RESTORATIVE PRACTICES AND POSSIBILITIES Spring 2011

1. RESTORATIVE PRACTICES AND POSSIBILITIES Spring 2011 Facilitator:David Osborn email: dosborn@sd69.bc.ca webpage: http://qbes.sd69.bc.ca/ (click counselling services)

2. Today’s Intention: All behaviours are purposeful, and often behaviours end up damaging relationships. We will be exploring ways to restore damaged relationships and to more easily get to a place of connection and co-operation.

3. A Traditional Model to Wrong Doing generally linear in nature Punitive-Permissive Continuum Punitive/CoercivePermissive Punisher Buddy The punitive-permissive continuum. From T. Wachtel, 1999, Restorative justice in everyday life: Beyond the formal ritual. http://www.realjustice.org/Pages/anu.html

4. (high importance) NOT ASSERTING ASSERTING NOT COOPERATING COOPERATING (low importance) (high importance) Wachtel, 1999, Restorative justice in everyday life: Beyond the formal ritual. high importance high importance high importance COMPETING is both assertive and unco-operative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COMPETING is both assertive and unco-operative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COMPETING is both assertive and unco-operative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COLLABORATING is both assertive and co-operative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for discussion. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. COLLABORATING is both assertive and co-operative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for discussion. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. COLLABORATING is both assertive and co-operative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for discussion. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. assertiveness/courage/goals assertiveness/courage/goals assertiveness/courage/goals LOSE/WIN LOSE/WIN LOSE/WIN WIN/WIN WIN/WIN WIN/WIN COMPROMISING is both assertive and co-operative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward. COMPROMISING is both assertive and co-operative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward. COMPROMISING is both assertive and co-operative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward. half-win/half-lose half-win/half-lose half-win/half-lose AVOIDING is neither assertive nor co-operative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others loses the value of the individuals input. AVOIDING is neither assertive nor co-operative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others loses the value of the individuals input. AVOIDING is neither assertive nor co-operative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others loses the value of the individuals input. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but co-operative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but co-operative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but co-operative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. LOSE/LOSE LOSE/LOSE LOSE/LOSE WIN/LOSE WIN/LOSE WIN/LOSE low importance low importance low importance co-operation/consideration/relationships co-operation/consideration/relationships co-operation/consideration/relationships high importance high importance high importance Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators. Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators. Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators.

5. (high importance) NOT ASSERTING ASSERTING NOT COOPERATING COOPERATING (low importance) (high importance) Wachtel, 1999, Restorative justice in everyday life: Beyond the formal ritual. high importance high importance high importance COMPETING is both assertive and unco-operative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COMPETING is both assertive and unco-operative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COMPETING is both assertive and unco-operative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COLLABORATING is both assertive and co-operative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for discussion. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. COLLABORATING is both assertive and co-operative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for discussion. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. COLLABORATING is both assertive and co-operative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for discussion. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. assertiveness/courage/goals assertiveness/courage/goals assertiveness/courage/goals LOSE/WIN LOSE/WIN LOSE/WIN WIN/WIN WIN/WIN WIN/WIN COMPROMISING is both assertive and co-operative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward. COMPROMISING is both assertive and co-operative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward. COMPROMISING is both assertive and co-operative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward. half-win/half-lose half-win/half-lose half-win/half-lose AVOIDING is neither assertive nor co-operative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others loses the value of the individuals input. AVOIDING is neither assertive nor co-operative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others loses the value of the individuals input. AVOIDING is neither assertive nor co-operative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others loses the value of the individuals input. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but co-operative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but co-operative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but co-operative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. LOSE/LOSE LOSE/LOSE LOSE/LOSE WIN/LOSE WIN/LOSE WIN/LOSE low importance low importance low importance co-operation/consideration/relationships co-operation/consideration/relationships co-operation/consideration/relationships high importance high importance high importance Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators. Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators. Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators.

