Discipline Practices in Schools

Discipline Practices in Schools: Interrupting the “School-to-Prison Pipeline” and Implementing Restorative Practices

What’s the Problem?

When school discipline practices depend on punitive and exclusionary practices that remove a child from the classroom such as suspension and expulsion, they reduce a child’s educational opportunities and may prevent their healthy reintegration into the school community.   These practices contribute to poor academic achievement, reduce graduation and employment rates, and can significantly increase the chance a child will spend time in juvenile detention or adult prison during their lifetime.

Punitive and exclusionary discipline practices have historically been used disproportionately on children of disadvantaged backgrounds and children of color.  The slippery slope from school discipline to adult prison has been called the “school-to-prison pipeline” because it is so hard for a child to get back on the right track once they have started down this path.  It is also the case that a classroom management style that depends on threats of punishment can sap teachers’ energy and lead to higher rates of teacher turnover.

Maryland has one of the worst records for imprisoning children.  A 2023 comprehensive study of 45 states showed that 3% of individuals serving time in U.S. prisons were under 18 when they committed the crime that led to their imprisonment.  Sadly, Maryland is one of nine states with more than 1,000 prison inmates who are serving time for crimes they committed as children, and one of just four states where that group accounts for at least 6% of the prison population (twice the national average).  Maryland also has one of the largest racial disparities out of the 45 states whose data the study analyzed. More than 90% of the Maryland inmates incarcerated since childhood are people of color, and more than 80% are Black (The Mass Incarceration of Children in the US, 2023).  This is a particularly striking statistic given that only 31% of the Maryland population is Black.  A report by the Maryland General Assembly concluded that “the criminalization of relatively trivial student behavior … which might be a minor fistfight or something far less serious …  criminalized many children, especially youth of color, and contributed to the school-to-prison pipeline” (2018 Commission Report p.27).

What Can Help? Restorative Practices in Schools.

The Maryland General Assembly has recognized that our state has a serious problem with the school-to-prison pipeline.  In 2017, the Maryland General Assembly passed a bill (HB1287) requiring the creation of a committee to investigate the “School to Prison Pipeline. This committee carried out a 18-month study and produced an extensive report “The School-to-Prison Pipeline and Restorative Practices”.  They concluded that exclusionary discipline practices were counter-productive and that they should be replaced with “restorative approaches” in which students help to identify what they have done wrong, work with teachers, staff and other students to come up with ways to resolve problems and reduce future issues.

When using restorative practices the school community treats each person with respect and expects them to participate in creating a healthy school community.  “Restorative practices” consist of a specific group of activities designed to foster community building and support healthy conflict resolution.  One method used in some schools to implement Restorative Practices for conflict resolution is the use of a “Circle” for carrying out a conversation which identifies: “what happened?”, “who was affected and how?”, and “what can be done to address the harm and move on?”.  Such a circle could be used for school or family issues and can include a collection of students, teachers, staff, and parents. The circle is just one of many other tools that are encompassed under the restorative practice umbrella to encourage accountability and growth within a school’s culture.

As you will see below, restorative practices have a proven track record in reducing suspensions and expulsions,  improving educational outcomes for students and leading to more positive interactions of students, faculty, staff, and families.  It has also been shown, that training staff and students in restorative practices leads to a change is the school culture that reduces discipline issues.

Evidence for Effectiveness of Restorative Practices in Maryland

The restorative practices model has already been successfully implemented in some Maryland schools as a whole-school strategy designed to foster a sense of community and teach positive ways to deal with problems.  You can watch Principal Matt Hornbeck speaking on the success of restorative practices in his school on this video “Restorative Practices in Schools” by Principal Matt Hornbeck.  He gave this inspiring talk on “Restorative Practices in Schools” to the Juvenile Justice Team at MAJR.  Matt Hornbeck is introduced by his father David Hornbeck, former Maryland State Superintendent of Schools, founder of Strong Schools Maryland and founder of Voices for Restorative Schools Maryland.

