Once again, society witnesses an episode of extreme violence in an educational centre. The sequence repeats itself: a young man bursts in with a gun, leaving corpses in his wake in the cruelest of ways. It was in Uvalde, Texas, with Salvador Ramos as the perpetrator of 21 deaths. There is one more element that is reiterated in this succession, and that is that Ramos was bullied at school, as were previous perpetrators of similar situations.
​
Beyond the recurring debate on access to guns in the United States, this appalling event, far removed from European parameters, nevertheless raises a number of questions. For example, the consequences for the victim of bullying, for the bully, for the perpetrator, for those who assist the bully and for those who passively witness these episodes. Also, the difficulty of establishing that certain events actually constitute bullying.

"It is a complicated matter," admits Antonio Jiménez, a guidance counsellor at IES San Sebastián de Huelva and author of a thesis on this complex subject. For Jiménez, "it is a group problem rather than an individual one, which spreads like the layers of an onion" and which is difficult to "diagnose correctly". In reference to other problems in the school environment, the counsellor explains that, for example, "absenteeism is objective", since a limit is established for unjustified absences.

The protocol for action in cases of bullying (Order of 20 June 2011) establishes several characteristics for identifying cases. These are that there is an intention to harm, that it is repeated over time and that there is a real or imaginary imbalance of strength or power between people, "the aggressor knows that with impunity he can attack and the victim is unable to oppose, he teaches him to be a victim". A process, he points out, similar to the victimisation and annulment that occurs in gender violence.

Others are helplessness and personalisation. Mª Ángeles Sánchez, head of the Educational Psychology group of the Huelva Delegation of the Official College of Psychology of Western Andalusia, explains that this helplessness is "learned" and causes the victim to think "I can't defend myself and I don't do anything", in addition to the fact that the attacks target a specific person. She also points out that there is usually more than one aggressor, as well as the existence of passive observers who do not contribute to the cessation of the aggression.

When should the scales be raised? There are worrying elements such as "being a loner, being teased, having things disappear, not liking playtime or being afraid of situations in which they are not observed under adult supervision", says Antonio Jiménez. Sánchez also points out signs such as "fear of going out alone in the street, crying because they don't want to go to school, low self-esteem or sudden poor school performance" and even physical symptoms such as headaches or stomach aches.

​Original source

The official figures are devastating: nearly 80% of people with disabilities claim to have suffered bullying at school and, not only that, six out of ten also confess that they have been victims of this school violence for years, turning this situation into a problem that not only becomes chronic over time but, more seriously, ends up becoming normalized.  
These are data that have been put on the table at the conference Disability and Bullying at School: How to detect and manage it, organized by the Spanish Council for the Defense of Disability and Dependency (CEDDDD) together with the Federation of Education (FEUSO) and which counted with the interventions of the trainer in bullying prevention Inma Badía, Secretary of Action and Occupational Health of FEUSO; and the psychologist Luis Ángel Romero, expert in school bullying and president for Soria of the Official College of Psychology of Castilla and León (COPCYL).

On these specific data related to students with disabilities, Inma Badía confessed that "the numbers are important and a bit scary", adding that bullying is the main factor of loneliness in children with disabilities, as 32.7% feel isolated, rejected or excluded by the rest of their classmates.

The expert added that bullying is most common in mainstream schools, with 92.9% compared to 2.6% in special education centres. The communities most affected "either because it is reported more or because bullying really exists to a greater extent" are: Andalusia with 21.2%, Madrid with 17.8%, Catalonia with 8.3%, and Castilla La Mancha and Valencia with 7.7% and 7.5%, respectively.

As for the type of disability suffered by bullied students, the statistics show that 26.9% of the cases are physical, 26.1% intellectual or developmental, 17.5% visual, 15.4% mental illness, followed by 14.7% with a hearing disability.

For Badía, it is important to stress that what happens in schools is no more and no less than a reflection of what happens in the rest of society: "Cases of violence are experienced in different ways and to different degrees. Learning to confront and resolve them requires all those involved in educational tasks to integrate the culture of encounter, welcome, dialogue, coexistence and peace in the classroom. And for this it is important to have not only an education in values project, but also effective plans for prevention, detection and intervention in the face of phenomena such as bullying".
Bullying cannot be considered an isolated event independent of the environment and social stimuli.

