What Works Brief #5: Physical and Emotional Violence Perpetration
Schools are among the safest places for youth. However, many schools have instituted various safety practices that research has shown to be ineffective—even harmful.
Effective evidence-based strategies that reduce rates of physical and emotional violence all have a common denominator—non-punitive, restorative prevention and intervention practices.
This What Works Brief, cowritten by Meagan O’Malley, former Research Associate at WestEd, provides evidence-based strategies that school staff, parents, and community members can use to:
- Improve school environment by decreasing the reinforcement students receive for acts of aggression
- Establish sanctions that decrease the likelihood that students will reoffend
Note: Developed by the California Safe and Supportive Schools (S3) Technical Assistance Center, What Works Briefs summarize state-of-the-art practices, strategies, and programs for improving school climate.
Based on the most current research, each of the ten briefs provides practical recommendations for school staff, parents, and community members and can be used separately to target specific issues (e.g., family engagement) or grouped together to address more complex, systemwide issues.
What Works Briefs are organized into three sections:
- Quick Wins: What Teachers and Adults Can Do Right Now
- Universal Supports: Schoolwide Policies, Practices, and Programs
- Targeted Supports: Intensive Supports for At-Risk Youth
In addition to Brief #5: Physical and Emotional Violence Perpetration, download these What Works Briefs:
- What Works Brief #1: Caring Relationships and High Expectations
- What Works Brief #2: Opportunities for Meaningful Participation
- What Works Brief #3: Perceptions of Safety
- What Works Brief #4: School Connectedness
- What Works Brief #6: Physical and Emotional Violence Victimization
- What Works Brief #7: Harassment and Bullying
- What Works Brief #8: Substance Use at School
- What Works Brief #9: Family Engagement
- What Works Brief #10: Improving Staff Climate
Information about California Safe and Supportive Schools (S3) can be found at the S3 website.
Restorative Justice in U.S. Schools: Summary Findings from Interviews with Experts
Current methods of responding to student offenses in schools are often not effective, and may even be backfiring. Many experts support the use of restorative justice (RJ), an approach to justice that focuses on repairing harm and restoring relationships, rather than simply punishing the perpetrator.
This new report, funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, describes the promise of RJ in improving relationships and the overall school environment, and summarizes the findings from interviews with over 40 nationally recognized RJ leaders.
Written by researchers from the WestEd Justice & Prevention Research Center, the report explores:
- Current work related to RJ in schools
- Defining RJ in schools
- Key practices of RJ in schools
- Successes and challenges of implementing RJ in schools
- Suggestions for future research on RJ in schools
The experts agreed that RJ can help address some major challenges schools face, such as disproportionality among discipline referrals and the zero-tolerance policies that contribute to a school-to-prison pipeline.
In addition, the experts supported the need for further rigorous research in the field to determine the full impact of RJ in schools.
Restorative Justice in U.S. Schools: Practitioners’ Perspectives
This research report, developed by researchers at the WestEd Justice & Prevention Research Center, focuses on how practitioners are integrating restorative justice (RJ) practices into their schools as an alternative to traditional responses to student misbehavior. The report covers how and when RJ is used in schools, and the successes and challenges schools face. The study findings are based on data from both a survey of and interviews with practitioners who are implementing RJ in schools.
Key Findings
- Most respondents agreed that student discussion circles are the most frequently used component of an RJ program
- Respondents indicated that one of the biggest successes of implementing an RJ approach is a large and rapid decrease in student suspensions and expulsions
- Some of the most common challenges of RJ implementation include resistance from some administrators, staff, students, and parents; insufficient funding; and extensive training requirements
This report reflects only the opinions of the individuals surveyed and interviewed, and is not a representative sample of all possible RJ practitioners; the findings are therefore not applicable to all schools in the nation that are implementing RJ. However, the report can be used to inform schools that are researching and/or implementing RJ programs.