Multiple Maryland school districts, including Baltimore County, Baltimore City, Anne Arundel, Howard, and Frederick, have begun the process of integrating restorative approaches into their school culture. One school in Howard County, The Homewood Center, began phasing in restorative practices in the 2011-2012 school year. Between the implementation of the restorative practices and the 2016-2017 school year, the Homewood Center saw a plethora of benefits. Some of these changes include: a 15% increase in attendance, a 74% decrease in office referrals, a 48% decrease in out-of-school suspensions, and a 48% decrease in dropouts. (2018 Commission Report p.34)

In Baltimore City specifically, there was a 44% decrease in suspensions between the 2017-2018 school year, which was the year restorative practices were first implemented and the 2018-2019 school year. Furthermore, 72% of teachers also reported an improved school climate (Open Society Institute-Baltimore, 2020).

Evidence for Benefits of Restorative Practices in Other States and Countries

Restorative Practices have been implemented broadly in the Oakland school system in California. One study looked into how restorative and non-restorative schools in Oakland compared (Restorative Justice in Oakland Schools, 2011). Oakland middle schools that began integrating restorative practices saw a 24.4% decrease in chronic absenteeism, while middle schools that did not implement restorative practices saw an increase. Restorative schools also saw a significant increase in the number of ninth graders able to read at grade level. This number more than doubled from 14% to 33%. Whereas, non-restorative schools only saw a slight increase. One final metric that was observed was graduation rates. Restorative schools had 60% more students graduating after implementing restorative practices, while non-restorative schools only saw a 7% increase in graduation rates.  Another two-year restorative practices program at a middle school in West Oakland saw a decrease in the average suspension rate and zero expulsions after implementation (Lessons from West Oakland, 2011).

The restorative practices implemented in Minnesota in the Restorative Conference Program (RCP) held students accountable for their misbehavior through group conferencing, and worked to integrate students back into the school after suspensions. It was important that, while the students were held responsible for repairing the harm they caused, they were also made aware that their actions did not make them irredeemable. After a two year period of using the RCP, schools in Minnesota saw a similar trend to Oakland. Attendance rates increased while suspension rates, expulsions rates, and serious offense rates all declined; 91% of students and 97% of family members who participated in the RCP and were interviewed said that they would recommend restorative approaches to a friend. (Applying Restorative Justice Practices to Minneapolis Public Schools, 2013)

In their article, Mind the Gap: A Systematic Review of Research on Restorative Practices in Schools, Brittany Zakszeski and Laura Rutherford compiled and reviewed 71 studies, which included 2,663 schools across nine countries, that researched restorative practices.

Although the studies they considered were hard to combine since they focused on various aspects with different metrics, a few examples from their compilation include:

  • One study that looked at four schools that implemented restorative practices and saw an increase in school safety and a decrease in school discipline (Mirsky, 2011b). One of these examined schools is located in Baltimore.
  • A San Diego elementary school that saw a significant decrease in incident referrals after implementing restorative practices (Ingraham et al., 2016).
  • A study in which high school students in New York “reported that the Fairness Committee [restorative practices] contributed to a safe and positive environment in which students who had felt marginalized found acceptance and were able to succeed” (Hantzopolous, 2013).

A Hong Kong study compared schools with and without restorative practices by looking at the amount of bullying incidents and student attitudes. After 15 months, schools that had implemented restorative practices saw an increase in positive attitudes, like caring behavior, harmony in school, and a sense of belonging. Schools that did not implement restorative practices exhibited more negative attitudes, like hurting others and lacking empathy. Additionally, restorative schools saw that almost 50% of students previously engaging in bullying behavior decreased this behavior. Non-restorative schools saw an increase in their students bullying others. (Wong, 2011)

Similar benefits showing reduced bullying, aggression, theft, and misbehavior also were reported in studies in the UK and Canada. (Porter, 2007, pp. 1-3; Lewis, 2009, pp. 22, 27-31)

School cultures shifted as schools implemented restorative practices and provided problem resolution mechanisms within an expectation of mutual respect.  One of the most striking and interesting effects of the shift was that teachers reported less insubordination and defiance by students. For example, after implementing restorative practices, one Oakland, California school saw a 40% decrease in the suspension of black students for “willful defiance” (2018 Commission Report p.37).

Why is it Important to Change the Whole School Culture?

