title: Can we call ourselves a Restorative School yet? Report on an Innovations Project in Restorative Practices

authors: Kaveney, Kathleen Mary

subjects: Restorative Practices

abstract: This report will discuss the impact of an Innovative Restorative Practices professional development of three years, 2009-2011, introduced to a mid-decile, urban, multi-cultural, New Zealand secondary school.

There are a number of reasons that a school might choose to commit to a restorative model and at the heart of this professional development (PD) was a belief that implementing Restorative Practices (RP) would have a positive impact on the well-being of teachers and students. In 2008 the school successfully won funding for a three year professional development and the project began in 2009. One of the challenges of Restorative Practices is the adaptation of the practices so that they can be utilised on a daily basis by teachers to deal with issues that arise each day, that impact both teaching and learning. The school developed a model of classroom meetings and taught teachers to use a discursive process of inquiry. This process and these skills were used to challenge poor learning behaviours by students and difficulties in relational dynamics in classrooms.

This report analyses data that is collected as a matter of course by the school to consider whether or not the introduction and implementation of Restorative Practices has had an impact. It discusses evidence that this adaptation of RP for daily use has made any difference to the school and explores the implementation of Restorative Practices by considering various data: stand down, suspensions and exclusions, referrals from class and the student management records that record student behaviour. It also explores the self reported impact of the professional development on participants.

The data show decreased involvement of Senior Leaders in various behaviour situations and increased contribution from the deans, form teachers and classroom teachers in the management of student behaviour. This suggests that teachers/staff are more able to de-escalate behaviour situations and that behaviour management is better aligned with staff roles and/ or expectations. Feedback from participant teachers suggest that learning the new skills and the regular discussion meetings have positively impacted their classroom management and their mental well being.

The teachers’ self-reported sense of competency in using the skills and processes introduced/ taught to participants is analysed and it is apparent that some of the skills are more readily utilised than others. It appears that the use of a discursive process, and the regular opportunity to discuss issues of learning and teaching, have provided teachers with an opportunity to better understand both themselves and their students, enhancing their professional identity. Restorative practices at this school have been utilised in both a proactive and reactive way. It seems that the practices have much potential as an everyday tool, rather than just a reactive device. This report sought to answer the question “Is the school able to call itself restorative yet?” but argues that perhaps the concern should be “Are we restorative enough?”

text: Can we call ourselves a Restorative School yet? Report on an Innovations Project in Restorative Practices This report will discuss the impact of an Innovative Restorative Practices professional development of three years, 2009-2011, introduced to a mid-decile, urban, multi-cultural, New Zealand secondary school.

There are a number of reasons that a school might choose to commit to a restorative model and at the heart of this professional development (PD) was a belief that implementing Restorative Practices (RP) would have a positive impact on the well-being of teachers and students. In 2008 the school successfully won funding for a three year professional development and the project began in 2009. One of the challenges of Restorative Practices is the adaptation of the practices so that they can be utilised on a daily basis by teachers to deal with issues that arise each day, that impact both teaching and learning. The school developed a model of classroom meetings and taught teachers to use a discursive process of inquiry. This process and these skills were used to challenge poor learning behaviours by students and difficulties in relational dynamics in classrooms.

This report analyses data that is collected as a matter of course by the school to consider whether or not the introduction and implementation of Restorative Practices has had an impact. It discusses evidence that this adaptation of RP for daily use has made any difference to the school and explores the implementation of Restorative Practices by considering various data: stand down, suspensions and exclusions, referrals from class and the student management records that record student behaviour. It also explores the self reported impact of the professional development on participants.

The data show decreased involvement of Senior Leaders in various behaviour situations and increased contribution from the deans, form teachers and classroom teachers in the management of student behaviour. This suggests that teachers/staff are more able to de-escalate behaviour situations and that behaviour management is better aligned with staff roles and/ or expectations. Feedback from participant teachers suggest that learning the new skills and the regular discussion meetings have positively impacted their classroom management and their mental well being.

The teachers’ self-reported sense of competency in using the skills and processes introduced/ taught to participants is analysed and it is apparent that some of the skills are more readily utilised than others. It appears that the use of a discursive process, and the regular opportunity to discuss issues of learning and teaching, have provided teachers with an opportunity to better understand both themselves and their students, enhancing their professional identity. Restorative practices at this school have been utilised in both a proactive and reactive way. It seems that the practices have much potential as an everyday tool, rather than just a reactive device. This report sought to answer the question “Is the school able to call itself restorative yet?” but argues that perhaps the concern should be “Are we restorative enough?”

year: 2012

title: Pandora’s box down-under: origins and numbers of mustelids transported to New Zealand for biological control of rabbits

authors: King, Carolyn M.