6. (high importance) compromising NOT ASSERTING ASSERTING developing and using : COURAGE, LIMIT SETTING & DISCIPLINE, FINDING & USING YOUR VOICE NOT COOPERATING COOPERATING (high importance) (low importance) developing and using:CONSIDERING, LISTENING, REFLECTING, ENCOURAGING & NURTURING Osborn, D. (2005). Training in Restorative Justice: Enhancing Collaboration with Public School Educators. Relational child & youth care practice, 18(1), 42-50 high importance high importance high importance COMPETING is both assertive and unco-operative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COMPETING is both assertive and unco-operative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COMPETING is both assertive and unco-operative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COLLABORATING is both assertive and co-operative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for discussion. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. COLLABORATING is both assertive and co-operative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for discussion. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. COLLABORATING is both assertive and co-operative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for discussion. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. assertiveness/courage/goals assertiveness/courage/goals assertiveness/courage/goals LOSE/WIN LOSE/WIN LOSE/WIN WIN/WIN WIN/WIN WIN/WIN COMPROMISING is both assertive and co-operative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward. COMPROMISING is both assertive and co-operative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward. COMPROMISING is both assertive and co-operative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward. half-win/half-lose half-win/half-lose half-win/half-lose AVOIDING is neither assertive nor co-operative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others loses the value of the individuals input. AVOIDING is neither assertive nor co-operative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others loses the value of the individuals input. AVOIDING is neither assertive nor co-operative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others loses the value of the individuals input. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but co-operative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but co-operative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but co-operative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. LOSE/LOSE LOSE/LOSE LOSE/LOSE WIN/LOSE WIN/LOSE WIN/LOSE low importance low importance low importance co-operation/consideration/relationships co-operation/consideration/relationships co-operation/consideration/relationships high importance high importance high importance Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators. Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators. Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators.

7. Adapted from:Chelsom-Gossen, D. (1992). Restitution: Restructuring school discipline, facilitator’s guide. Chapel Hill, NC: New View. . high importance high importance high importance COMPETING is both assertive and unco-operative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COMPETING is both assertive and unco-operative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COMPETING is both assertive and unco-operative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COLLABORATING is both assertive and co-operative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for discussion. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. COLLABORATING is both assertive and co-operative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for discussion. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. COLLABORATING is both assertive and co-operative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for discussion. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. assertiveness/courage/goals assertiveness/courage/goals assertiveness/courage/goals LOSE/WIN LOSE/WIN LOSE/WIN WIN/WIN WIN/WIN WIN/WIN COMPROMISING is both assertive and co-operative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward. COMPROMISING is both assertive and co-operative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward. COMPROMISING is both assertive and co-operative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward. half-win/half-lose half-win/half-lose half-win/half-lose AVOIDING is neither assertive nor co-operative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others loses the value of the individuals input. AVOIDING is neither assertive nor co-operative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others loses the value of the individuals input. AVOIDING is neither assertive nor co-operative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others loses the value of the individuals input. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but co-operative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but co-operative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but co-operative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. LOSE/LOSE LOSE/LOSE LOSE/LOSE WIN/LOSE WIN/LOSE WIN/LOSE low importance low importance low importance co-operation/consideration/relationships co-operation/consideration/relationships co-operation/consideration/relationships high importance high importance high importance Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators. Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators. Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators.

8. CIRCLE OF GROWTH FRUSTRATION YOUR STUCK SPOT mixed feelings futility A T T A C K C H A N G E TO TO FOR FOR defend against vulnerability ADAPTATION Neufeld, G. (2006). Neufeld Intensive-Level 2..

9. GETTING TO “WITH” THROUGH • MY JOB / YOUR JOB • RESTITUTION TRIANGLE • LANGUAGE PATTERNS • TALKING CIRCLE • FIVE CORE CONCERNS