He also insists that the consequences of bullying on students with disabilities are very negative from an emotional, social and academic point of view. She highlights, among them, fear, decreased performance, emotional blockage, "erosion" of the personality, chronic post-traumatic stress, social phobia, sleep and eating problems, difficulty in establishing friendships, low self-esteem and increased feelings of inferiority.
​
"What has to be taken into account is that bullying cannot be considered as an isolated event independent of the environment and social stimuli. It is often a manifestation in the classroom of behaviour learned directly from social behaviour or perceived through the media," she says.

​Original source

​

• Commissioning and delivering restorative and relational processes training are fairly straightforward, but this is not the whole picture.
• Do trainers always understand or appreciate the cultural differences between schools, other types of organisations, or when appropriate, different countries?
• It is the ‘what happens after the training’ that is important and this can be the difference between the implementation process being a success, or failure.

In 2017 IIRP Europe(now defunct) and SynRJ were pleased and excited to be approached to join the RESTORE PROJECT, an Erasmus+ funded programme that aimed to “develop safer and more positive school climate through restorative practices”. There were six partner organisations from 6 countries;
Ligand (Coordinator) (Belgium)
International Institute for Restorative Practices (IIRP) Europe (UK – No longer operating)
Le Souffle (Belgium) 
Mairie de Lille (France)
CRESM – (Italy)
ASOCIATIA DE DEZVOLTARE INTERCOMUNITARA ZONA METROPOLITANA – CLUJ (Romania)
Eigen Kracht Centrale (Netherlands)
The aim of this project was to create an implementation plan for Restorative Practice (RP) training that could be used by any organisation, anywhere in Europe. An idea that quickly proved to be both complex and difficult.
The Partners in the RESTORE PROJECT brought with them very different levels of RP knowledge and experience. In order to achieve a level of consistency the group provided training for everyone following a structured model approach, using a combination of training materials developed by the IIRP Europe and SynRJ. For research purposes this ensured consistency of material and training, as the different Partners introduced the concepts in their own countries.
The ‘RESTORE’ Partners produced a number of ‘tools’ aimed at helping organisations along their restorative journey, starting with the initial contact, through to aspects of ‘restorative leadership’. However, there are two aspects of the implementation process that we would like to focus upon, the first, born out of circumstances and necessity – ‘Student Workbooks’, and the second, ‘Professional Learning Groups’. These ‘tools’ enabled us to continually support the schools that we were working with. This article reflects our journey as one partner working in the UK to develop training that could be used inclusively in any country.

​The courses and workshops that we delivered helped the organisations and individuals address negative behaviour, though our emphasis was on the concept of Restorative Practice (RP) as an opportunity to create an organisational climate which promotes positive relationships and is therefore proactive e.g. the use of Circles, reducing the chances of the negative behaviour occurring in the first place.
Our structured model focusses on providing a practical range of skills that can be used by everybody (including pupils) throughout the day and can be applied to the frequent small but nagging issues to the less frequent serious incidents.

​At the end of a day’s training, loading the car is always accompanied by positive emotions. The day has gone well and the group has worked together in a constructive way as they successfully moved through the various sessions.
During the journey home we tend to ponder upon what will happen next within the commissioning organisation(s). Will Restorative Practices ‘fly’ or will it ‘sink without trace’? These are the two extreme outcomes and for most organisations, the future is usually somewhere between the two. The underlying theory is not difficult to understand and indeed, we have delivered a version of our One Day Introduction to RP to school children as young as 6 years old, so the real question is around applying the theory to their practice.
When we created SynRJ in 2016 we recognised that applying the theory to their practice was a major issue for many organisations and it was something that we wanted to help address. The organisations that ‘fly’ (the ones that fully integrate the new ideas into what they already do), are often characterised by having people who can identify the bridges between theory and practice and have the will and drive to move in the desired direction. Unfortunately, all too often, many others enjoy the training and leave the session enthused, without fully recognising the scope and opportunities for its practical application. For this group, the everyday demands of their work slowly but surely consume both their enthusiasm and will to make the necessary changes.

