongdoings generate needs. Ask the involved parties, what is needed to repair the harms?
  2. Harmful behavior indicates a need that is not being met. Behavior is an attempt to fulfill a need, so try to identify the need at the root of problematic behaviors.

Step 4: Design Circle Questions

Remember to maintain the flow of the restorative questions, moving from impacts to ideas for repair. It is advisable to open with a question that will help to build comfort with the circle process and speaking in a circle. Ending with a question round that gives an opportunity for each person to have a final word provides a sense of closure.

The number of rounds and specific questions will vary depending on the needs being addressed by the circle.

Designing a circle

Depending on the situation, the discussion of ideas for repair will take different forms. At times, it may be enough for people to verbally commit to what they will do to make things right. At other times, it may be necessary to suspend the circle speaking order to allow more in-depth discussion of what is needed to make things right. This may culminate in a written agreement with specific action items moving forward. This can help circle participants to continue to take responsibility and make things right after the culmination of the circle process.

Example Circles

To help illustrate this process, I am including two stories of circles I have facilitated in the last couple weeks.

Circle 1: The Messy Flat

This case involved an apartment full of female students who hadn’t know each other prior to the university placing them together in student housing. The apartment was routinely extremely messy, with piles of dirty dishes covering the kitchen and trash left so long that it developed maggots. Each woman felt like the others weren’t completing their chores. They had also had several months of very high power bills and contentious conversations about how to divide them. Communication in the flat had devolved into passive aggressive Facebook messages. The RA and hall management had tried to hold a couple flat meetings to resolve these problems, but reported that most of the women would just sit there quietly on their phones, not willing to discuss the issues. I agreed to facilitate the circle with a member of the hall management team so that these sorts of conflicts could be resolved in-house in the future.

Using a talking piece and the circle format with clear questions invited each person to share how they were being impacted and what their needs were. We were able to get full participation through the structured equal voice. The women discussed important issues like not feeling at home in their flat, the extra stress created by the Facebook messages, and the financial strain and panic two women in particular felt when the power bill arrived each month. They agreed on a system for cleaning, a fair way to divide the power bill each month based on usage, a new way to communicate with each other, and an occasional flat dinner to get to know each other better. None of these solutions came from myself or my co-facilitator. It was all a product of creating the space for the conversation.

Here is the circle outline used to facilitate this process.

Circle Outline

Welcome: Thank you all for being here and for taking the time to have this conversation.

Introduction: We are here to discuss the issues in the flat (particularly the cleanliness, the power bill, and communication), to understand how everyone has been affected, and to work together to find a solution moving forward.

Ground Rules

  • Listen and speak with respect
  • Respect confidentiality
  • Only one person will speak at a time
  • Any additional ground rules? Can we all agree to those ground rules?

Introduce Talking Piece:  Share the significance of the talking piece and its connection to the circle. For this process, I used a rock I found on the beach that can balance in a really unexpected way up on its side and looks like a sculpture. It also feels nice to hold. I showed them how the rock could balance and said I hoped that this meeting would be a chance for them to find an unexpected and perfect way to come back into balance in the flat.

Question 1 Hopes: What are you hoping to get out of this meeting?

Question 2 Relationship Building: What is something fun or interesting you would like your flatmates to know about you?

Question 3 Impacts: What is the main issue for you and how have you been affected?

Question 4 Repair: What needs to happen now to make things right/improve the experience of living together in the flat?

Discuss ideas and reach agreement.

Final Round: What are you taking away from this process?

Close: Thank you for being here. Final reflection.

Circle 2: The Trouble-Makers

This case involved a large group of male students who had become friends in one of the university residential halls. Most nights the group had big, noisy parties with outside guest that negatively impacted the other residents in the hall. These parties had also resulted in damage to the hall and a mess left in common areas. The group also has a history of being very disrespectful to RAs when they have knocked on the door to ask them to be quiet.

RAs and Hall Management had tried to have one-on-one conversations with each of the young men as issues arose, but it was clear that what was needed was a chance to bring them all together, so they could all be part of the shared commitment to change some of these behaviors.

Two RAs and the Hall Managers were also present in the circle. One of the most impactful moments was several of the men with larger stature talking about how even though sometimes people think they are intimidating, they are actually really friendly and want to have a chat and include everyone. The female RA expressed that it was really helpful to hear that because she had often felt intimidated by them.

The group agreed to be mindful of their noise level and the impact on the hall and common areas, to be respectful and helpful to RAs, to keep each other honest and in-line, to rotate where they host parties so it wouldn’t always be one group of neighbors being bothered, and to keep the lines of communication open and respectful. They also asked the RAs if they would be willing to come by earlier in the evening to knock and just check in so that it wouldn’t always be a knock when they had gone to far. The RAs said they would be happy to do that.

Here is the circle outline used to facilitate this process.

Circle Outline

Welcome: Thank you all for being here and for taking time to have this conversation. We are going to use the circle format for this meeting. That means we’ll go around the circle and each have a chance to respond to a few different questions.

Ground Rules

  • Listen and speak with respect
  • Respect confidentiality
  • Only one person will speak at a time
  • Any additional ground rules? Can we all agree to those ground rules?

