STAKEHOLDER PRESENTATION 2
Timeline
When developing a curriculum change plan everyone must first understand the
importance of the planning and decision-making process. Effective change happens through
careful preparation and intentional plans are implemented. “There is a time for everything, and a
season for every activity under the heavens” (New International Bible, 1978/2011, Ecclesiastes
3). As this curriculum change plan is introduced it must be understood that in order to change
punitive mindsets to restorative mindsets it normally takes three to five years. The Denver
School-based Restorative Practices Partnership (2023) states that the vision and mission of
expectation of restorative justice practices must be communicated with all stakeholders
explaining the purpose and the racial injustices in discipline related to the school-to-prison
pipeline. If this foundation for the stakeholders is not established then the mission will not be
fulfilled.
Curriculum Change Plan: Research Matrix: The most important aspect of the research
phase of this plan is determining the readiness of the school. Research shows that positive
outcomes are made with the implementation of restorative justice practices. However, in
order to establish positive outcomes copious amounts of professional development must
have been implemented prior to the rollout of restorative justice practices (Katic et al.,
2020). The research phase with embedded professional development will be one year.
This is critical and because of the importance of the first-year leadership must have
thoroughly assessed faculty and staff prior to beginning this journey. This is strictly a
STAKEHOLDER PRESENTATION 3
framework that must be completely supported by leadership to initiate the culture change
that will be imperative for effective implementation to be successful.
Curriculum Change Plan: Philosophy and Models for Change: In the same year the focus
model will be chosen that fits into this curriculum change. The progressivism model is
what would be the most effective to show the desire and outcome that is wanting to be
achieved. Students are always learning from each other, and when utilizing restorative
justice practices that is a key concept of the framework. When embedding this model the
students must communicate and be open-minded to accept each other’s point of view
(Lynch, 2016, p.8). This is a process of self-reflection and social-emotional growth. The
model is easy to understand, and stakeholders will be able to follow the plan of how it
will be integrated into restorative justice practices.
Curriculum Change Plan: Core Decisions: During the first year of professional
development and stakeholder feedback core decisions will be shared. There will be three
curriculum goals supporting the change. Vaandering (2014) explains that restorative
justice practices in schools are building relationships, being proactive a building peace
through a democratic pedagogy. The three goals are to: improve the morale in the school
community by implementing a sense of unity with students and teachers in the school,
make the school environment a safe place to attend, and decrease discipline referrals
therefore this will decrease out-of-school suspensions. Johnston et al., (2019) stated there
are three key theoretical concepts related to restorative justice practices: encounter,
transformative, and restorative practices. It’s the mission of moving students and teachers
from a sense of doing something wrong to focusing on how we fix it. These concepts will
require policy change moving towards a restorative school/community, transforming
STAKEHOLDER PRESENTATION 4
mindsets of the school/community, and building capacity in the school for restorative
development.
Curriculum Change Plan: Approaches to Implementation: Implementing a restorative
justice community in a school by shifting mindsets from punitive to restorative could take
as much as three to five years. The Denver School-based Restorative Practices
Partnership (2023) states that the vision and mission of the expectation of restorative
justice practices must be communicated with all stakeholders explaining the purpose and
the racial injustices in discipline related to the school-to-prison pipeline. If this
foundation is not established then the mission will not be fulfilled. As the implementation
is integrated in the schools the policymakers will ensure that multiple stakeholders are
involved to ensure buy-in of this positive growth change. As restorative justice practices
are implemented a data analysis will be done quarterly on attendance record data and
discipline referral data to review the impact the curriculum change is having on the
school environment. This information will be presented to school site meetings and
school board meetings to include all stakeholders in the outcomes. Morrison et al., (2005)
said that the key to an effective implementation is to have a whole-school culture change.
The evidence plan will have a successful alignment with the curriculum change plan
goals as long as effective professional learning, self-reflection, and patience are a part of
the implementation.
Curriculum Change Plan: Textbook and Digital Resource Chart: This last phase of
implementation will be around the third or fourth year. This is the phase where
restorative justice practices will be embedded in a civics education course. The textbook
is a supplemental book where civics is the main subject and restorative justice practices
STAKEHOLDER PRESENTATION 5
are embedded as a supplement. The stakeholders will be shown data and results of their
decision to agree to the curriculum change. The CIPP model was created by Daniel
Stufflebean from Western Michigan University (Molope et al., 2020). The evaluation
model is comprehensive and is named after context, input, process, and product. The
content is civics education, we're constantly evaluating the input to process and ensure
the final result will produce what is hoped for. The focus of the CIPP model is to
motivate the key participants (teachers, administrators) and stakeholders at the initiation,
implementation, and final approach to assist in the fidelity of the goal (Sopha et al., 2019,
p. 1363).
Technology
Technology can play a key part in implementing restorative justice practices. Schools
have to constantly keep up with technology changes so students are ready for the world (Kim et
al., 2015, p.76). In the middle and high school level technology is found more of a distraction
than a resource. Implementing a Digital Citizenship plan in the classroom can help strengthen
relationships between teachers and students. These two concepts combined can move forward a
shared partnership of educational technology and restorative justice practices. Digital Citizenship
is taught and also a piece of the curriculum change to promote safe online behavior. “Start
children off on the way they should go, and even when they are old, they will not turn from it”
(New International Bible, 1978/2011, Proverbs 22:6).
STAKEHOLDER PRESENTATION 7
References
Denver School-based Restorative Practices Partnership. (2017). School-wide restorative
practices: Step by step. Denver School-Based Restorative Practices Partnership.
Retrieved from https://www.skidmore.edu/campusri/documents/Denver-2017-School-
Wide-RP-Implementation-Guide.pdf
Katic, B., Alba, L.A., & Johnson, A.H. (2020). A systematic evaluation of restorative justice
practices: School violence prevention and response. Journal of School Violence, 19(4),
579-593. https://doi.org/10.1080/1538820.2020.1783670
Kim, L.E., Dar-Nimrod, I., & MacCann, C. (2018). Teacher personality and teacher effectiveness
in secondary school: Personality predicts teacher support and student self-efficacy but not
academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(3), 309-323.
https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000217
Johnston, G., & Van Ness, D. (2013). The meaning of restorative justice. In G. Johnston (Ed.), A
restorative justice reader (2nd ed., 12-22). NY: Routledge.
Lynch, K. (2021). The effect of restorative practices on student behavior and achievement in
schools.
Molope, M., & Oduaran, A. (2020). Evaluation of the community development practitioners’
professional development programme: CIPP model application. Development in Practice,
30(2), 194-206. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2019.1650894
STAKEHOLDER PRESENTATION 8
Morrison, B., Blood, P., & Thorsborne, M. (2005). Practicing restorative justice in school
communities: Addressing the challenge of culture change. Public Organization Review,
5(4), 335-357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-005-5095-6
New International Version Bible. (2011). Original work published 1978.
Sopha, S., Nanni, A., & Mahidol University International College. (2019). The CIPP model:
Applications in language program evaluation. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 16(4), 1360-
1367. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2019.16.4.19.1360
Vaandering, D. (2014). Relational restorative pedagogy in educator professional development.
Curriculum Inquiry, 44(4), 508-530. https://doi.org/10.1111/curi.12057
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
