All four staff sessions showed incremental innovation during the soft systems methodology sessions41. They all produced divergent opportunities by developing a range of purposeful
activities to achieve their root definitions. These lists could arguably be forms of potential emergence. The ability of staff in each school to create new activities to achieve their root definitions shows an ability to imagine alternative trajectories to achieve a new system state. Part of this process involved changing the spaces and places in which these discussions happened, i.e., the creation of heterotopias for staff participating in this research. In the third and final focus group session (19th March 2018) in Riverview School staff reflected on their purposeful activity statement for a second time, ten months after they had created it on the 15th June 2017. Firstly, they were asked whether they still agreed with their root definition statement. There was affirmation in the room from the participants, until: RV6 I don’t know whether I understood it but I do agree with it.
Researcher You created it.
RV6 No I do, yeah, I do agree. Researcher OK.
RV1 I think we’ve heard it before.
This conversation demonstrates deterioration in the individual staff member’s ability to recollect the root definition. The lack of feedback and a self-organising network has led to an
41 See Appendix 4 for the structure of the SSM sessions and appendices 7 to 10 for what was produced by each
151
absence of collective memory. This places greater onus on individuals to retain information. Secondly, in the final statement, ‘I think we’ve heard it before’, ‘I think’ shows signs of deterioration, even though this member of staff was at the SSM session and the three focus groups in the school where this was discussed. This is symptomatic of the fact that, with few opportunities to come together outside of the focus group sessions, the staff members’ ability to recall the root definition has been depleted over time – both individual and group memory has faded.
In Laguna High, the implementation or restorative approaches resonates with the non- linearity of complex adaptive system. The school has embarked on a new form of staff training as the structures of the school have changed. The following exchange demonstrates this:
LH1 I think at Laguna High the…, it was tried and failed [reference to RP], and then there was a different type of structure that was in school and then it went back to restorative working and from now, you meet with Mr F and, you know, learn about restorative practice.
RV9 So new staff are…
LH1 …are educated on it. So… and I think also, we mentioned as well like… I feel like when you’re interviewed, they look for it, if you are possibly that type of person…
It appears from this conversation that previous attempts at RP knowledge creation were not been successful in Laguna High. Interestingly, the school has begun recruiting staff who demonstrate restorative values during the selection process; the selected new staff are then inducted in RP when joining the staffing body in the school. This is a different model of school change: rather than staff being selected for their technical abilities to teach and manage behaviour, new staff are selected because they resonate with restorative values and are then educated in RP. Over time this has the potential to create a cultural tipping point for RP as new staff amplify the norms and values of the school. An additional benefit over time will be the attrition of non-restorative staff, which will tip the old system into a new system state.
The challenge of developing the purposeful activity in Northside School was of interest as the staff continued to discuss their existing localised purposeful activity. The rationale for the Year 8 training was explained as a pilot by the following exchange:
152
NS4 Erm, yeah I’d sort of agree with NS2 really, I think the plan was really to run it through the… run it by Year 8 first, see how they got on and then sort of… they’re the example and then you sort of roll it out to the rest of the school because you’ve got like a model in place. I mean as a form tutor and part of NS2‘s team I do try and speak to my form group about restorative so that it is not a detention, it’s not, you know, for some of you it might just be an opportunity to get your thoughts together.
NS3 That’s a good point, yeah.
NS1 …maybe you might just need a couple… you know, maybe you might need a lesson out of that lesson and…
NS2 PSHE? Would that be good idea?
This exchange builds on the previous discussion about focusing on Year 8s but NS4 also alludes to the need to ensure that all young people receive the benefits of having a reflective space. The participants’ discussion concluded with the possible solution of developing an activity within PSHE. This was put forward as a new idea; however, this was explicitly part of their focus in the activity they chose to help develop. This again reflects the lack of attention being paid to the activities undertaken since the SSM session, which has resulted in loss of group memory.
The recognition of an absence of action raises the question for the staff about to what extent they are able to influence Northside School to further change the system to support the development of RP, as highlighted by the following discussion:
NS5 I don’t know how much power we have to change systems…
NS3 …in terms of when it’s done and how… like I think in terms of how it’s done, and doing training but…
NS2 I suppose if we fed back… NS3 To deputy head.