subjects: Invasive species

abstract: This paper describes one of the world’s first large-scale experiments in biological control of a major vertebrate pest of agriculture, which was tried in New Zealand during the second half of the nineteenth century. Starting from the late 1860s, pasture damage in Southland and Otago by European rabbits was causing serious reductions in productivity of sheep (wool clip and lambing percentages) associated with malnutrition of the breeding ewes, and a consequent decline in the value of pastoral land. In response, and despite repeated local and international warnings, ferrets, stoats and weasels (Mustela furo, M. erminea and M. nivalis) were liberated on the worst of the rabbit-infested pastures. They were perceived as the ‘natural enemies of the rabbit’ but (unlike foxes) too small to threaten lambs. Over the 50 years after 1870, upwards of 75,000 ferrets, most imported from Australia or locally bred, were released in the South Island. Over the decade 1883–1892, at least 7838 stoats and weasels arrived from Britain. At least 25 shipments are known, with an average of only 10% mortality per shipment. Of the 3585 animals listed by species, 73% were weasels. The total cost of the ferret programme cannot now be estimated; that of stoats and weasels alone was at least £5441, probably twice that, or >$NZ 1–2 million in today’s money. Mustelids (and cats) killed many young rabbits, which was helpful because rates of change in rabbit populations are sensitive to variations in juvenile mortality, but in the most rabbit-prone semi-arid lands, mustelids could not remove enough rabbits to prevent the continuing damage to sheep pastures. The era of deliberate introductions of mustelids to control rabbits in New Zealand was short, expensive, and unsuccessful.

text: Pandora’s box down-under: origins and numbers of mustelids transported to New Zealand for biological control of rabbits This paper describes one of the world’s first large-scale experiments in biological control of a major vertebrate pest of agriculture, which was tried in New Zealand during the second half of the nineteenth century. Starting from the late 1860s, pasture damage in Southland and Otago by European rabbits was causing serious reductions in productivity of sheep (wool clip and lambing percentages) associated with malnutrition of the breeding ewes, and a consequent decline in the value of pastoral land. In response, and despite repeated local and international warnings, ferrets, stoats and weasels (Mustela furo, M. erminea and M. nivalis) were liberated on the worst of the rabbit-infested pastures. They were perceived as the ‘natural enemies of the rabbit’ but (unlike foxes) too small to threaten lambs. Over the 50 years after 1870, upwards of 75,000 ferrets, most imported from Australia or locally bred, were released in the South Island. Over the decade 1883–1892, at least 7838 stoats and weasels arrived from Britain. At least 25 shipments are known, with an average of only 10% mortality per shipment. Of the 3585 animals listed by species, 73% were weasels. The total cost of the ferret programme cannot now be estimated; that of stoats and weasels alone was at least £5441, probably twice that, or >$NZ 1–2 million in today’s money. Mustelids (and cats) killed many young rabbits, which was helpful because rates of change in rabbit populations are sensitive to variations in juvenile mortality, but in the most rabbit-prone semi-arid lands, mustelids could not remove enough rabbits to prevent the continuing damage to sheep pastures. The era of deliberate introductions of mustelids to control rabbits in New Zealand was short, expensive, and unsuccessful.

year: 2017

title: Whakarongo mai!: Transformative teaching to support Māori identity and success in a mainstream school