Restorative practices have been shown to create strong, positive community spirit in schools which improves the experience for students and teachers and increases retention. Research has shown that restorative practices are particularly impactful when they are implemented as a whole school strategy which changes the culture of a school.  This change reduces the number of discipline issues in the class.  Studies have shown a decrease in the amount of bullying and insubordination.  Bullying decreases when students have access to conflict resolution within the school and learn habits of mutual respect.

Perceived insubordination and “willful defiance” of students to teachers decreases when students and teachers have been involved in a framework that teaches mutual respect and conflict resolution skills.  This drop in “insubordination” is a significant factor in reducing discipline problems.  A national study found that without restorative practices, 43% of all serious discipline cases were reported to be caused by “insubordination” (Digest of Education, 2013, Table 233.10).

In Pennsylvania, six schools began using restorative practices and saw an decrease in disruptive behavior, detentions, suspensions, and expulsions, but on top of that, whole school’s experienced culture shifts like the one described below by an Assistant Principal from Newton Middle School:

“Restorative practices have changed the feeling and culture here. Now it’s like a family setting. Everyone asks for help and helps others. This has come about through a conscious effort on our part to build community. Out of 900 kids we suspended only five this year. We used to have two days a week of detention, now we have only one. This has been a financial boon. Our school is no different than any other. Kids are far more likely to behave due to relationships than out of fear.” (Improving School Climate, Evidence from Schools Implementing Restorative Practices, 2014)

Denver schools that implemented restorative practices not only looked at disciplinary and behavioral statistics, which all improved, but also examined how the students dealt with personal and social situations. They found that almost half of all students reported having more positive moods and that they felt more confident in being able to navigate social emotional demands. Over half reported an increase in stress management skills. (Baker, 2009, pg.12)

What Progress has Maryland Made So Far in Establishing Restorative Practices in Schools.

In May 2019, the Maryland General Assembly passed legislation (bill 725) directing the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) to provide significant support to Maryland schools in the implementation of restorative approaches. This includes “technical assistance and training to county boards regarding the use of restorative approaches” as well as assistance to “each county board with the implementation of the guidelines.”

The MSDE and the Center for Dispute Resolution at the University of Maryland (C-DRUM) are collaborating to increase the capacity of school districts around the state to implement restorative approaches to discipline (Maryland Department of Education on Restorative Approaches). The website for C-DRUM has links to dozens of information in categories including: research, training, and general information.

In 2020, the Maryland General Assembly passed a sweeping education reform called the Blueprint for Maryland’s Future (HB1300 / SB1000) which includes providing access to restorative practices coaches in schools that are in areas of concentrated poverty, and providing new teachers with training in restorative approaches.  Although this bill was passed in 2020, it was vetoed by Governor Hogan at the end of the session, so Maryland needed to wait for a veto override to be passed at the beginning of the 2021 session by the General Assembly.  One of the components of this bill was to create “Community Schools” in areas of concentrated poverty which would provide “wrap around” services.  The criteria for concentrated poverty in the first year of implementation is that at least 80% of students were eligible for free or reduced price meals. The criteria becomes more inclusive in subsequent years of the implementation, so that by 2025 the criteria for “concentrated poverty” is that at least 55% of students be eligible for free or reduced price meals. As well as additional restorative practices coaches, “Wraparound services” (Section § 9.9–101) include: extended learning time; safe transportation; health, vision, dental, and care services; social workers and counselors; training for staff in trauma-informed interventions; healthy food support (in and out of school); family and community engagement efforts; and linking parents to increased opportunities for early childhood education feeding into the school.  Additionally it was specified that trainings for new teachers include instruction on “implementation of restorative approaches for student behaviors.”

What Are the Next Steps?

In 2024, in order to robustly establish restorative practices in Maryland schools, a bill was proposed to provide a restorative practices coach to every school (to be phased in over a period of 10 years) (HB1257/SB0917). During committee discussions, there was strong support for implementing restorative practices, however, the committee was concerned that the bill would not be able to pass due to funding issues created by Maryland’s huge structural deficit. The bill was changed in the House committee to say that the Department of Education would be charged with creating a plan to phase in restorative practices coaches for all schools in the state (Amended version of HB1257).  This would delay the debate on funding until there was an implementation plan.  The amended bill passed with an impressive majority of 128 to 6 in the Maryland House of Delegates.  The bill did not get a chance for a senate vote due to the legislature’s focus on the collapse of the Key Bridge.  MAJR supports the introduction and passing of a restorative practices implementation bill in 2025.