NS5 …I suppose it’ll be deputy head that will be in charge of behaviour, so if we… if we fed back directly to deputy head to…
153
NS5 …about these are the things that we want to do and we have some of deputy head’s clout to umm push those things through… if we have one assembly, what we were talking about, one of the big things was having those assemblies, those assemblies are run on a liturgical42 basis…
This discussion shows the staff seeking to find a leverage point in the school to address their challenge of inactivity. This raises an immediate response from the staff. They do not immediately perceive that, as individual agents, they are able to influence change.
Nevertheless, a solution emerges as they then identify a leverage point that can be influenced by them collectively - the deputy head. This shows a new form of self-organisation
happening within the focus group, into a loose network communicating a common message. In their discussion the emergence of a series of ideas shows how they wish to amplify their decision making so that they can use the social energy of the deputy head. The staff in the focus group perceived that, through gaining the permission of the deputy Head, there existed an opportunity for RP by accessing attention and information in the space created by
assemblies in the school. This would create a trajectory for their root definition by raising young people’s awareness of restorative practice in Northside School. This idea raised a further opportunity within the focus group, which returned to the emerging issue of PSHE and discussed it at length:
NS4 I think… is it something that we could do in PSHE? I’m just thinking about the students and sort of… [inaudible couple of words] a PSHE lesson? Rather than…
NS3 I think that’s a great idea. NS1 It is.
NS2 But the PHSE… NS3 It’s a really good idea.
NS4 I’m just putting an idea there; I’m not saying we have to do it but I’m just putting an idea… NS2 You’ve got some people who would do that very well.
NS1 And some wouldn’t.
154
NS3 It… the time slot could, but you can’t include that, like PSHE’s quite heavily kind of curriculum-led, as much as people might think it’s…
NS2 And also with… with the teaching the kids about it, Ms C [member of staff43] would do an amazing job, whereas you’ve got student… teachers who look at PSHE and they look at… teachers look at the PSHE lesson 5 minutes before…
NS1 It’s true.
NS4 …I know I’ve… I know I’ve definitely done it, so 5 minutes before you teach it, so… NS1 Your best bet’s the assembly…
What this discussion shows is the focus group staff reaching a bifurcation point in the emergence of change in the school. A choice relating to overcoming their challenge of inaction is presented: ‘Does the purposeful activity go with PSHE or assemblies?’. Through exploring their own personal experiences a collective narrative helps to inform the prospect of the opportunity working in the school. There is an admission that staff do not have time to prepare, which would affect the quality of the delivery of such a session. They therefore decide to remain with their first suggestion of using an assembly to deliver awareness of RP. Paradoxically, the staff had previously ruled this out as not happening soon; they have now found a means to work around the boundary of inaction.
In Evergreen College the challenge of inaction also presented an emergent opportunity within the focus group. Staff in the focus group perceived that there was a wider network of staff using RA in the school. However, the perception was that restorative approaches are implicit as staff embody practice, as shown by the following statement:
EC5 I still think… I do think it lives in the individuals… and because of the… the roles that we have here, we’re all a part of the pastoral team in some… some way, shape or form. It still lives in us as individuals, and we’ve chosen or been successful in obtaining pastoral roles because [laughs] it is within us. There are still many members of staff, even some in pastoral roles, that don’t like the approach, don’t want to use it, don’t think that it works, takes up too much time, ‘I’m just going to take a statement and then put… and then figure out who’s to blame and put that kid in detention’ without anything around it… there is skills within people, within this school that have had no formal training in that area because it’s within that person,
155
but as a sustainable whole-school approach, it’s not in the policy, it’s not in regular practice, it’s not done in every college, it’s not done by every senior tutor, it’s not done in the
detentions, so it’s not sustainable.
This statement implies that the school has a group of bounded agents (a pre-network group of practitioners who have yet to form a group purpose). They are bounded by their commitment to developing RA but have not yet formed the connections and interdependencies necessary to be a networked team. What this conversation also indicates is that, in Evergreen College, RA practice is conducted by a minority of staff in niches. As the extract closes the member of staff provides a perspective that, although the values of RA are present in the school, the more formal structures associated with school change (or the WSA) are not. Thus, this member of staff does not believe that the use of RA in Evergreen College is currently sustainable.
