Resultados del diagnóstico inicial que presenta la EA en niños de 9-

Henning (2011: 27) states that the purpose of consulting existing literature is the “contextualisation of your study to argue a case”. According to Hart (2018) a literature study entails becoming acquainted with literature that deals broadly with the topic chosen as well as directly with research related to the study field (see Chapter 2 as well).

According to Kothari (2004) a literature review has the following value to the success of research: all available literature concerning the problem at hand must necessarily be surveyed and examined before a definition of the research problem is given. This means that the researcher must be well conversant with relevant theories in the field, reports and records, as well as all other relevant literature (conceptual as well as empirical literature). The researcher must devote sufficient time to the reviewing of research already undertaken on related problems. A literature review allows the researcher to identify what data and other materials, if any, are available for operational purposes. Knowing what data are available often serves to narrow the problem itself, as well as the technique that might be used to study. This would also help a researcher to identify gaps in the theories, enabling the researcher to take new strides in the field for furtherance of knowledge and build on existing premises. Studies on related problems are useful for indicating the type of difficulties that may be encountered in the present study, and the possible analytical shortcomings. At times, such studies may also suggest useful and even new lines of approach to the present problem (cf. Kothari, 2004). This enables the researcher to render an original contribution to the field of school discipline and an intervention into problem behaviour of learners.

1. The concept of Restorative justice

Against this background, various works were studied in order to become acquainted with the concept of restorative justice. Studies by subject exponents like Braithwaite and Strang (2017); Braithwaite (2004); Clark (2012); Reyneke (2011); Smit (2011); Suvall (2010); Besemer(2017); Ebrahim (2017); Du Plessis (2018); Nair (2018); Kaufmann (2016); Katz (2016) and Zehr and Gohar (2014) ( 2003) were considered in depth and formed a basis from which a more detailed study could be made.

2. Restorative justice in South Africa

Sources on restorative justice in South Africa, and especially concerning the youth (see Clark, 2012 & Suvall, 2010) form the foundation of this study. Various methodological sources entrenched in this study include authors such as Coombes (2001); Black (1999); Dantzker & Hunter (2012); Henning (2011); Kumar (2005); Lehaney (1994); Maree (2010) and Rule (2011). A personal interview with the Head of Discipline ( 2014), at the school involved with the study, was valuable as it gave further insight into the problem regarding the support of learners after the “punishment” was concluded (the value of this interview is reflected in chapter 5).

3. Restorative justice: Internationally

Various studies on restorative justice in international school environments were identified and best practises identified (Zehr, 2014) (Zehr & Gohar, 2003), for possible inclusion in the South African setting. Suvall (2010) proposes that punitive discipline is the dominant model in many schools in the United States of America. Punishment consists of expulsion or suspension and surveillance (the close observation of the offender/ watching the offender’s moves) that are often part of the problem and not a solution. This form of punishment offers the offender no opportunity to learn from the experience.

4. Restorative justice: Why and how?

The dominant aim of restorative justice is the disapproval of the offender’s behaviour but also the reintegration and support for the offender and victim. The characteristics of a punitive school policy according to Zehr and Gohar (2003) are that discipline includes a zero tolerance policy as well as the school to prison pipeline (Zehr & Gohar, 2003). One of the disadvantages of a punitive discipline system is the fact that it alienates the offender and it could be psychologically harmful to the wrongdoer at a

later stage (Suvall, 2010: 552). In other words, it creates a ripple effect, where the harm done by the offence is not repaired by the reaction but rather remains unresolved. Often, with the punitive discipline system, the needs of the victim are forgotten. Problems within the school environment can escalate if conflict is not addressed properly. One of the models that can be considered is the “family group conferencing model” (Suvall, 2010: 558). This model is discussed in detail in chapter 6 (see section 6.2.1 and section 6.2.3).