MAJR is strongly interested in advocating for restorative practices in Maryland schools, starting with those schools with the greatest need in communities with concentrated poverty, and eventually expanding to all Maryland schools.  If you would like to become involved with the grassroots effort to advocate for these changes we recommend you contact an organization we have allied with on this issue, Voices for Restorative Schools Maryland.  They are forming small teams, “circles of ten,” that will work in their local community and join in state-wide letter writing and state legislative advocacy.

Testimonies in favor of the 2024 bill can be seen here: the House on February 28th and the Senate on March 6th (there were no testimonies in opposition to the bill in the hearings).

Some other organizations that are supporting the bill to give each Maryland school a restorative practices coach are: Maryland State Education Association, Baltimore Teachers Union, the NAACP State Conference, the Caucus of African American Leaders, the Maryland Education Coalition, Maryland Alliance for Justice Reform, Maryland Public Defender’s Office, Maryland Education Coalition, Maryland Out of School Time Network, the ACLU, Center for Dispute Resolution at the University of MD Law School.  The Maryland State Superintendent of Schools, while having to maintain an official neutrality, testified in person strongly in favor of restorative practices as a priority.

References and Sources of More Information

  1. Maryland Commission on the School-to-Prison Pipeline and Restorative Practices (2018) Final Report And Collaborative Action Plan Final report and collaborative action plan.
  2. US Department of Education, 2013 Digest of Education Statistics
  6. Restorative Practices Working Group. (2014, March) Restorative Practices: Fostering healthy relationships and promoting positive discipline in schools – A Guide for Educators. Advancement Project, American Federation of Teachers, National Education Association, and Scott Foundation for Public Education.
  8. Video: Stories Matter Media. (2017). Restorative Welcome and Re-entry Circle Filmed at Bunche High School in Oakland, this video conveys the critical importance of re-integration when a student has been removed, in this case returning from prison. The film was made in collaboration by Oakland Unified School District and Restorative Justice for Oakland Youth. (14 minutes)
  9. Video: Edutopia. (2014, July 4). Using dialogue circles to support classroom management [Video]. YouTube.
    The video provides a brief example of dialogue circles at Glenview Elementary School in a diverse population in Oakland, California. The teacher demonstrates how she uses mindfulness to begin circles. This segment includes students collaborating to resolve conflict around issues such as bullying. (4:04 minutes)
  11. Muhammad, A-M. (2021, May 4). Restorative Approaches: From Reform to Real Social Justice [Webinar]. YouTube. (49 minutes). Presented by the Maryland Restorative Approaches Collaborative and featuring Dr. Abdul-Malik Muhammad, founder Akoben LLD and Transforming Lives, Inc. the interactive presentation focuses on building restorative practices that transform school systems rather than replicating the existing power dynamics. Dr. Muhammad emphasizes the necessity to revolutionize this work, especially in service to building just systems and dismantling punitive systems that harm students, especially students of color.
  12. Skiba, R. J. & Losen, D. J. (Winter 2015-2016). From reaction to prevention: turning the page on school discipline. American Educator.
  13. Wachtel, T. (2013). Defining Restorative. International Institute for Restorative Practices.
  14. Steven, J. E. (2012, April 23). Lincoln High School in Walla Walla, WA, tries new approach to school discipline. ACES Too High News.
  15. Mirsky, L., (2011, May 26). Restorative practices: Whole-School change to build safer, saner school communities. IIRP News.
  16. Ingraham, C. L., Hokoda, A., Moehlenbruck, D., Karafin, M., Manzo, C., & Ramirez, D. (2016). Consultation and collaboration to develop and implement restorative practices in a culturally and linguistically diverse elementary school. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 26(4), 354–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/10474412.2015.1124782
  17. Hantzopoulos, M. (2014, June 4). (2013) The Fairness Committee: Restorative justice in a small urban public high school. The Prevention Researcher.
  18. Riestenberg, N. (2008). Applying the framework: Positive youth development and restorative practices. Journal of Youth Development, 3(1).