authors: Gilgen, Renée

subjects: Māori and mainstream education

abstract: This thesis topic emerged following a year’s teaching experience in a mainstream classroom during 2009. My cultural assumptions of being a Māori teacher in a mainstream class were challenged predominantly by a group of Māori students in the classroom. The level of despondency I felt as a result of disruptive student behaviours forced me to reassess my own socio-cultural constructs which had influenced the formation of my identity as Māori and as a mainstream teacher. The purpose of this study was to understand and explore a transformational behavioural shift which occurred within a group of Māori students during 2009 and the level of support they felt they received as Māori within a mainstream classroom context. National and international literature demonstrates that transformative praxis is both reflective and active. Successful inclusive teaching requires a personal and professional commitment to firstly understand individual cultural constructs to then better understand how learners are perceived and positioned. Culturally responsive pedagogy ensures that all students’ cultural practices and values are acknowledged and included into classroom teaching and learning programmes. In a New Zealand mainstream context, the Treaty of Waitangi principles of ‘partnership’, ‘participation’ and ‘protection’ serve as a bi-cultural ‘power-sharing’ metaphor from which all mainstream teachers of Māori students can successfully encourage student voice and foster reciprocal teaching and learning relationships. My use of qualitative research methods and kaupapa Māori principles to guide the research process ensured that Māori cultural protocols and practices were honoured. My role as a Māori insider researcher meant that my relationship with the participants was already established. Our reflections as Māori students and a Māori teacher in a mainstream classroom context were based from shared teaching and learning experiences during 2009. Researcher reflexivity has ensured that the research integrity, validity and reliability have remained high. The research findings present the reflections of both the participants and researcher as Māori students and as a Māori teacher during 2009. Participants believed that teaching and learning programmes which incorporated te reo Māori served to honour their identity as Māori. However, their awareness of participating with tikanga Māori principles of whānaungatanga (relationships), manaakitanga (caring), ako (reciprocity) and aroha (respect) embedded within classroom activities that were exclusively in English, were not identified as being relevant to them as Māori. Similarly, the Treaty of Waitangi principles lacked transparency within my teaching pedagogy. Two key implications for teaching and learning in mainstream schools and classrooms were identified. Firstly, there is an urgency for mainstream school managers, leaders and teachers to develop an understanding of the Treaty of Waitangi and its significance for the 21st Century mainstream teacher and learner. A bi-cultural understanding of ourselves as treaty partners support Māori cultural values and practices within increasingly diverse mainstream school and classroom contexts. Māori students‟ success becomes the responsibility of all mainstream managers, leaders and teachers as treaty partners. Secondly, inclusive and culturally responsive pedagogy demonstrates that Māori and non-Māori mainstream teachers are capable of effectively engaging Māori students with learning while acknowledging and reaffirming their cultural identity and language as tangata whenua. Overall, my commitment for Māori students to be supported as Māori within mainstream school and classroom context has been enriched and strengthened as a result of this research study. The cultural and professional tensions I have experienced in mainstream contexts have challenged the socio-cultural constructs that I had accepted as being my cultural ‘norm.’

text: Whakarongo mai!: Transformative teaching to support Māori identity and success in a mainstream school This thesis topic emerged following a year’s teaching experience in a mainstream classroom during 2009. My cultural assumptions of being a Māori teacher in a mainstream class were challenged predominantly by a group of Māori students in the classroom. The level of despondency I felt as a result of disruptive student behaviours forced me to reassess my own socio-cultural constructs which had influenced the formation of my identity as Māori and as a mainstream teacher. The purpose of this study was to understand and explore a transformational behavioural shift which occurred within a group of Māori students during 2009 and the level of support they felt they received as Māori within a mainstream classroom context. National and international literature demonstrates that transformative praxis is both reflective and active. Successful inclusive teaching requires a personal and professional commitment to firstly understand individual cultural constructs to then better understand how learners are perceived and positioned. Culturally responsive pedagogy ensures that all students’ cultural practices and values are acknowledged and included into classroom teaching and learning programmes. In a New Zealand mainstream context, the Treaty of Waitangi principles of ‘partnership’, ‘participation’ and ‘protection’ serve as a bi-cultural ‘power-sharing’ metaphor from which all mainstream teachers of Māori students can successfully encourage student voice and foster reciprocal teaching and learning relationships. My use of qualitative research methods and kaupapa Māori principles to guide the research process ensured that Māori cultural protocols and practices were honoured. My role as a Māori insider researcher meant that my relationship with the participants was already established. Our reflections as Māori students and a Māori teacher in a mainstream classroom context were based from shared teaching and learning experiences during 2009. Researcher reflexivity has ensured that the research integrity, validity and reliability have remained high. The research findings present the reflections of both the participants and researcher as Māori students and as a Māori teacher during 2009. Participants believed that teaching and learning programmes which incorporated te reo Māori served to honour their identity as Māori. However, their awareness of participating with tikanga Māori principles of whānaungatanga (relationships), manaakitanga (caring), ako (reciprocity) and aroha (respect) embedded within classroom activities that were exclusively in English, were not identified as being relevant to them as Māori. Similarly, the Treaty of Waitangi principles lacked transparency within my teaching pedagogy. Two key implications for teaching and learning in mainstream schools and classrooms were identified. Firstly, there is an urgency for mainstream school managers, leaders and teachers to develop an understanding of the Treaty of Waitangi and its significance for the 21st Century mainstream teacher and learner. A bi-cultural understanding of ourselves as treaty partners support Māori cultural values and practices within increasingly diverse mainstream school and classroom contexts. Māori students‟ success becomes the responsibility of all mainstream managers, leaders and teachers as treaty partners. Secondly, inclusive and culturally responsive pedagogy demonstrates that Māori and non-Māori mainstream teachers are capable of effectively engaging Māori students with learning while acknowledging and reaffirming their cultural identity and language as tangata whenua. Overall, my commitment for Māori students to be supported as Māori within mainstream school and classroom context has been enriched and strengthened as a result of this research study. The cultural and professional tensions I have experienced in mainstream contexts have challenged the socio-cultural constructs that I had accepted as being my cultural ‘norm.’

year: 2010