The Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing: A DisCrit Analysis of the Enduring Nature of Carceral Logics within Restorative Justice

• In Event: Exclusionary Practices and Reparative Pathways at the Intersection of Disability and Race

Abstract

Carceral logics in schools are defined as the institutional preoccupation with control of students’ bodies and behaviors over all (Rudolph, 2023). Specifically, the disproportionate policing of racialized and disabled bodies fuels institutional subordination of bodyminds deemed deviant (Annamma, 2018; Broderick & Leonardo, 2016). Restorative justice (RJ) is a philosophical approach that shifts institutional focus away from individual infractions to one that contends with the relational harm and community-based approaches for repair (Evans & Vandering, 2016). However, without systemic, critical contention with how power structures draw on racialized ableism, the anti-carceral potential of RJ’s implementation may be neutralized (O’Brian & Nygree, 2020). We conducted a narrative analysis of district RJ implementation policies in five Western states to understand the ways in which district RJ policies enable and/or limit the anti-carceral potential of RJ for multiply-marginalized students.

Three theoretical frameworks guided our study. Disability Critical Race Theory (DisCrit) focused us on the intractable relationship of racism and ableism in co-constructing dominant notions of normalcy (Annamma et al., 2013). The Restorative Justice in Education (RJE) framework (Evans & Vaandering, 2016) is the adaptation of RJ for schools, and provided our study with a frame for examining anti-carceral approaches to RJ and to what extent districts are utilizing these tools. Carceral logics in education (Rudolph, 2023) layered our interpretations to understand how ableism and racism work together to uphold carcerality.

We sampled all public districts in 5 US states (California, Idaho, Oregon, Nevada and Washington), to identify a state-representative percentage of students of Color (N=542). We employed a narrative analysis of district websites (Josselson, 2014). Data sources included: (1) district and school Restorative Justice Plans; (2) student and parent handbooks; (3) district and school disciplinary policies; (4) school board and district meeting notes; and (4) RJ professional development resources.
We created a typography of district implementation of RJ using our conceptual framework as our guide (Ravitch & Riggan, 2012). Our categories included: (1) social justice oriented; (2) social justice oriented and disability acknowledged, (3) disability acknowledged; (4) integrated support systems; (5) carceral in the name of RJ. Overall, we noted the silence around disability in RJ approaches (Annamma & Winn, 2019); dissonance between the emancipatory aims of RJ and the race evasive and behaviorist roots of Positive Behavior and Integrated Supports (Calais & Green, 2022); and the appropriation of RJ to reinforce and sustain carceral logics (O’Brian & Nygree, 2020).

Our research corroborates extant research revealing a lack of systemic support from the district level for educators to disrupt carceral logics (Beneke et al., 2024) and implement RJ in humanizing ways (Kulkarni & Chong, 2021). While the co-opting of RJ in the name of carceral logics is not new, our study adds to the limited knowledge base around the intersection of racism and ableism within RJ (Kervick et al., 2019). In doing so, our study helps scholars understand social processes and constraints at the district level that contribute to the hyper-surveillance of students’ racialized and disabled bodyminds to invoke violence on multiply-marginalized students and impede the anti-carceral potential of RJ.

Authors

• Molly Elizabeth Siuty, Temple University

• Shanté Stuart McQueen, Portland State University