Ripple Community Inc. (RCI) is not the first or last grass roots urban organization to examine the value and attempt to integrate restorative practices in places of stress, struggle and disconnection. There have been numerous studies, both qualitative and quantitative research, that have applied these principles with varied success. This week I will look at a few articles and a short book and assess if there could be any application or direction for RCI to proceed, as we evaluate our summer 6-week restorative practice (RP) and chart our course for the future.
Walker (2009) uses the restorative circle as a means of reintegrating incarcerated men into the community in an attempt to promote desistance from crime. A key point in the intervention of this study involves rescripting of the subject’s story, not a focus on blame but that they “hold themselves responsible for the solution to the problems” (p.423). The reader is reminded that for successful reintegration people need a functional role in the community. I believe that this is one of the keys to RCI’s commitment to restorative practice (RP) –people need a function and purpose in community. The restorative circles had a powerful impact on those involved as people examined their strengths and had these qualities affirmed by those around them. The study was not focused on why the participants stayed crime free, but rather how. The study does not claim an experimental reduction in desistance but it indicates a clear increase in feelings of hope and optimism for the participants in the process.
Swanson, Culliver and Summers (2007) examined the use of creating a faith-based community within a community in a maximum-security prison. The structure involved using circles for self-governance and provided rehabilitation based on increasing trust, accountability, and values based structure between inmates and officers. Again, no clear data indicated the model’s success in desistance but rather an overall improved climate of purpose and belonging for inmates and higher “functioning” rating by prison officials.
Smith and Ross (2007) conducted a study that applied “mediation principles.” Training for parents was done on the principles of fair practice, discussing “what happened,” sharing feelings, and brainstorming possible alternative outcomes as parents intervened with their families of siblings ages 5-10. This study was designed to instruct the parents on mediation skills, and was focused on reducing sibling disputes. Extensive qualitative data collection and analyses indicated a significant increase in desirable resolutions and positive behavioral outcomes relating to sibling conflicts when mediation was applied. This study indicates not only the effectiveness of the application of mediation practices similar to RP, but that the methods and instruction does not have to be carried out by “professionals,” but can be effectively trained and managed by participants in the natural settings.
Expanding the idea that RP is applicable not just among the professionals or those with more education is examined in Rader’s (2008) qualitative report that encourages an increase in “public space where oppressed and privileged people come together in conscious ways, to rebalance power relations and work together for social justice”(p.131). It is Rader’s belief that faith based organizations can build democracy, solidarity and understanding, rather than be a source of derision. The report details the Center for New Creation as it attempts to bring alternate possibilities and help people of differing races, incomes, educational backgrounds and genders to “struggle more authentically with the complexities” of community. New Creation found ways to work at honesty, and being in tension with each other rather than denying the differences. Some of the principles that were built on included seeing life through new lenses, respecting all people’s capabilities, taking time for self-reflection, and building on a collaborative approach. The outcome was one of a process of recognizing that all people are different and interconnected. The Center for New Creation finds that the biggest challenge and opportunity in their work is in the act of listening. In the Dialogue for Difficult Subjects (Schirch & Campt, 2007) a similar finding is in the focus on listening that moves to a meaningful dialogue – that results in improved by communication patterns, collective analysis and, finally, options for collaborative action.
I have found inspiration, affirmation and challenges as I read through the research. I believe that the overwhelming amount of research supports the direction that RCI is moving in, engaging with a diverse group of people to instruct, explore and experience RP in an urban context. The research points to not only increased hope and satisfaction among people who apply and participate in these principles, but the changes in pro-social actions and decrease in social tension. The work is not easy and more research is needed, especially in replicable and sustainable RP training and implementation. The small successes that RCI experienced this summer came as we attempted to create two-way communication- listening and speaking, telling our stories, and listening to others’ stories. This vulnerability created human connections and brought balance into social, economic and political power, as we shared fellowship and accountability. I believe that the community that existed was a place that brought new possibilities towards reconnection and mutuality.
How do we move forward from here? Rader (2008) reminds us that it is much more than good intentions. It takes “developing a culture of relationship, a caring about differences and a sense of collective empowerment and responsibility.” I would be interested in your thoughts, ideas and suggestions. Thanks for sticking with me through this journey. Tom
Rader, V. (2008). Restoring right relations among privileged and poor people: a case
study of the center for new creation. Contemporary Justice Review. 11, 31 153.
Schirch, L. & Campt D. (2007). Dialogue for difficult subjects, a practical, hands-on
guide. Intercourse, PA: Good Books.
Swanson, C., Culliver, G. & Summers, C. (2007). Creating a faith-based restorative
justice community in a maximum security prison. Corrections Today. 69, 667.
Smith, J. & Ross, H. (2007). Training parents to mediate sibling disputes affects
children’s negotiation and conflict understanding. Child Development. 78, 790-805.