  20. Lewis, S. (2014). Improving school climate, evidence from schools implementing restorative practices. International Institute for Restorative Practices.
  21. McMorris, B. J., Beckman, K. J., Shea, G., Baumgartner, J., & Eggert, R. C. (2013, December). Applying restorative practices to Minneapolis Public Schools students recommended for possible expulsion: A pilot program evaluation of the family and youth restorative conference program.
  22.  Open Society Institute-Baltimore & Baltimore city Public Schools. (2018). Baltimore City Public Schools restorative practices report.
  23. House Bill 1287. An Act Concerning Commission on the School-to-Prison Pipeline and Restorative Practices, Maryland General Assembly, Approved by the Governor (May 25, 2017).
  24. House Bill 725. Public Schools-Student Discipline-Restorative Approaches. Maryland General Assembly, Approved by the Governor (May 25, 2019).
  25. Grochal, B. S., & Drew, C. (2021, April 28). Engaging leadership, building infrastructure to support restorative approaches. YouTube. The one hour virtual chat provides local school system and school leaders with information regarding what is needed to build infrastructure to support restorative approaches in Maryland schools.
  26. Grochal, B. S., & Drew, C. (2021, April 14). Why Restorative Approaches? YouTube. (1 hour 30 minutes). The program highlights the reasoning “Why Restorative Approaches” makes sense for Maryland schools today. The discussion considers brain research, special needs students, alignment with tiered systems of supports and SEL, and disproportionality.
  27. McNair, R., & C-DRUM. (2021, March 30). The restorative classroom and beyond. YouTube. With Robin McNair, restorative approaches coordinator for Prince George’s County Public Schools.
  28. Thorsborne, M. & C-DRUM. (2021, February 23). The stickiness factor: Embedding restorative practices in school communities. YouTube. International expert Marg Thorsborne discusses the challenges of committing to and sustaining a schoolwide restorative climate.
  29. Eisenberg, D. T., Smith, A. W., Webber, K., & Hornbeck, M. (2020, November 18). Building a restorative school district: A discussion of lessons from recent research. YouTube. Featuring C-DRUM’s Deborah Thompson Eisenberg and Anastasia Watson Smith along with Karen Webber, Director of Education and Youth Development, Open Society Institute-Baltimore, and Matt Hornbeck, Principal, Hampstead Hill Academy.
  30. Catania, P., & C-DRUM. (2020, November 10). Using a restorative practice mindset to positively impact school culture. YouTube. Educator and expert Phil Catania discusses his successful approach to fostering relationships in schools.
  31. Yusem, D., & C-DRUM. (2020, December 1). Restorative practices for effective youth engagement. YouTube. National leader in conflict resolution and restorative practices, David Yusem discusses the essential importance of student participation in restorative practices implementation and the organizational structure adopted by the Oakland Unified School District.
  32. Grochal, B. S., & Drew, C., (2020, December 15). MSDE and C-DRUM restorative approaches collaborative launch. YouTube. MSDE announces the collaboration with C-DRUM in promoting restorative approaches in Maryland schools.
  33. Fong, L., & Kugbo, L. (2018, June 9). Schools Resolve Conflicts By Getting Kids To Talk Things Out. PBS News Hour Weekend. This video highlights the positive impact some New York City Schools are seeing with restorative justice. (7:46 minutes)
  34. C-DRUM. (2017, September 20). Restorative approaches to school conflict management. YouTube. C-DRUM partnered with Callaway Elementary School in western Baltimore City in the implementation of restorative practices. The focus was in providing teachers and administrators with conflict management strategies designed to increase student engagement in school, lower suspensions and expulsions, and improve overall school climate. This project was generally funded by the Charles Crane Family Foundation. (7:11 minutes).
  35. Wide Angle Productions. (n.d.). Second chances: school profiles. Vimeo. A video highlighting the successful implementaiton of restorative practices in Baltimore’s City Springs Elementary-Middle School. (10:43 minutes).
  36. Wide Angle Productions. (n.d.). Second chances: Robert Murphy intro. Vimeo. A video describing Maryland’s adoption of a new disciplinary policy to reduce suspensions, featuring Robert Murphy, MSDE School Completion Speacialist (4:12 minutes).
  37. Pierson, R. (2013, May). Every kid needs a champion. TED Talks: Education.
