If a Behavior Is Serious Enough for a Restorative Conversation, It's Serious Enough for a Consequence
In this video, Dr. Justin Baeder argues that restorative conversations without consequences send the message that serious behavior doesn't have real repercussions.
Key Takeaways
- Conversations without consequences are hollow - If the behavior warranted a formal restorative process, it warrants a real consequence too
- This standard is self-evident - The seriousness that triggers restorative action should also trigger accountability
- Both are needed together - Restorative practices and consequences should complement each other, not substitute for one another
Transcript
When it comes to behavior, if it's serious enough to have a restorative conversation, it's serious enough to have a consequence.
Over on the Unofficial Teacher's Manual podcast, Omar Akbar and Sam Strickland talk about the situation in the UK with restorative practices, and it's really interesting to see so many similarities between how this is being implemented in Both places here in the US and in the UK.
So many similarities in how teachers are experiencing these policies where it's basically a punishment for the teacher.
You basically have to come after school on your break, you know, one of the few times when you're not actually teaching during the day.
and accept what may or may not be a real apology from the student.
And students realize very quickly that all I have to do is say the right words and I'm out of here.
There's no real consequence.
I think if we're going to spend the time on these conversations, which are not always a bad idea, they have to be accompanied by a consequence because students will learn very quickly if there is not a consequence.
They will learn, hey, I can actually get away with a lot No consequence as long as I'm willing to apologize.
And I think that puts teachers in a terrible position of having to kind of accept this apology, knowing that the behavior is likely to just repeat, right?
Because what have we done when we have the teacher sit down kind of as an equal to the student, which is a little bit messed up, but sit down and have to accept that apology and maybe take some ownership of the problem when it was the student's behavior that was the problem?
Well, what we're doing there is we're putting the teacher on equal footing with the student and we're giving the student power to do this again, right?
Any other incentive that may be in place is very unlikely to match the incentive of power, right?
Kids like power.
Everybody likes power.
And when you give kids power to disrupt, to harm, to control the situation in the classroom, well, then learning grinds to a halt.
And often what happens is the teacher quits.
So I think we've got to stop these restorative conversations without a real consequence to go with them.
And I want to encourage you to check out the Unofficial Teacher's Manual podcast for a UK perspective on behavior.
Let me know what you think.