Walker, L. (2009). Modified restorative circles: a reintegration group planning
process that promotes desistance. Contemporary Justice Review. 12, 419-431.
Walker (2009) uses the restorative circle as a means of reintegrating incarcerated men into the community in an attempt to promote desistance from crime. A key point in the intervention of this study involves rescripting of the subject’s story, not a focus on blame but that they “hold themselves responsible for the solution to the problems” (p.423). The reader is reminded that for successful reintegration people need a functional role in the community. I believe that this is one of the keys to RCI’s commitment to restorative practice (RP) –people need a function and purpose in community. The restorative circles had a powerful impact on those involved as people examined their strengths and had these qualities affirmed by those around them. The study was not focused on why the participants stayed crime free, but rather how. The study does not claim an experimental reduction in desistance but it indicates a clear increase in feelings of hope and optimism for the participants in the process.
Swanson, Culliver and Summers (2007) examined the use of creating a faith-based community within a community in a maximum-security prison. The structure involved using circles for self-governance and provided rehabilitation based on increasing trust, accountability, and values based structure between inmates and officers. Again, no clear data indicated the model’s success in desistance but rather an overall improved climate of purpose and belonging for inmates and higher “functioning” rating by prison officials.
Smith and Ross (2007) conducted a study that applied “mediation principles.” Training for parents was done on the principles of fair practice, discussing “what happened,” sharing feelings, and brainstorming possible alternative outcomes as parents intervened with their families of siblings ages 5-10. This study was designed to instruct the parents on mediation skills, and was focused on reducing sibling disputes. Extensive qualitative data collection and analyses indicated a significant increase in desirable resolutions and positive behavioral outcomes relating to sibling conflicts when mediation was applied. This study indicates not only the effectiveness of the application of mediation practices similar to RP, but that the methods and instruction does not have to be carried out by “professionals,” but can be effectively trained and managed by participants in the natural settings.
Expanding the idea that RP is applicable not just among the professionals or those with more education is examined in Rader’s (2008) qualitative report that encourages an increase in “public space where oppressed and privileged people come together in conscious ways, to rebalance power relations and work together for social justice”(p.131). It is Rader’s belief that faith based organizations can build democracy, solidarity and understanding, rather than be a source of derision. The report details the Center for New Creation as it attempts to bring alternate possibilities and help people of differing races, incomes, educational backgrounds and genders to “struggle more authentically with the complexities” of community. New Creation found ways to work at honesty, and being in tension with each other rather than denying the differences. Some of the principles that were built on included seeing life through new lenses, respecting all people’s capabilities, taking time for self-reflection, and building on a collaborative approach. The outcome was one of a process of recognizing that all people are different and interconnected. The Center for New Creation finds that the biggest challenge and opportunity in their work is in the act of listening. In the Dialogue for Difficult Subjects (Schirch & Campt, 2007) a similar finding is in the focus on listening that moves to a meaningful dialogue – that results in improved by communication patterns, collective analysis and, finally, options for collaborative action.
I have found inspiration, affirmation and challenges as I read through the research. I believe that the overwhelming amount of research supports the direction that RCI is moving in, engaging with a diverse group of people to instruct, explore and experience RP in an urban context. The research points to not only increased hope and satisfaction among people who apply and participate in these principles, but the changes in pro-social actions and decrease in social tension. The work is not easy and more research is needed, especially in replicable and sustainable RP training and implementation. The small successes that RCI experienced this summer came as we attempted to create two-way communication- listening and speaking, telling our stories, and listening to others’ stories. This vulnerability created human connections and brought balance into social, economic and political power, as we shared fellowship and accountability. I believe that the community that existed was a place that brought new possibilities towards reconnection and mutuality.
How do we move forward from here? Rader (2008) reminds us that it is much more than good intentions. It takes “developing a culture of relationship, a caring about differences and a sense of collective empowerment and responsibility.” I would be interested in your thoughts, ideas and suggestions. Thanks for sticking with me through this journey. Tom
Rader, V. (2008). Restoring right relations among privileged and poor people: a case
study of the center for new creation. Contemporary Justice Review. 11, 31 153.
Schirch, L. & Campt D. (2007). Dialogue for difficult subjects, a practical, hands-on
guide. Intercourse, PA: Good Books.
Swanson, C., Culliver, G. & Summers, C. (2007). Creating a faith-based restorative
justice community in a maximum security prison. Corrections Today. 69, 667.
Smith, J. & Ross, H. (2007). Training parents to mediate sibling disputes affects
children’s negotiation and conflict understanding. Child Development. 78, 790-805.
Walker, L. (2009). Modified restorative circles: a reintegration group planning
process that promotes desistance. Contemporary Justice Review. 12, 419-431.