10. We are internally motivated. All behaviour is purposeful. Validate the Misbehaviour Seek the Belief RESTITUTION Stabilize the Identity We are doing the best we can. Chelsom-Gossen, D. (1992). Restitution: Restructuring school discipline, facilitator’s guide. Chapel Hill, NC: New View. high importance high importance high importance COMPETING is both assertive and unco-operative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COMPETING is both assertive and unco-operative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COMPETING is both assertive and unco-operative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COLLABORATING is both assertive and co-operative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for things to be fully discussed. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. COLLABORATING is both assertive and co-operative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for things to be fully discussed. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. COLLABORATING is both assertive and co-operative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for things to be fully discussed. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. LOSE/WIN LOSE/WIN LOSE/WIN WIN/WIN WIN/WIN WIN/WIN assertiveness/courage/goals assertiveness/courage/goals assertiveness/courage/goals COMPROMISING is both assertive and co-operative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward. Compromise is a half-win / half-lose style and may not produce the best resolution of a difficulty. COMPROMISING is both assertive and co-operative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward. Compromise is a half-win / half-lose style and may not produce the best resolution of a difficulty. COMPROMISING is both assertive and co-operative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward. Compromise is a half-win / half-lose style and may not produce the best resolution of a difficulty. AVOIDING is neither assertive nor co-operative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose style. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others loses the value of the individuals input. AVOIDING is neither assertive nor co-operative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose style. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others loses the value of the individuals input. AVOIDING is neither assertive nor co-operative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose style. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others loses the value of the individuals input. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but co-operative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but co-operative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but co-operative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. LOSE/LOSE LOSE/LOSE LOSE/LOSE WIN/LOSE WIN/LOSE WIN/LOSE low importance low importance low importance co-operation/consideration/relationships co-operation/consideration/relationships co-operation/consideration/relationships high importance high importance high importance Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators. Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators. Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators.

11. If your behaviour could talk what would it be telling me? What do we as a class or family believe? Keep that behaviour; add a new one. How do we work together to meet each others needs? All behaviour is purposeful. We are internally motivated. What would you like to see happen? Seek the Belief Validate the Misbehaviour How could you have done worse? RESTITUTION What kind of person do you want to be? Stabilize the Identity We are doing the best we can. Good friend to self. You’re not the only one. I’m not interested in fault. It’s OK to make a mistake. Perfection is not a human condition. Chelsom-Gossen, D. (1992). Restitution: Restructuring school discipline, facilitator’s guide. Chapel Hill, NC: New View. high importance high importance high importance COMPETING is both assertive and unco-operative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COMPETING is both assertive and unco-operative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COMPETING is both assertive and unco-operative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COLLABORATING is both assertive and co-operative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for things to be fully discussed. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. COLLABORATING is both assertive and co-operative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for things to be fully discussed. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. COLLABORATING is both assertive and co-operative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for things to be fully discussed. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. LOSE/WIN LOSE/WIN LOSE/WIN WIN/WIN WIN/WIN WIN/WIN assertiveness/courage/goals assertiveness/courage/goals assertiveness/courage/goals COMPROMISING is both assertive and co-operative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward. Compromise is a half-win / half-lose style and may not produce the best resolution of a difficulty. COMPROMISING is both assertive and co-operative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward. Compromise is a half-win / half-lose style and may not produce the best resolution of a difficulty. COMPROMISING is both assertive and co-operative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward. Compromise is a half-win / half-lose style and may not produce the best resolution of a difficulty. AVOIDING is neither assertive nor co-operative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose style. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others loses the value of the individuals input. AVOIDING is neither assertive nor co-operative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose style. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others loses the value of the individuals input. AVOIDING is neither assertive nor co-operative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose style. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others loses the value of the individuals input. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but co-operative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but co-operative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but co-operative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. LOSE/LOSE LOSE/LOSE LOSE/LOSE WIN/LOSE WIN/LOSE WIN/LOSE low importance low importance low importance co-operation/consideration/relationships co-operation/consideration/relationships co-operation/consideration/relationships high importance high importance high importance Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators. Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators. Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators.

12. COULD YOU HAVE DONE WORSE Less Effective More Effective Effective Select a misbehaviour or mistake. • Ask…”Could I have done worse?” (exaggerate, if aggressing, “Could I have been more aggressive or withdrawn?” • Ask…”What was the value I was protecting by my behaviour?” • Ask…”Would it be better to not hold the value—to not be the person I want to be?” (No!) • “Give myself credit! Though it didn’t work out the way I wanted it to, it was better than something else I might have done. Now I can figure out a better way. Chelsom-Gossen, D. (1992). Restitution: Restructuring school discipline, facilitator’s guide. Chapel Hill, NC: New View.