    A dynamic Ted talk featuring Rita Pierson, career educator. Ms. Pierson emphasizes the importance of adult-student relationships in successful education environments. (7:35 minutes).
  38. International Institute for Restorative Practices Graduate School. (2009, May 6). From hostility to harmony. A group of teenage girls in Albany, New York, had recently fought each other in a violent brawl. The International Institute for Restorative Practices videotaped a facilitated restorative circle involving the girls (friends since childhood), their family members and supporters. This short film telescopes the remarkable transformation that takes place as all individuals in the circle are given a chance to freely express their feelings about what happened between them. (4:30 minutes).
  39. Freeman, C. (2011, May 27). Introducing restorative justice for Oakland youth.YouTube.
    The nonprofit organization Restorative Justice for Oakland Youth underscores the shift from punitive to restorative in this segment focused on urban high school youth at McClymonds High School in Oakland. (7:40 minutes).
  40.  Central Michigan Restorative Justice. (2008, September  Restorative justice introduction. YouTube.
    Overview of the circle. When a high school football player in Lansing, Michigan finds himself in a serious conflict, restorative conferencing provides a mechanism all concerned to address accountability, empathy, respect and justice. (5:45 minutes).
  41. Central Michigan Restorative Justice. (2009, July 21). Restorative justice: It’s elementary. YouTube.
    This video contrasts a punitive approach to a restorative approach at the elementary level in Lansing, Michigan, with an emphasis on developing social emotional skills. (5:23 minutes).
  42. Restorative Justice Colorado. (2010, October 19). Restorative Justice (RJ) in schools. YouTube.
    When a student has money stolen from her locker, a restorative conference is used to provide a means of productively addressing the conflict at Montebello High School, Colorado. The data reflects a reduction in suspension and expulsion rates by 30% through Restorative Justice. (6:36 minutes).
  43. Restorative Resources. (2013, April 19). Restorative justice in schools. YouTube. School suspensions and RJ have different messages and focus. Video about building relationships, teachers talking, mixed with facts in power point. High School students talking about their experiences and the different outcomes – focus on healing and accountability. (10:46 minutes).
  44. San Francisco Unified School District. Restorative practices: Student voices. YouTube. San Francisco Unified School District has rolled out a District-wide implementation of Restorative Practices in dozens of schools. Restorative Practices is based on the assumption that students respond better when things are done WITH them rather than TO them. Students, of a broad range of ages, exposed to Restorative Practices reflect on how they feel regarding the use of Restorative Circle in the classroom. (3:57 minutes).
  45. International Institute for Restorative Practices Graduate School. (2009, June 25). The transformation of West Philadelphia High School: A story of hope.YouTube. Teachers and students talk about their experiences and the great results using RJ circles. This video includes interviews with staff and students of West Philadelphia High School, which was on Pennsylvania’s “Persistently Dangerous Schools” list for six years, but has improved immensely, due to strong administrative leadership and the implementation of restorative practices. (9:04 minutes).
  46. Baltimore City Public Schools. (2018). School climate. Vimeo. This video highlights Baltimore County Public School’s work in introducing restorative practices in their school communities. (3:09 minutes).
  47. Henry, M. (2015). Out-of-School Suspension in Maryland Public Schools, 2008-2014. [Policy brief]. Maryland Equity Project.
  48. Bouchein, M. (2015, August). School-to-Prison pipeline: A comparison in discipline policy between Maryland and Texas public schools. [Policy brief]. Maryland Equity Project.
  51. Jain, S., Bassey, H. ,Brown, M. and Kalra, P. (2014). Restorative Justice in Oakland Schools: Implementation and Impacts.
  54. Wong, D., Cheng, C., Ngan, R. & Ma, S. (2011). Program effectiveness of a restorative whole school approach for tackling school bullying in Hong Kong. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. 55(6): 846-862.
  57. Darling-Hammond, S. (2024, January 9). Fostering belonging, transforming schools: The impact of restorative practices. Learning Policy Institute.