It is against this backdrop that we now want to highlight two opportunities that arose - both via the Erasmus+ route: the use of student workbooks and Professional Learning Groups (PLGs)
Student Workbooks.
Two schools from Bury (the north west of England) had agreed to work with us as part of the RESTORE PROJECT. One was a Secondary School (11 to 16 year-olds) and the other, a Primary School (3 to 11 year-olds). One of our key areas of focus was upon the ‘transition process’, looking at what each school had in place, or did together, to help the pupils as they move from the Primary to Secondary setting.
The early meetings with both schools went well. Time and space were made available for us to provide the necessary training, and where possible, the separate school staff groups came together for these sessions. As is often the case, the Primary School found it easier to interweave the ideas and restorative approaches with their way of working, though the Secondary School was also making similar significant changes too.
Unfortunately, towards the end of the first year of our involvement, there was an extremely serious incident involving pupils from the Secondary School, which not only impacted upon the school, but also had serious implications for the local community. As a result of this incident the focus of the school had to temporarily change and the ongoing work that we had planned was understandably put on hold. This difficult period slipped into the long summer break (July and August) and our contact with the Secondary School was significantly less than our time with the Primary School. As a consequence, they were no longer moving at the same pace and we were having real doubts around the viability of continuing with the Secondary School. Following discussions with the School Leaders it was decided that we should continue, but that we needed to find a way of re-launching the RP initiative and at the same time, providing a ‘booster’ for both the staff and pupils.
At that point, the training provided had been for the staff groups and due to several delays at the start of the project, training for pupils was still some way off. Even then, it was envisaged that the pupil training would be for relatively small numbers. Our long experience of working with schools has repeatedly shown that working with pupils and engaging pupils in the process can be a key component of the implementation process.
We therefore saw the need to train all of the pupils, delivering the same concepts, using similar materials provided to staff and it needed to be completed in a very short period of time. An admirable goal but could it be achieved? Out of this need an idea was born that fully addressed this need.

We used ‘2 twilight sessions’ (after school time), to introduce the SynRJ ‘Student Workbooks’ and ‘Teachers Guides’ to the staff, to show them how to present the material and to prepare them to engage the pupils in the process. The additional benefit of this process, is the fact that the materials lend themselves to be delivered in various formats. These range from merely facilitating group or circle discussion, using a story board style, through to the pupil working through the workbook independently. Thus creating an inclusive approach, particularly important for those pupils who would otherwise struggle to engage.

At the same time the process also reacquainted the staff with the key RP concepts and materials. Following on from these sessions with staff, the school then created the time and opportunity for staff to work through the workbooks with their pupils. The general feedback was that this intervention had been well received by all pupils and it had succeeded in making up for the time lost.

The Primary School also followed the same process with the appropriate age-related workbooks and they too reported the whole process as being a success. Both staff groups recognised that the implementation plan could be flexible to respond to changing circumstances, as long as the end goal is not lost.

Professional Learning Groups (PLGs)
Professional Learning Groups (PLG) – became the missing link between theory and practice.
When reflecting upon the many training sessions that we have delivered over the years, we cannot recall a single example of when an attendee could not understand the training or the theory. As tempting as it may be to cite the brilliance of the trainers, the reality is that the underlying theory and principles are both straightforward and easy to comprehend. The course feedback supports this notion and many attendees also add that the sessions are fun and practical. So, if all of this is true, why do so many organisations struggle or fail to integrate the training into their everyday practice?

We would suggest that there is not a simple, single answer to this question but ‘time and guidance’ probably encompasses the myriad of factors that come into play.
There are many models used to explain how PLG’s (sometimes also referred to as Professional Learning Communities (PLC’s)) work and how they can be used. However, for the RESTORE Project we wanted to create a process that could be systematically followed by any of the Partners (or others), one that focused on practice (both current and desired), and continually linked theory with practice.