Introduce Talking Piece:  Share the significance of the talking piece and its connection to the circle. For this process, my co-facilitator used a polished moonstone. She said that this rock didn’t look like this when it was picked up off the ground, it had to be polished and cleaned to look like this. The same goes for our communities and ourselves, we don’t start out all shiny, but with a bit of effort and intention, we can make it just as beautiful.

Question 1 Relationship Building: What is your name and a story connected to your name?

Introduction: The co-facilitator and I won’t participate in answering the next few rounds, this is your chance to talk. We are here because something isn’t working and people are being affected.

Question 2 Story: What’s been going on that has been negatively impacting others?

Question 3 Impacts: How have people been affected (including yourself and the staff)?

Question 4 Strengths: What is something great about you that you bring to the hall?

Question 5 Repairs: Is there anything that needs to happen right now to repair the harms you’ve named? If not, how can we ensure that this doesn’t happen anymore?

Discuss ideas and reach agreement.

Final Round: Chance for a final word.

Close: Thank you for being here. Final reflection.

Rotary Global Grant Blog July 2017

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Starting this term, my PhD studies in New Zealand are generously supported by a Rotary Global Grant Scholarship. I am honored and so grateful to have received this support from Rotary. I was lucky enough to have the opportunity, while home in Colorado, to visit a couple of the local clubs to say thank you in person. I would also like to continue to share my journey and what I am learning through this blog.

Before returning to New Zealand at the end of June, I stopped in Oakland, CA to attend the 6th National Conference on Community and Restorative Justice. It was invigorating to be in a room full of passionate, driven and skillful restorative practitioners. I learned a lot about the state of restorative justice around the country and also delivered two talks titled Creating Transformational Space: Ritual and Restorative Justice and Building a Restorative University. 

During July, my colleague, Haley Farrar, and I had the opportunity to deliver a workshop on Restorative Justice to Wellington Community Justice Project, a law student-led society that aims to improve access to justice services in the community. I enjoyed the opportunity to discuss restorative practices with this group of intelligent and engaged law students.

On July 31st, the Rotary Club of Wellington hosted a forum with the central question “What would it take for Wellington, the city and region, to be the best in the world?” It was an exciting and thought-provoking event, featuring many great speakers from Wellington and beyond. Members of the audience were invited to share 60 seconds on their impossible dream for Wellington. I was lucky enough to be chosen to share the idea of making Wellington a Restorative City.  You can see a video of my one minute of fame here.

This month, I also began interviewing restorative justice facilitators and participants for my PhD research. It has been wonderful to go beyond the books and to draw from the experience and insight of the people engaged in the process.



Restorative Pedagogy

This year, Victoria University has begun offering a Graduate Certificate course in Restorative Justice. Last week, Dr. Tom Noakes-Duncan delivered a fascinating class on Restorative Pedagogy, raising the question, “How should restorative practices be taught?”

He introduced the old paradigm of teaching, often referred to as the Transmission Model. The teacher transfers knowledge to the students as if he/she were “pouring water into an empty vessel.” Advancements in teaching have certainly been made, but interestingly this still describes the model of teaching used at many major universities around the world, with the professor at the front of the classroom delivering a lecture to a group students who diligently take notes, recording the transmitted information.

From the viewpoint of a restorative framework, there are a few problems with this education model. The first is that it is hierarchical. Whereas restorative approaches prioritize equal voice and emphasize the facilitation of a space where all voices are valued, the traditional classroom values and creates space for the teacher’s voice above all others. Additionally, the traditional classroom structure encourages a passive role for students, a conformist approach to learning, and sometimes an adversarial sense of competition resulting from the grading structure of the course. All of these qualities contradict the participatory, individualized, and collaborative nature of restorative processes.

If you look at the structure of a traditional classroom, there are several similarities to a courtroom. The structure of each room reinforces relationships of power.  In both rooms, there is one person of authority (the judge or teacher) who determines what is relevant and what is correct. In both structures, a limited number of people are given the opportunity to speak, and all communication is addressed to the authority figure, not to peers.

Personally, I have been fortunate to receive a different sort of education, one in which student creativity was prized and I always felt there was a space for my voice in the classroom. I attended a Waldorf school as a child and went to a small Liberal Arts college in Colorado. However, the majority of educational experiences, particularly at the university level, are still characterized by a more traditional lecturing method.

As the restorative justice movement increasingly expands to touch additional areas of civil life, it is necessary for us to re-think the structure of the learning environment. What learning structure would communicate and reinforce the restorative values of respect, equal voice, and relationship? How can we better value the perspectives of the students in the room in addition to the teacher? How can education encourage the development of empathy in students? In the words of Dr. Noakes-Duncan, how can we develop a “proactive relational pedagogy?”

This is a big question, but I think it lends a helpful value structure and a basic framework to the task of educational reform. A good starting point is in the integration of circle practice in classrooms. Circles are used to build relationships, to establish classroom norms, to respond to issues, and also to deepen learning and promote reflection. Circles bring student voice into the learning experience.

We have historically shaped our education system to fill societal needs (here is a great TED Talk on how education has been shaped by the need to produce factory workers). I would argue that our greatest societal need at this point in history is empathy and a restorative lens offers tools and guidance to re-shape our education system to meet that need.