Following on from this statement other members of the focus group then began to respond by seeking a way to increase the use of RA in their colleges44 rather than across the whole school. The process of creative emergence happened during the following exchange:
EC6 …but I wasn’t aware that this was a whole-school training kind of thing. I kind of thought we just referred to you (EC5), could we kind of put together – I know again this takes time; it’s a bit more difficult, but maybe just a very short sample of questions that teachers could use… when they send a student out of lesson… like, you know, ‘In order to formulate your
discussion, try asking this rather than this’, and not to patronise… and I don’t know whether people find it patronising… that’s the only thing, whether they would be a bit… but kind of maybe, you know, ‘If you’re really struggling with a student, what…’ because I often share strategies as a senior tutor. I’ll often say, ‘Rather than asking x to “Why are you not getting on with your work”, why don’t you say, “How far have you got”’ and kind of turn it on so you’re then starting a conversation rather than telling her off and making her feel uncomfortable and so it’s kind of… I don’t know whether I’m being patronising doing it but I’m trying to kind of work on a more positive note with those students.
EC5 Yeah.
EC6 And so, it’s almost… some people haven’t maybe seen it modelled or…
156
EC5 There’s a nice… there’s a meme and it’s got lots of swearing in it, but there’s a meme and it says, ‘When you’re at work, instead of saying… this’ and then something will turn it
[inaudible couple of words]… so we can almost sort of put out a grid that incorporates not only restorative approach as a standard four questions, but actually all of the things you’re talking about. ‘Instead of saying this why don’t you try this’, umm…
EC6 And people will take or leave it and it just might be there’s some people who are willing to try it that have never had the tools to do it, they’ve never been shown how to do it, and then like you say there’s people who are never going to do it, so they’ll just go, ‘Oh I don’t want to do that’ and they’ll just ignore it but it might be something that might resonate with quite a few people that maybe have never been given that opportunity.
In this exchange the two members of staff are amplifying each other’s ideas, self-organising to create an emergent idea which had not been developed in the SSM session. Yet, the emergence of modelling RA would be a trajectory which would help the school reach its root definition. The use of scenarios gives a nuanced understanding in which to apply restorative phrases to use in conflict situations to potentially inform different responses by staff.
Interestingly, the participants are aware their colleagues may interpret this emergent idea of scenario-based restorative language as patronising and are careful to ensure their newly developed ‘questions grid’ resonates with them. The staff participants want to resonate with their colleagues, so are developing a means of promoting RA which is not rejected. This resonates with Freire’s solution to the banking model: ‘Dialogue with people is neither a concession nor a gift much less a tactic of domination. Dialogue as the encounter among men to “name” the world, is a fundamental precondition for their true humanization’ (1970:137).
By having a voluntary dialogue with colleagues as a means of promoting RA the two focus group members recognise that, although some staff members will not use the three-phrase grid, voluntary engagement will influence the take-up of RA among other colleagues.
Furthermore, their objective as a team is to influence the use of language in the school. The development of the ‘three-phrase grid’ is an interesting way to support other members of staff in the adoption of restorative language in the school. The three-phase grid also requires collective knowledge from the participants in the focus group for it to be developed. This shared knowledge creation is an important aspect of systems change emerging as the potential for focus group members to self-organise from bounded agents into a networked
157
team. The emergence of a new trajectory for RA appears to have been re-invigorated by their proposed activities in terms of both co-creating and allowing self-selection in the
development of RA in Evergreen College. The opportunity to overcome the previous lack of a purposeful activity was recognised, with the participants discussing the time needed to achieve this new activity:
EC5 So, could each of us, after today, give a short task with a deadline… All [laughs].
EC5 …can you come up with at least 3 phrases, ‘Instead of this, try this’; send them all to me, I’ll collate them in a grid and then I’ll share them back out again.
EC4 Do they have to be our own? [laughs].
EC8 ‘From now on I’m not going to say that; I’m going to say this’.
EC5 Just things you’ve heard that work, things that you’ve used yourself, at least 3 each from each of us, will give a nice list then we’ll be the same[?] and I’ll send it back out again to all of us and the others that aren’t here today to say, ‘This is what we’re using’ by… by… err… what are we, Tuesday, by end of tomorrow.
This creation of a purposeful activity shows that the participants were able to create a new activity and a way to achieve their root definition. The opportunity to develop this emergent form of RA in the school will depend on the galvanisation of attention and information within the existing bounded agents. The potential network shape appears to be coalescing around a hub and spoke model with the spokes feeding into the hub (EC5 as the hub acting as the co- ordinator).