Reimagining School Safety: A Guide for Schools and Communities
While school safety ideas and practices have evolved over the last several decades, the variety of school safety tools, policies, and degrees of success highlights a need for more conversation about the very concept of safety: what it is (and isn’t), who gets to define it, how it’s achieved, and at what cost.
In shifting how safety is defined so that it is not the absence of violence but the existence of systems and structures that support mutual care, belonging, and interconnection, schools’ policies, practices, and values shift towards creating strong communities and places of collaborative learning.
The purpose of this guide is to support education professionals reimagine and redefine school safety such that safety is not the absence of a negative but rather the existence of positive elements like interconnection, belonging, voice, and agency. Further, working from this paradigm of safety and centering the lived experiences of students and families—especially those who have been kept furthest from institutional power—can be a key component of designing systems that are more equitable and sustainable.
This interactive guide pulls from different frameworks and concepts, including complex adaptive systems, restorative justice, co-designing, and design thinking, to provide educators, school leaders, and district administrators with mindsets, strategies, and grounded examples of what is possible by reimagining school safety.
Creating a Culture of Care: A Guide for Education Leaders to Develop Systems and Structures That Support Educator Well-Being
Educator well-being is often approached in terms of self-care, with an overreliance on individual strategies and supports for well-being. Although well-intentioned, this approach can inadvertently put the onus on individuals to heal and care for themselves, ignoring the impacts of systems and structures on individual and collective well-being.
This guide is for education leaders at all levels—local, regional, and state—in charge of supporting their education staff. It offers practical information and guidance on educator well-being in these ever-challenging times. The guide includes the following sections to help education leaders co-create educational environments that are systems of well-being:
- Key Concepts: the “what” and “why,” providing background information on the ecological systems framework and the root causes of and conditions for well-being; the relationship between brains, bodies, behaviors, and environments; influences of bias and perception on educator well-being; and shifting systems
- Tips for Using the Strategies: the foundational elements of applying the guide’s strategies
- Strategies: the “how,” offering some ways to rethink and redesign education systems as well as some preventative and restorative strategies, with specific examples
- References: works cited throughout the guide
In Brief: Creating a Culture of Care
This summary document features highlights from the guide and an infographic, which depicts a shift from traditional ways of addressing educator burnout toward more inclusive, sustainable approaches that are suggested in the guide.
Discipline Equity for American Indian and Alaska Native Students: Recommendations for District Leaders
This report from the Western Educational Equity Assistance Center (WEEAC) summarizes information and recommendations about exclusionary discipline for American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) students. It examines the negative consequences of exclusionary discipline; shares examples of how some states address these problems of suspension, expulsion, and related low graduation rates; and presents recent statistics that reveal adverse impacts on particular racial and ethnic groups.
The report offers policymakers and district leaders specific recommendations to reduce disciplinary issues, bridge learning gaps, and improve learning outcomes among AI/AN students. Emphasizing evidence-based practices and targeted interventions, these effective strategies include increasing cultural responsiveness, reducing implicit bias, recognizing students’ racial and cultural assets, and implementing prevention and restorative justice strategies.
Schools Can’t Do It Alone: Envisioning a Statewide System of Support to Advance School-Based Behavioral Health in California
Throughout the research conducted for WestEd’s recent brief, Schools Can’t Do It Alone: Developing Sustainable Systems of Care for School-Based Behavioral Health in California, local educational agencies (LEAs) expressed a need for technical assistance (TA) in a variety of areas to improve student behavioral health outcomes.
Needed assistance includes TA to build school staff’s capacity to support student behavioral health (e.g., by using trauma-informed and restorative practices) and TA on how to develop infrastructure to collaborate with external partners such as health care providers and community-based organizations to provide school-based care.
This companion brief envisions how a statewide system might be structured to improve LEAs’ and their local partners’ access to TA focused on supporting students’ behavioral health.
The brief explores two potential models for such a statewide system of TA. Model 1 would involve integrating TA on school-based behavioral health into California’s existing Statewide System of Support (SSOS). Model 2 would entail creating a separate structure, analogous and connected to the SSOS and focused on school-based behavioral health.