One of the main components of the RESTORE Project PLG model is identifying a staff group who will be instrumental in overseeing aspects of the implementation plan, who can provide ‘challenge’ when necessary and who will engage in regular ongoing sessions with the RP trainer/ consultant.
​
Our focus is on linking theory and practice, so how does it work? The basic steps are as follows;
1 . Assess current practice and plot it on the  ‘Social Discipline Window’ (IIRP).or ‘Relationship Styles Template’ (SynRJ), as illustrated below. This can quickly highlight what practice is identifiable as being ‘restorative and relational’ (working in the WITH’ box), and that which is not.

2. Having identified area of practice that are considered not to be ‘fully restorative’, consider the specific area of practice in greater detail using the key restorative elements;

• Relational Styles Template (based on McCold, & Wachtel, 2003)
• Fair Process (Kim Chan, & Mauborgne,2003)
• Relational Questions (O’Connell, 2015)
• Free Expression of all Emotions (Nathanson, 1992)
• Braithwaite’s Hypothesis (Braithwaite, 1989)

 
The PLG then looks at what is working well, what needs to be changed, and also suggests as to how the practice can be changed where needed. Important aspects of this include being clear who is responsible, what is the timescale and what resources are required.
​
3. Re-assess changed practice using the same methodology.
This process can be used to consider ‘practice’ in any area of the organisation and this reinforces the belief that RP is not just something we use with young people or the client group.

​As this project came to a close in 2020, we were invited work with a new Erasmus + project called Schools&Solutions. As the name suggests, the practical application of RP was one of the main goals of this project.

When the Schools&Solutions Project was still in its early stages, the school that we were to work with welcomed the opportunity to examine the problems that they faced, and to consider the ways in which they currently respond. Some of the staff had previously received RP training and in the first instance, it was interesting to see how much of their current practice reflected this input. Initially the schools identified the various problems that occurred within their schools and at the interface with the local community. The next step was to look at how they currently responded and judge how ‘restorative’ that response was. After this had been assessed the project then helped the schools work out if the processes could be made ‘more restorative’. A further interesting aspect of this project was that where appropriate, the schools were encouraged to look beyond the school gates and look at how the wider community may be involved in helping to address and resolve incidents/problems.

We were able to take into this project lessons learnt from the RESTORE project. Partners initially assumed that once the key components of the implementation plan had been formulated and agreed, the work with their respective schools would be straightforward. With hindsight, it was probably the case that each individual partner was considering their own circumstances and assuming that everyone else was working within the same parameters.

So, one of the first tasks was to identify the main problems and issues experienced by each school and have them think about how they currently address these issues. It was interesting to see that many problems were common across all schools – the most common being ‘bullying’ -though methods used to address incidents was very varied.
The second phase was about creating a model that could have widespread application, one that could be applied to all organisations, most if not all of their identified behaviours, and would result in a high level of consistency, both in terms of application and outcome.

Learning from, and building upon prior experiences, is extremely important.  In this respect there are two ‘stand out’ points to consider. The first is to consider the differences between ‘Restorative Justice’ (RJ) and ‘Restorative Practice’(RP). This was covered extensively in the training provided as part of phase 2.  In essence the former enables the organisation to address issues once they have occurred, and the latter also covers this, but goes further, by assisting the organisation in creating a culture / ethos in which the incidents are less likely to occur in the first place.  

By pursuing the RP route, it is expected that non-incident specific issues identified in the first phase, such as ‘not continuing in education’, may also be reduced. When creating the model for this project great emphasis has been placed on developing relationships, both within the school and between the school and the community in which they operate. A significant portion of training time has been devoted to the various use of ‘CIRCLES’ as this aspect is considered to be a highly effective way of developing and building relationships between the various parties.

The second ‘stand out’ factor is around pupil engagement and involvement. There are various models around how this might be achieved from awareness raising training for all pupils, to more intense training for smaller groups of pupils who will have a specific role in terms of applying the processes when addressing issues with other pupils. All approaches have merit and the favoured route is to provide RP training for all pupils, the content of which closely resembles the one-day training provided to all staff. As the staff who have experienced the one-day training are not qualified to train, they will require additional support and direction. This can best be provided by the use of Teachers Guides and Student Workbooks, which the staff can work through with the pupils.