13. RESTITUTION TRIANGLE Adapted from: Chelsom-Gossen, D. (1992). Restitution: Restructuring school discipline. Chapel Hill, NC: New View. If your behaviour could talk what would it be telling me? What do we as a class or family believe? How do we work together to meet each other’s needs? Keep that behaviour; add a new one. What would you like to see happen? All behaviour is purposeful. How could you have done worse? We are internally motivated. Validate the Misbehaviour Seek the Belief What kind of person do you want to be? It’s OK to make a mistake. Stabilize the Identity We are doing the best we can. BATHE ing the heart: B=background: What happened to you? A=affect: How did you feel? / What was that like for you? T=trouble: What troubles you the most now? H=handling: What helps you the most to handle this?” E=empathy: That must be very difficult for you. / I felt _______ too, as I listened to you.” high importance high importance high importance COMPETING is both assertive and unco-operative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COMPETING is both assertive and unco-operative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COMPETING is both assertive and unco-operative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COLLABORATING is both assertive and co-operative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for things to be fully discussed. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. COLLABORATING is both assertive and co-operative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for things to be fully discussed. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. COLLABORATING is both assertive and co-operative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for things to be fully discussed. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. LOSE/WIN LOSE/WIN LOSE/WIN WIN/WIN WIN/WIN WIN/WIN assertiveness/courage/goals assertiveness/courage/goals assertiveness/courage/goals COMPROMISING is both assertive and co-operative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward. Compromise is a half-win / half-lose style and may not produce the best resolution of a difficulty. COMPROMISING is both assertive and co-operative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward. Compromise is a half-win / half-lose style and may not produce the best resolution of a difficulty. COMPROMISING is both assertive and co-operative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward. Compromise is a half-win / half-lose style and may not produce the best resolution of a difficulty. AVOIDING is neither assertive nor co-operative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose style. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others loses the value of the individuals input. AVOIDING is neither assertive nor co-operative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose style. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others loses the value of the individuals input. AVOIDING is neither assertive nor co-operative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose style. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others loses the value of the individuals input. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but co-operative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but co-operative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but co-operative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. LOSE/LOSE LOSE/LOSE LOSE/LOSE WIN/LOSE WIN/LOSE WIN/LOSE low importance low importance low importance co-operation/consideration/relationships co-operation/consideration/relationships co-operation/consideration/relationships high importance high importance high importance Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators. Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators. Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators.

14. BATHEing the heart: B=background, “what happened to you?” A=affect, “and how did/does that make you feel? T=trouble, “and what troubles you the most now?” H=handling, “and what helps you the most to handle this?” E=empathy, “that must be very difficult for you. I felt sad too, as I listened to you.” Servan-Schreiber, D. (2004). The instinct to heal: Curing stress, anxiety, and depression without drugs and without talk therapy. USA.: Rodale.

15. RESTORATIVE PRACTICE CONTINUUM INFORMAL FORMAL      affective questions small impromptu formal (language patterns) circles / conference conference The restorative practice continuum. From T. Wachtel, 1999, Restorative justice in everyday life: Beyond the formal ritual. http://www.realjustice.org/Pages/anu.html

16. CIRCLE GUIDELINES • Circle is voluntary • Respect the talking piece • Share ideas when the talking piece is in your hand. • Listen when it’s in another person’s hands. • Everyone has an equal opportunity to speak • You may pass the talking piece. • Try to be brief and to the point. • Speak from the heart • Speak with honesty and compassion. • Speak in a good way • Be kind and respectful. • All people are treated equally • All ideas are equally important. • All decisions are made by consensus. • The Circle is confidential • The stories shared in the circle “belong” to the circle. South Saint Paul Restorative Justice-Kaposia Education Center-Stacy Elliott Sarff-Summer 1999

17. Zehr, H. (2002). The little book of restorative justice. Intercourse, PA: Good Books.

18. When you do justice restoratively AND work collaboratively … You will be concerned and focused on building, re-building, and maintaining relationships.

19. THREE PILLARS OF RESTORATIVE PRACTICES • FOCUSES ON HARMS AND NEEDS OF AN INDIVIDUAL SITUATION OR EVENT. • WRONGS, MISTAKES, OR HARMS RESULT IN OBLIGATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES. • PROMOTES ENGAGEMENT, PARTICIPATION AND COLLABORATION. Zehr, H. (2002). The little book of restorative justice. Intercourse, PA: Good Books.

