Table 3 Logic model for Restorative Practice Intervention
Inputs | Whole school restorative activities | Causal Mechanisms | Intermediate Outcomes | Outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Initiation funding Staff training in restorative approach Policy and systems alignment Benchmarking | Individual-level • Student-staff: Restorative conversations; Student needs-led approach to learning • Student –student: Peer mentoring • Staff-staff: Peer mentoring Group level • Classroom: Circle time; Rotational seating plans • Staff: Circle time structure for meetings and policy development Organisational level • Distributive leadership • Language of school reflects restorative principles • Student involvement in high stakes school level decisions, e.g. school development planning. Community level • Engagement with families • Engagement with local community | Intra-personal skill development – empathy, accountability Enhanced confidence, self-efficacy and sense of achievement in learning among students Enhanced confidence, self-efficacy and reduced stress among staff Trustworthy, supportive, respectful relationships between: • Student-staff • Student-student • Staff-staff Improved relationships between school and families Improved relationships between school and community | School connectedness for students and staff Student engagement in learning and pride in success Positive school culture (e.g. supportive, welcoming, trustworthy, safe and secure) Enhanced school reputation in community and student/staff pride in school | Primary outcome: improved student mental health and wellbeing Improved staff mental health and wellbeing. Increase in student attendance Reductions in student suspension & permanent exclusion. Reduction in staff absence Reduction in students’ referrals to youth justice Reduction in bullying and inappropriate behaviour Improved academic attainment School oversubscription |
Contextual characteristics that influence implementation and programme theory | Â | |||
School level | Re-enforce and promote cultural shift | Undermine or threaten cultural shift | Â | |
• On-going senior leadership support and investment • Monitoring and evaluation • Self-assessment and development e.g. inset day meetings • Revision of policy documents as active process | • Staff changes and challenge with continuity • Sub-culture of staff resistance and challenge with consistency |  | ||
Policy and political level | Contextual drivers that value restorative approach (e.g. the Donaldson review recommending curriculum reform in Wales) | Contextual factors that threaten the approach (e.g. school accountability measures that focus on student results at the exclusion of other metrics) | Â | |