Implementation of Restorative Practices: A Mixed-Methods Study of Michigan Districts

• In Event: Disrupting Discipline: An In-Depth Examination of Restorative Practices’ Impacts and Implementation

Abstract

There is growing public concern about the negative effects of exclusionary discipline practices and the disproportionate rate at which students of color are subjected to them. Accordingly, states and districts have tried to lower suspensions through various actions, including adopting restorative practices (RP). Michigan has joined other states in codifying RP into law by requiring school officials to consider using RP in disciplinary decisions (H.B. 5619, 2016). Because of this state law and the growing evidence on RP, many Michigan districts are implementing RP.

While evidence on the effectiveness of RP has become increasingly robust, fewer studies examine how RP is implemented and which contextual factors shape the uptake of a restorative approach. This paper draws on a research-practice partnership between the researchers and four districts in Michigan implementing RP using a commercially-available curriculum. We analyze survey data from educators and students, and qualitative interview data from district and school staff collected in the 2022-23 school year to answer the following research questions:
1) What are districts hoping to achieve by adopting RP?
2) To what extent do educators report using RP, and how does their use vary across school and teacher characteristics?
3) What are students’ perceptions of RP use and how do these align with those of educators?
4) How do district and school conditions, organizational context and characteristics shape the use of RP?

We use a multi-phase convergent mixed methods design to answer these questions (Creswell & Plano-Clark, 2018), where phases of data collection and analysis were sequentially ordered. The convergent approach enables direct comparisons between data sources to obtain a more complete understanding of RP implementation. We descriptively analyze survey data using correlations and t-tests and use qualitative coding techniques and case study write-ups to analyze interview data. Our analysis is guided by several perspectives related to policy implementation, including capacity (Marsh, 2002), policy cohesion (Coburn et al., 2012), and leadership (Honig, 2006).

Preliminary results indicate that district leaders adopt RP for many reasons, including compliance with the state mandate. Others became interested in adopting RP after recognizing the negative effects and racially disparate use of exclusionary discipline. Survey results suggest substantial variation across districts and by school level in how frequently educators reported using elements of RP, and while students agree educators use RP, they disagree the practices reduce conflict and build community. Qualitative results suggest that clear expectations and a whole-school approach encourage the use of proactive elements. Furthermore, educators who more frequently reported using RP found that it aligned with pre-existing practices (e.g., discipline procedures). Finally, insufficient time for RP and student attitudes towards it were the most widely reported hindrances to effective implementation.

Our results elucidate what happens once district leaders commit to implementing RP, including their reasons for adoption, how frequently their educators reported using these practices, and how factors enable or constrain their use. These findings also potentially contextualize results from impact analyses of RP, as they suggest which mechanisms might help RP achieve its intended goals

Authors

• Tasminda Dhaliwal, Michigan State University

• Kaitlin Anderson, American Institutes for Research

• Jerome Graham, Michigan State University

• Dasmen Richards, Michigan State University

• Yi-Chih Chiang, Michigan State University