University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Stopping the school to prison pipeline: a restorative intervention for educators

(USC Thesis Other)

Stopping the school to prison pipeline: a restorative intervention for educators

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 1
Stopping the School to Prison Pipeline Capstone Project
Michael Fiorillo
Doctor of Social Work
University of Southern California
December 2019
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 2

Area 1- Executive summary

The school-to-prison pipeline is the result of an accumulation of policies that originally
targeted adult offenders and, over the past several decades, have been shown to create significant
outcome disparities for youth in schools (Heitzeg, 2009). Despite a decline in school violence,
highly publicized juvenile crimes resulted in new laws and policies that both criminalize
developmentally appropriate youth behaviors and increase the severity of punishment for youth
in the classroom (Browne-Diani, 2012). In response, a capstone project was developed over the
past two years that is guided by the goals within the Grand Challenges for Social Work and
Society (2018), to help Ensure the Healthy Development for All Youth. The capstone project
developed the methods to limit the disproportionate impact of exclusionary discipline policies
that contribute to the school-to-prison pipeline in an effort to disrupt current school discipline
norms and change how students are disciplined in schools. Currently, exclusionary discipline
and implicit bias, coupled with limited options for school staff, are creating significant outcome
disparities for students and represent a large social justice issue (Fiorillo, 2018). Increased
school staff turnover and the lost potential taxed income due to lower student graduation rates
beg for system change. The proposed innovation to combat these issues consists of a newly
developed, non-clinical, restorative intervention that will be diffused through a low-profit, LLC
called ImpactEquality. This organization will provide a five-day restorative training modality to
educators in middle and high schools that must embrace the required national educational
components of Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) (Fiorillo, 2018). This organization is
structured to provide more supportive services at a comparatively lower cost, increasing the
potential scope of diffusion and positive disruptive change as evidenced by better stakeholder
outcomes. ImpactEquality is guided by the mission “to establish restorative practices in schools
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 3

to limit exclusionary discipline and stop youth from entering the school-to-prison pipeline” with
a vision of “a supportive school culture for every student to learn and grow.” Guided by these
mission and vision statements, the organization seeks to disrupt current school exclusive
discipline norms by providing newly developed alternatives to ensure the healthy development
for all youth at the local, state and national levels.
In its early stages, the capstone project was informed by school administrators, educators and
students throughout Southeast Michigan. These stakeholders expressed frustration in both their
lack of discipline options and support in the classroom. After applying this information to guide
the programming prototype composition, the project will be introduced in two separate charter
schools that share the same campus in Detroit, MI. There, a research study and subsequent
collection of data will occur during the 2020 pilot. This outcome information will be later shared
with both educators and those in helping fields that are vested in youth development and positive
outcomes. After the first-year pilot, the capstone project will expand to the charter’s five other
Detroit area locations as it continues to grow to scale, while increasing the potential for all
stakeholders and working toward achieving the organization’s mission to promote change.
Within the five-day onsite restorative model training, which is guided by the affiliated
training manual prototype, educators will learn social and emotional learning (SEL), multi-tiered
system of supports (MTSS) and positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS)
methodology. During the training, this information will also be practiced and reinforced in an
effort to limit the overuse of exclusionary discipline and promote an inclusive school
environment driven by data tracking and improved user outcomes. This includes utilizing Likert
scale surveys to assess user attitudes and knowledge, as well as the Implicit Association Test
(IAT) to determine pre and post training changes in user implicit bias. In addition, school
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 4

performance data such as exclusive discipline utilization and student graduation rates will be
tracked to determine the impact that the capstone training modality has on post-trained schools.
ImpactEquality has developed a new restorative modality, informed by stakeholders, users and
evidence-based practices, in an effort to change the post-trained school’s prevailing exclusive
discipline norms. This change provides the opportunity for increasing positive student outcomes,
through restorative practices, while lowering the operating costs of the school, adhering to ESSA
requirements and reducing the risk factors associated with exclusive discipline and the school-to-
prison pipeline (Fiorillo, 2018).
Area 2- Conceptual framework