20. DOING JUSTICE RESTORATIVELY • You will focus on the harms of the crime rather than the rules that have been broken. • You will be equally concerned with victims and offenders involving both in the process of justice. • You will work toward the restoration of victims, empowering them and responding to their needs as they see them. • You will support offenders while encouraging them to understand, accept, and carry out their obligations. • You will recognize that while obligations may be difficult for the offenders, they should not be intended as punitive. • You will provide opportunities for dialogue, direct and indirect, between victims and offender as appropriate. • You will find meaningful ways to involve the community and to respond to community bases of crime. • You will encourage collaboration and reintegration rather than coercion and isolation. • You will be mindful of the unintended consequences of your actions and programs. • You will show respect to all parties—victims, offenders, and justice colleagues. Harry Mika & Howard Zehr, 1996. • You will be concerned and focused on building, re-building, and maintaining relationships.

21. OUR TARGETS IN HELPING A STUDENT ARE: • Stabilize their identity. • Help the person identify their need. • Access the belief. • Focus on the solution rather than blame. • Work towards self-discipline. Chelsom-Gossen, D. (1993). Restitution: Restructuring school discipline, facilitator’s guide. Chapel Hill, NC: New View.

22. TONE OF VOICE What carries the Message? WORDS…………………………10% TONE……………………………35% NON-VERBAL…………………55% Chelsom-Gossen, D. (1992). Restitution: Restructuring school discipline, facilitator’s guide. Chapel Hill, NC: New View.

23. ASK CUP EMPTYING QUESTIONS Allow the person to empty their cup by asking cup-emptying questions that are open-ended and show the utmost non-judgmental curiosity. Use: WHAT, HOW, & WHEN. Popov, L. K., Kavelin, J. & Popov, D. (1997). The family virtues guide. New York: Penguin Group.

24. CREATING A SAFE “CONTAINER” • EFFECTIVE LISTENING: A truly effective listener uses words which tell the other that you have heard them—that what they said has registered in your heart and brain. This will encourage them to keep talking about what you need to know, their “cheapbfv”s: their “concerns, hopes, expectations, anxieties, problems, beliefs, fears, & values.” • THREE AREAS OF FOCUS: Tone of voice (35%); nonverbal (55%); and quality of questions, “Straight not Crooked,” and “Open Ended not Closed.” • Try to Avoid: (generalizations, deletions, and distortions) “You forgot to…You never…You should have… (don’t should on yourself)…You can’t…You shouldn’t have…The way you did it is wrong…The way I do it…” • Acknowledge what they are doing well. Don’t tell people what they did wrong—let them discover how they could do it differently through your questions. • Straight not Crooked Questions: • “What’s the rule?” Not…”You know what the rule is don’t • you?” • “Where were you supposed to be?” Not…”You weren’t where you were • supposed to be, were you?” • Open-Ended Questions: • -When ________ happened (e.g. someone went off on a blaming tangent.) what ere you thinking”… Wanting to hear? ... Looking for? • -What could your have done differently? • -What does that feel like? How would you like things to be? • -What are you feeling right now? How is that (specific) for you? • -Where would you like to begin? What do you imagine? • -What have you thought of? How do you see things changing? • -What was most important for you now? • -How was that for you? What do you think will happen…? • -What would you like me to notice in this _______? • -I’m wondering if….? Adapted from: D. Chelsom-Gossen, S. Holloway, & other sources.

25. IMAGO DIALOGUE • Imago dialog is a basic three step to exercise to help people communicate information, thoughts, feelings, or experiences with the intention of being authentic, respectful, clear, and understood. On a deeper level Imago dialogue invites, creates, enhances, and preserves connection. • Step 1: Mirroring • Using “I” statements, the Sender then sends a message to convey his/her thoughts, feelings, or experiences to the Receiver (I feel, I love, I need…). In response, the Receiver echoes the sender’s message word for word or by paraphrasing, using a leading sounds like, “Let me see if I’ve got you. You said …” Then the Receiver checks for accuracy by asking, “did I get that?” or “did I get you?” Mirroring trains us to listen to what the other is saying rather than listening to their reactions and responses going on in our own hands all the other is talking. • Step 2: Validation • In addition to learning to listen fully to the other, the Receiver stretches to understand and acknowledge that the validity in the Sender’s point of view; especially when it is different from his or her own. The second step, validation, invites understanding. It is a communication by the Receiver that the Sender “makes sense." In validation, the Receiver discovers and embraces the differences of the Sender’s point of view. Simultaneously, validation also meets the needs of the Sender: to be understood and acknowledge in his/her uniqueness. It acknowledges the existence of the Senders’ internal experiences and perceptions of the world. • Step 3: Empathy • The third and final step of the Imago dialog is empathy. In empathy, the Receiver imagines the feelings of the Sender, steps into the Sender shoes, feels their pain, anger, fear, appreciation or joy. It is important two verify that the imagined feelings are correct. Over time, we move from a staring at exteriors to touching of interiors, we learn to participate in the world of the other, while holding onto our own, separate experience. WHEN DO WE USE IMAGO DIALOGUE? • To express appreciation and love. • To be heard and understood. • To listen and understand. • You are upset about something and want to discuss it. • To discuss a topic that might be “touchy.” Source: Imago Connects the Sense of Love: a couple’s handbook. p. 32 By Harville Hendrix & Helen Hunt. www.GettingTheLoveYouWant.com