Using the structure of student workbooks ensures that all materials are covered and is more likely to achieve a higher level of consistency and understanding for all concerned.

Experiences from other countries:
Implementing a new idea or new approach can be exciting, exhilarating and challenging. Organisations generally report that take up is usually very positive but also that it is important to maintain the momentum, particularly when challenging issues arise, which they inevitably will. Sometimes implementation is at a single school level, for others it is at a municipality (area /regional) level. Either way, what is required is support. Finding dedicated times and opportunities to discuss issues and celebrate successes is vital. Creating an internal group of staff who are responsible for driving the implementation process is useful (RPG’s*).
​
* ‘Restorative Planning Group’ (RPG), which is a very practical and RP focused version of the ‘Professional Learning Group’ (PLG), as mentioned earlier.

Experience shows that RP implementation, like all new projects or programmes, does inevitably raise issues and problems however, the cultural and systemic differences between countries brings an added dimension. If RP is thought of as a ‘different way of thinking’, and if the Key Elements are adhered to, it is surprising just how often the underpinning theory provides the solution to the emerging issues.

References
Braithwaite, J., (1989). Crime, Shame and Reintegration, Cambridge University Press.
Kim, W. Chan, & Mauborgne, R. (2003). Fair process: Managing in the knowledge economy. Harvard Business Review,81(1), pp.127-136. Available from: https://hbr.org/2003/01/fair-process-managing-in-the-knowledge-economy
McCold, P. and Wachtel, T. (2003). In pursuit of paradigm: a theory of restorative justice. Restorative Practices E-Forum, available from: http://www.iirp.edu/pdf/paradigm.pdf
Nathanson, D.L. (1992). Shame and pride: affect, sex, and the birth of the self. New York, Norton.
O’Connell, T. (2015). Why the Real Justice Script? International Institute for Restorative Practices 18th World Conference, June 10-12 2015, Budapest, Hungary. Available from https://www.iirp.edu/pdf/budapest2015-slides-oconnell.pdf
 Authors: 
​John Boulton and Les Davey
Co-directors of SynRJ

Zemgale Secondary School teachers were represented in teachers training event by 5 teachers. After returning home, the teachers realized that the knowledge gained was very valuable and needed to be shared with other school teachers.
Some of the methods were previously known and used in teachers' pedagogical experience, but were also new and introduced in Zemgale Secondary School to realize the goals and objectives of the project. In order to acquaint the other teachers of the school with the newly acquired knowledge, a presentation with infographics about the restorative circle, storytelling therapy and the Program TEI was created.
​We have translated the restorative question card so that every teacher can use it in the future, resolving conflict situations with the help of the restorative circle. We discussed how to better implement the acquired knowledge on methods for resolving conflict situations in the teaching process of Zemgale Secondary School.

As Turkish team, the first staff trainig was very important. Because we found us in a new world. Some of us have been abroad for the first time or travelled by plane. And we talked to much about that with this project we remembered our bachelors life. So the first meeting was full of firsts in our life. After landed on Barcelona we discovered this beautiful city.

​Next day, we had a loooong train journey to Alicante. It was really the longest one (nearly nine hours) for us. When we arrived the train station in Alicante, It was nearly midnight.
At the first day of the traning we welcomed with smile faces by our Spanish partners.
And here we go;

Spanish partners presented their problem solution mechanism which they have been using for a long period. Also they presented an instance of peer –mentoring related with the students.

​The second day with the presentation of SynRJ that our partners form UK, we had a new aspect to understand deeper the process of how the restoractive practices work and how they can be used in different countries. Our Spanish partner presented our attendance certificate.
And the last day, the traning ended with a nice study visit to the city hall. We had a chance to intereact with the Mayor of San Vicente del Raspeing. Then we attended a short trip in Barbara Castle. It was perfect to be with this project group.