Reintegration of the offending learner is very important in solving problems in the school and community. This implies that any punitive measures must allow the learner’s acceptance back into the school community. According to Imiera (2018) as well as Kohn, schools and communities should deal with minor offences “without trying to shame or isolate offenders” (Kohn, 1996: 168). All of mankind strives for a sense of belonging and it is important while punishing offenders not to take away this “sense”. Traditional forms of punishment push away or remove the offending learner from the rest of the school/community. The goals and objectives of restorative justice are to reduce suspension, to sustain the connection with the offender and with the reintegration of the offender as the focus (Imiera, 2018). This aspect is discussed in more detail in Chapter 6 (see section 6.2).

Davis (2014) states that punitive disipline, for example suspension and expulsion from school, is not working as a method of correcting behaviour although schools are “over” relying on those punitive strategies. As a matter of fact, Davis (2014) states that it was found that schools with high suspension rates, are offering less safe environments for learners and punishment given, is observed as less reasonable, as well as having lower academic outcomes. Duncan (in Davis, 2014) made the comment that the rethinking and redesigning of school discipline practices are long overdue. Schools with zero-tolerance policies, may be under the impression that having a zero tolerance policy is the answer to bad behaviour. However, zero-tolerance approaches are short- term oriented and based on fear. It focuses only on the rule that was broken and the punishment deserved. It does not attempt to repair harm done or to repair the damage to relationships (Davis, 2014). On the other hand, school-based restorative justice

offers a more sustainable, reasonable, and respectful alternative when dealing with misbehaviour, and creates safer schools (Davis, 2014).

In order to implement restorative justice in schools Davis (2014) gives the following guidelines to schools:

1. Assess Need

It is important to assess the numbers regarding suspensions and expulsions at the school where restorative justice is to be implemented. This information can be obtained through the school’s discipline/support office’s records or in absence of a fully functional discipline/support office at a school, the Department of Education (DOE) is legally bound to keep record of expelled learners as one of the functions of the DOE is to be involved in all cases of expulsion. It is also important to assess whether there is consistency in the school's discipline practices (through case comparison) as well as determine if the school have a safe, fair, and positive learning environment?

2. Engage the School Community

It is vital that staff, parents, students, and the community members are satisfied with the discipline practices and outcomes at the school? If one of the parties are concerned about the negative impact of punitive discipline, investigation should be made into the matter. For example, in the United States of America it was found that suspending students just once, triples the probability that they will end up in the juvenile justice system, and doubles the chance they will drop out. A strong foundation can be laid by involving as many of the members of the school community as possible in the restorative process in the school.

3. Hire a Restorative Justice Coordinator

It is ideal to have a full-time restorative justice coordinator working for the school, alternatively, a trained and motivated vice principal, dean, or school counsellor can be responsible to manage training and school-wide implementation of restorative practices. The main objectives of having a full time person involved, are apart from as mentioned training and implementing, also, in order to manage the process and to give support to the offender as well as victim and the irrespective families.

4. Begin Training

Training should start early in the school year with an introductory session, for as many staff as possible, including the security officers, teachers, counsellors, school administrators and support staff. This introductory training should prepare the school to implement proactive, community-building processes school-wide. With the next meeting the focus should be on a smaller group that is to be trained to facilitate the restorative discipline processes, to address rule infractions and to be used as an alternative to suspension. This group could consist of the school counsellor and discipline team.

5. School-Wide Implementation

What was learned must now be put into practice, with coaching from the restorative justice coordinator or other designated person. Restorative conversation techniques should be practised.

6. Institute Restorative Discipline

Alternatives for punishment must now be used as part of the restorative process. Students that WERE absent because they have been suspended should participate in healing circles. These practices must involve the parents and follow-up is very important. The school discipline policy should also be revised and updated.

7. Involve Students in Peer Restorative Practices

Students must be trained to promote and facilitate circles. They must be empowered to create a safe and respectful space to talk through instead of fighting through differences

8. Be Sure to Evaluate

In order to make sure you're on track, review and analyse data quarterly. Compare the past and present data on suspension rates and incidents. Question the teachers, students, and administrators regarding how they feel about their school:

Do they feel a greater sense of safety?

An increased sense of belonging?

Are relationships better among students and between students and adults?