This article is inspired by a visit that I made recently to Nottingham at the behest of the Restorative Justice in Schools project organisers. Four of us met, Robin Tinker, Lynne Pickup, Debbie Hewer and myself, in the comfortable setting of Lynne's house on a glorious sunny day and we gave ourselves the luxury of a fairly free agenda, discussing issues as they came up. We were all there to learn from each other's experiences but my particular brief was to offer insights on how the Nottingham project could develop further and involve more of the whole school population.

Between us we offered a variety of different approaches and experiences in schools. Robin, Lynne and I share a background in teaching and although we had differing philosophies whilst in the classroom, we now share a commitment to Restorative Justice. Lynne made no secret of the fact that her previous position on dealing with challenging behaviour was punitive but that she had become an enthusiastic convert to restorative ways of dealing with such issues now. My impression was that her experience must speak loudly to sceptical members of the teaching profession whereas someone like myself- always of a liberal, humanistic persuasion- might well get dismissed by some as 'unrealistic'. Robin's long experience working in challenging educational environments and his current advocacy of Restorative Justice also stands as a testimony to the value of a restorative framework in these settings.

Our current approaches differ too and this provided much food for discussion. The Nottingham project has grown out of enthusiasm from the Notts police, notably Dave Wakelin and Dave Padleigh, for using Restorative Conferencing when dealing with youth offending. The schools project began with offering conferencing in school settings with cases of bullying and harassment and has now been extended to peer buddying. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the people directly involved have benefited from the process, the inappropriate behaviour has been reduced and all sides have been able to move forward more positively.

In some respects the Notts approach mirrors the approach in the Thames Valley, where conferencing is being used to deal with inappropriate behaviour in a school setting. In some notable cases police officers working in schools - Drayton School in the Bretchill area of Banbury being a good example- have identified the wider potential of Restorative principles. It is perhaps fair to say that, to date, the restorative conferencing experiences have been in isolated schools, compared to the more formally constituted Notts project where six schools have been involved and the project evaluated for the Home Office CRISP project. (Crime Reduction in Schools)
My observation, in conversation with police officers involved in school projects in the Thames Valley, is that more could be done to coordinate their experiences, provide support, share their skills and create a clearer picture of what is being achieved. I have not gained the impression that there exists a Thames Valley Schools Project as such although there is an attempt to coordinate better what is happening in schools now.

Interestingly, in both the Thames Valley and in Notts a similar story is emerging - that whilst there is undoubted benefit to the individuals involved in conferences most of the time, the school community as a whole remains largely untouched by the process and the philosophy behind it. One of the very first questions Robin and Lynne asked me was how they can make a difference in the schools rather than just to individuals. It is pertinent to ask why they should ask such a question. Why do they want to make a difference in the school as a whole? One could argue that providing those directly involved in an incident are satisfied, the rest of the school community need not be bothered. But of course this is not what Restorative Justice is about. For pragmatic reasons alone the community in which the participants in a conference live and work need to understand what has happened. Their reactions to those involved following a conference will be crucial factors in the reintegration and rehabilitation of both 'victims' and 'offenders'.

However I would argue, and Robin, Lynne and Debbie agree, that there is much more to Restorative Justice than dealing with serious inappropriate or offending behaviour. All those who start using it in such cases can see its potential for dealing with inappropriate behaviour at all levels and also with conflict in general. (It is not for nothing that trained conference facilitators are being asked to adapt the process in neighbourhood conflicts where there are no specific victims and offenders.) Indeed there is something odd about using a process which emphasises restorative principles in one context whilst, in the same school and perhaps even simultaneously in another room, more minor conflicts and misdemeanours are being dealt with in a different, perhaps more punitive, way. Hence the question Robin and Lynne posed - how can we reach the teachers and the students?

This is where my contribution may have some value because I have been involved in developing a project which starts from the premise that we are talking about a 'Whole School Approach'. It has to be said that the project is in its early stages but the thinking and the development has grown out of years of thinking and preparation Interestingly enough, the position I have reached now, with a background in mediation and conflict management in schools, mirrors the experience of Restorative Justice school -based practitioners and it may be pertinent to reflect on that. Things appear to be coming full circle.

Mediation was first developed in this country, in the victim/offender context ,during the 1980's. This later led to the founding of an organisation called FIRM in 1984 (Forum for Initiatives in Mediation and Reparation) which has since become Mediation UK. Very soon afterwards the first neighbourhood mediation schemes began to develop.

