Abstract
According to the literature, the punitive approaches that are predominantly being used in schools today are inadequate for solving the escalating problems with regard to discipline and for fostering responsible behaviour in learners. In this article, therefore, which comprises mainly a conceptual study, the authors investigate how the philosophy and key elements of the restorative approach can be collated into a programme that can serve as an alternative to punitive approaches in schools.
The current situation regarding defiant behaviour and contributing factors thereto are stated, some of the current burning issues in South African schools are investigated and the historical context which substantially impacted on the education system and communities in general are interrogated. The motto of “liberation before education” from the 1980s embedded a negativity and feeling of disrespect towards structures and discipline (Beets and Van Louw 2005; Smit 2010). The remnants of these trends are still experienced in the current education community when bullying and disrespect towards authority and even among learners themselves are taken into consideration. These factors seem to have an impact on the lack of discipline experienced in a majority of South African schools.
Not only is discipline defined by using the views of different authors, but terminology is also clarified through utilising a holistic approach when looking at abnormal behaviour. School communities daily face problems such as bullying, gangsterism, sexual misbehaviour, drug abuse, disobedience and assault and are in dire need of support.
The conceptual framework of the article guides the reader to an alternative to the punitive model of discipline, namely the restorative approach which derives from restorative justice philosophy. Due to the innovative and relevant nature of the restorative approach it seems to be suitable for the current climate in South African schools because it can contribute to restoring the many relationships that were and are damaged as a result of the lack of discipline. The basic elements of the restorative approach as discussed by Zehr (2002) indicate that the approach not only focuses on the needs and suffering of the victim but also addresses the needs of the perpetrator. It addresses the responsibility to restore, through a multi-disciplinary approach, the relationships influenced and damaged by the misbehaviour. Even the broader community can be part of alleviating the problem. With these elements embedded it can support the school to build a values-based community with a focus on respect for everybody.
The ultimate aim of discipline, namely that responsible long-term behaviour will be established, can hopefully be reached through the restorative approach. Furthermore it can build capacity of the community because the values of the restorative approach will gradually be embedded there. As stated, most approaches in the solving of discipline problems are punitive and try to modify learner behaviour via fear of punishment; it seldom seems successful in establishing responsible value-driven actions from learners in the long run. The retributive discipline approach, according to Wolhuter and Van Staden (2008), is the most common reactive way to discipline learners where punishment such as whipping, detention and a demerit system (to name only a few) are used to prevent the learner or child from breaking the rule. The advantages of this approach are that an impact is immediately experienced and that the process seems easy to use to change overt behaviour (Badenhorst, Steyn and Beukes 2007; Maphosa and Shumba 2010). It seems that children from well-structured homes do not necessarily develop emotional scars from the punishment of the retributive approach, but in reality many children in South Africa do not grow up in established communities within loving and caring homes. Frustration and anger can be caused in these children by the punishment.
Another disadvantage is that the external locus of control – namely the fear of punishment – can contribute to an interim change in the behaviour and not be internalised in the long run in the form of responsible behaviour and deeper life skills needed to guide a person in life (Nelsen, Escobar, Ortolano, Duffy and Owen-Sohocki 2001). Although these are only a few disadvantages of the retributive approach, it still seems the approach mostly used in South African schools. Even though corporal punishment has been abolished it is still being used in many schools in the Free State (Graphics24 2013), probably because of the lack of an alternative. Educators do not get the necessary training and support from the Department of Education and are struggling with their workload since the inclusion of learners with special needs in the mainstream classroom (Ferreira and Wilkinson 2009) and because of preparation for the Annual National Assessment where the level of the learners is researched (John 2014). By taking this into consideration the authors of this article realised that an alternative approach, to be really effective in changing behaviour, will need to be holistic and to focus on the complex and unique issues of South Africa. Although this article argues mostly in favour of the utilisation of the restorative approach it does not deny that the retributive approach can be used in specific instances; in certain instances the two approaches could also be utilised in complementary fashion.