26. MY JOB / YOUR JOB Helps open discussion on: beliefs, values, the ideal classroom, and our “social contract.” MY JOB YOUR JOB Chelsom-Gossen, D. (1992). Restitution: Restructuring school discipline, facilitator’s guide. Chapel Hill, NC: New View.

27. FIVE CORE CONCERNS: Fisher, R. & Shapiro, D. (2005) Beyond reason: Using emotions as you negotiate. New York: Viking.

28. COMPETING is both assertive and uncooperative. The individual tries to "win" by defending their "position" with whatever power seems necessary. The individual's concerns are pursued at the expense of the other person. Competing is a win / lose style. COLLABORATING is both assertive and cooperative. The individuals work together to consider their mutual interests and needs while orienting their efforts towards consensus formation. This demands considerable interpersonal skill, commitment to the issue and time for discussion. In this respect not all conflicts are worth the effort, although the solution often empowers both parties and allows for a lasting resolution. COMPROMISING is both assertive and cooperative although it differs from collaboration mainly in matter of degree. Often compromise offers itself as a "natural" and easy solution. In doing so, a quick compromise can preclude the kind of discussion that usually accompanies collaboration and thus not allow some more creative and often better resolutions to come forward.   Asserting/expecting/goal setting AVOIDING is neither assertive nor cooperative. The individual can be sidestepping an issue for good reason or withdrawing because they are unable to cope with a conflict that threatens them. Avoiding is a lose / lose. The individual loses the opportunity to influence others, and others lose the value of the individual’s input. ACCOMMODATING is unassertive but cooperative. This could be based on altruism and a genuine concern for others or simply a fear of causing offense and difficulty for the other person. Accommodating is usually a lose / win style. Cooperating/considering/relating Five Conflict-Handling Modes Adapted from Kearns, T., Pickering, C., & Twist, J. (1992). Managing conflict: A practical guide to conflict resolution for educators.

29. “WORDS CHANGE PEOPLE ONLY IF THEY ARE SUPPORTED BY THE FULL EXPERIENCE TO WHICH THE WORDS POINT.” V. Satir "When we focus on clarifying what is being observed, felt, and needed rather than on diagnosing and judging, we discover the depth of our own compassion." Marshall B. Rosenberg

30. “Once a society loses this capacity for dialogue all that is left is a cacophony of voices battling it out to see who wins and who loses. There is no capacity to go deeper, to find a deeper meaning that transcends individual views and self interest. It seems reasonable to ask whether many of our deeper problems in governing ourselves today, the so-called “gridlock” and loss of mutual respect and caring…might not stem from this lost capacity to talk with one another, to think together as part of a larger community.” Peter M. Senge Stanfield, B. (2000). The art of focused conversation: 100 ways to access group wisdom in the workplace. Gabriola Island, B.C.: New Society Publishers.

31. “Proponents of restorative justice know that justice cannot be done by someone or administered to someone; it can be created or achieved only when all involved in the given situation are participants taking the opportunity to collaborate in the justice-making process.” Sullivan, D., & Tifft, L. (2001). Restorative justice: Healing the foundation of our everyday lives. Monsey, NY: Willow Tree Press.

32. When you do justice restoratively AND work collaboratively … You will be concerned and focused on building, re-building, and maintaining relationships.