Meanwhile, and at first apparently separately, initiatives were being developed in schools to help children deal with conflict in a more creative way. Ideas came over from the United States and various Peace Education networks were formed around the country. Even at that time it was perceived that radical changes might be needed in schools if the ideas being discussed could take root in schools. Political factors governing school policy also played a part and of course there came the backlash against liberal teaching styles that reduced teachers' freedom to develop more holistic approaches. I directly experienced these myself as a teacher struggling with a commitment to democracy in the classroom in the 80's and 90's.

Increasingly people committed to developing conflict management skills in children were drawn to peer mediation as a way of channelling the skills development and some schools responded enthusiastically, seeing it as a way of addressing the bullying and conflict which happened in the playground. Mediation UK lent its support to these initiatives and developed an education wing to its work. Over time however, experienced peer mediation trainers have noticed that the schemes fail to survive for long after the initial training if the school does not embrace the values of mediation.
Young people soon notice if their conflicts are dealt with one way out on the playground by their peers but another way by the adults. They appreciate having their views respected by the mediators and notice all the more if there is a lack of trust and respect from the teachers and lunchtime staff.

To some extent this dissonance can be mitigated if a school has taken on board the practice and values of Circle Time - a process which encourages mutual respect, active listening, non-judgemental acceptance of differences, inclusion and problem-solving. Unfortunately this excellent process is not always understood as precisely that - a process which entails the use of many restorative skills and values - mutual respect, empathy, active listening, impartiality, non-judgemental acceptance of difference, win-win problem-solving. All too often it is considered a time for 'sitting around and discussing problems' and the personal growth and development aspects are ignored, not least by the teacher for whom, to be fair, vulnerability is threatening without the appropriate support from colleagues.

School mediation work then, has reached a point where many practitioners are accepting that more work needs to be done to effect whole school change. This seems to parallel exactly what has been happening recently in Restorative Justice Projects initiated by the police. The inspiration for the projects has come from the conferencing process, originally designed for dealing with victim/offender issues. The potential for use in schools has been identified, the work has started and then frustration has arisen because the whole school has not necessarily understood or embraced the approach.

So let me return to Robin and Lynne's question and my contribution. I am involved ina two-year project in Oxfordshire, working in two secondary schools, to see how Restorative Justice principles and practices can impact on certain key issues in schools. The performance indicators being looked at by the funders of the project - the Oxford Y.O.T,(Youth Offending Team) the L.E.A.(Local Education Authority) and the Thames Valley Police - include reduction in exclusion, raising of attendance, raising of achievement , reduction in staff turnover and absenteeism. I am also concerned with key qualitative indicators such attitudinal and behavioural change as well as tangible changes in management structures. I have made no secret of the fact that this is a pioneering project and we are all learning as we go. Explicitly so - I consider this an Action Research project with the involvement and the collaboration of the school community. This is a vital aspect of the project - it is an organisational change project underscored by restorative values.

It is early days to discuss the project in detail but I will relate the thinking I have been doing back to the sunny day Robin, Lynne, Debbie and I spent together and to the issues that were raised. I only mention the Oxford project to put my thinking in context.

Approaching schools
Key questions for Robin and Lynne were how to approach a school and how to engage key people. I have been reflecting on this and come to the conclusion that we need to address this issue from a community conferencing, problem-solving perspective and go into the experience with our conference facilitators' hats on. In other words we do not have an agenda of persuasion or coercion. Instead we listen actively to the situation as painted by the people we are meeting, we support them to identify their issues and problems, we create safety for them to express their fears and concerns in their present situation, we encourage exchange in the group about what they currently do well and then invite them to identify ways forward. Last and not least we explain what we can offer by way of support, whether this be training or consultancy in addressing the implementation issues. In other words - we are modelling restorative practices from the moment we make the first contact with the school. Our process IS our 'product'.

Time
Another issue that Lynne raised was the issue of time. It is an issue raised by the teachers time and again. When is there time to receive training? When is there time to train young people? When is there time to use the processes even when trained?
These are all very important questions. To some extent I think, as trainer/consultants, we have to be careful not to 'rescue' here. How and when the training will pan out is partly a problem for the schools themselves. My experience in mediation training is that when a school really wants it they make the time available but before they have taken that decision, almost like a leap of faith, time is an insurmountable barrier. So when people raise issues of time I try to listen to the feelings behind the words. However, it is also true that there are tremendous pressures on teachers time-wise. The Restorative Justice community has a role to play at an LEA and even at a national level to lobby for greater flexibility in the teaching timetable. If the government supports the development of Restorative Justice, which I believe it does, then there needs to be a commitment to creating opportunities for it to happen in schools and this includes the financial resources and the time for the initial training, the time for strategic support and the time to sustain the projects.