The restorative approach attempts to change the culture and ethos of the school by restoring the relationships and by creating a caring community which was damaged by the disciplinary problems experienced. The techniques or activities used by the school to achieve this are, for instance, enhancing of communication, creating positive role models and focusing on clear boundaries (Reyneke 2011). These activities can be referred to as restorative practices or activities (Jenkins 2006), but for this article it was decided to use the term restorative practices. The theoretical framework of the study, together with the philosophy of restorative justice, links with elements of positive psychology in which the strengths, development of caring communities and capacity building of the school and the community are important building blocks (Linley and Joseph 2004), These in turn link with the Life Orientation curriculum of the Department of Education (Department of Basic Education 2012) in which the teaching of values is given prominence.
It can therefore be argued that the restorative approach is compatible with present approaches used in schools and can be used as a starting point to address challenging behaviour in South African schools as is done already in several schools overseas. In this article the international implementation of restorative practices is discussed and the recent implementation of the restorative philosophy in South Africa also briefly addressed.
Due to the fact that this article aimed at establishing an alternative (or complementary) approach to address disciplinary problems in schools, the bulk of it covers the relevancy of the implementation of these restorative practices and focuses especially on elements that should be included in such a school programme. It investigates the whole-school approach of restorative practices of Morrison (2005) in which the pro- and reactive nature of addressing behavioural problems is discussed.
Proactive processes take place through capacity building via embedding of values, relationship building, the use of better communication, development of resilience and emotional intelligence of the learners, and are done on the primary level of the whole-school approach. At this level an attempt will be made to establish support systems and parental involvement within the schools’ activities in general. At this primary level it will also be important to use and teach facilitation skills to assist learners and educators to deal with disciplinary issues (Johnstone and Van Ness 2007). Unfortunately behaviour cannot be dealt with only in a proactive manner and therefore the skills gained on this level will be used at the secondary level of the whole-school approach.
The secondary level of the whole-school approach is reactive and addresses defiant behaviour when it occurs. Most importantly the relationships that are influenced by the misbehaviour must be restored in the classroom (Morrison and Vaandering 2011). This can be done by informal circles (Morrison and Vaandering 2011), restorative discussions (Warren and Williams 2007), classroom conferences (Wachtel 2012) and using the Circle of Hope as an assessment model (Coetzee 2012). These processes will contribute to addressing the discipline issues and must be used concurrently. If all these avenues were used and the problem with the behaviour of a learner is still not solved, the process moves to the intense tertiary level of the whole-school approach.
At this tertiary level, behaviour of a very serious nature is handled in the form of a restorative conference in which a broader group of people will be included to discuss the problem and try to find a solution. Everyone who was/is influenced by the behaviour gets the opportunity to share their pain and how the behaviour contributed to damage in the respective relationships (Morrison and Vaandering 2011). Different avenues are then investigated to restore the relationships. The Circle of Hope can be used to assess why the perpetrator acted in this way and a strategy can then be put in place to support him/her to stop the destructive behaviour. To use these approaches constructively it is important that the school should fully integrate this into its practices.
When schools compile a programme in which the different elements of the restorative approach are integrated, it will be important first to orientate the school management team and educators. The necessary training in the restorative approach – and especially ways and means to use the proactive and reactive approaches to address discipline problems in the school – should then follow.
These approaches will have to be revised and tailor-made to suit the nature of each school and community, and then only can a specific programme for a school be developed. The programme should be monitored after implementation and adapted as necessary. Hopefully the internalisation of values, the development of emotional intelligence and resilience, the use of restorative language, the establishment of healthy relationships and the creation of caring school communities will eventually not only address discipline problems, but also contribute to developing caring communities in the long term.
Keywords: building of relationships; caring environments; discipline; restorative justice; restorative justice approach; restorative practices; values
Kommentaar
Interesting information and will be helpful because I work with learners with profound behaviour challenges.