1. Statement of problem
The opportunity for disrupting how students are disciplined in schools is made possible by the
entrenched school discipline norm that “problematic youth decrease school metrics and potential,
so the students should be treated accordingly through exclusion.” This significant perennial
national problem will be addressed by introducing a new school discipline deviant norm that
promotes an inclusive school culture while utilizing restorative circles to promote both internal
and systematic change. The modality, developed over the past two years, helps to create a
supportive environment for all students to build relationships with their school staff, while
increasing the social skills that limit the risk factors influencing their thinking, feelings and
negative behaviors (Fiorillo, 2018). Addressing this national wicked problem contributing to
student outcome disparity helps to ensure the healthy development for all youth.
2. Literature and practice review of problem and innovation
Rates of student discipline and outcome disparity have several important components.
According to the Government Accountability Office (2018), implicit bias—a key catalyst in
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 5

starting the discipline process—disproportionately impacts minority students, those with
disabilities, LGBTQ youth and those of low SES. To reinforce this implicit bias component,
eye-tracking technology shows that teachers, when asked to look for challenging behavior, tend
to look at Black boys longer than any of the other children (Gilliam et al. 2016). Further, the
types of offenses that Black children are at increased risk of being disciplined for are largely
based on school officials’ subjective interpretations of their behavior (Browne-Dianis, 2012).
Recent research from Jarvis and Okonofua (2019) illustrates that Black students are disciplined
more severely for the same behaviors that are exhibited by their White counterparts. Given these
points, it is no surprise that big data shows that exclusive school discipline is not levied
proportionately. The U.S. Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights (2016) shows that
Black youth, despite only comprising 15% of the student population, represent 31% of in-school
arrests. In addition, Black students are suspended three times as often as White children, with
LGBTQ students and those with disabilities being excluded approximately twice as often. As a
result of these comparatively disproportionate rates of classroom exclusion, these students face
additional barriers that likely impact the quality of their life.
A viable solution must be found to counteract these school practices and subsequent disparity.
The vast majority of current school suspensions are for minor, nonviolent infractions—resulting
in a significant increase in the chances of a student dropping out of school—and the restorative
circle addresses these issues directly without student classroom exclusion (Hawkins, 2016).
ESSA national education policy and restorative circles allow for the small everyday practices
needed to create a school culture where choices must expand beyond zero tolerance or no
excuses discipline policy (Hawkins, 2016) in order to protect students from adult implicit bias.
Introducing restorative practices to schools struggling with higher rates of disproportionate
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 6

discipline can increase accountability, community safety, and competency development; reduce
racial and ethnic disparities in school discipline; reverse the negative academic effects of
exclusionary discipline policies; and reduce negative student contact with police to limit the
school-to-prison pipeline (Passarella, 2017).
An overly punitive environment disrupts students’ bonds to the school while alienating them,
leading to a deterioration of the school’s social climate (Ulmer & Bradley-Engen, 2018). Given
that several prior studies have found that schools with more inclusive school social climates—
where students report believing that they have a voice, while feeling respected and valued in
their school environment—have lower rates of misbehavior, the overuse of suspension
negatively impacts school safety (Ulmer & Bradley-Engen, 2018). Given the requirements of
ESSA, schools, districts and states are in the process of exploring the methods needed to reduce
the traditional reliance on exclusionary discipline while still holding disruptive students
accountable (Fronius, et al. 2016). As a result, both this research and ESSA combine to create
the need and market for which ImpactEquality can disrupt current school discipline norms,
influence educator practice, and diffuse the modality to limit student outcome disparity.
During 2018, interviews and surveys were completed throughout Southeast Michigan, where
educators reported that they lacked discipline options and did not have the tools to address the
deeper emotional and psychological needs driving disruptive student behavior (Fiorillo, 2018).
Chafouleas et al. (2016) provides additional context, noting that there is an increased concern
regarding youth outcomes in social and emotional learning (SEL) areas and how they connect to
the multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS) and positive behavioral interventions and supports
(PBIS) that have shown promise in supporting positive holistic educational outcomes for youth.
Schools utilizing MTSS and PBIS have committed to a concurrent focus on both academic and
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 7

behavioral concerns, in recognition that they often correlate, especially with non-traditional or
struggling students (Samuels, 2018). These skills are associated with high school and college
success, increased likelihood of future employment, positive health, higher earnings and a
decreased chance of incarceration (Balonon-Rosen, 2015) and are an integral part of the
restorative modality and school culture change.
The Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health & Development Study, James Heckman’s 2006
analysis of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth from 1979, the Fast Track longitudinal
study and Perry Preschool Study, all identified by Gabrieli, Ansel, & Bartolino Krachman,
(2015) offer support to the importance of restorative practices (RP), socio-emotional learning
and multi-tiered systems of support. For example, the studies demonstrated that non-cognitive
competencies in children as young as preschool are important predictors of outcomes in their
adult lives, including high school and college completion, employability, earnings, financial
stability, avoidance of criminality, as well as physical and mental health. Interestingly, in several
cases, data shows non-cognitive skills are greater or equal to cognitive or academic skills in
predicting positive life outcomes.
Additional pertinent data from Gabrieli, Ansel, & Bartolino-Krachman (2015) demonstratethe
importance of RP, SEL and MTSS concepts to the disparity between K-12 students scoring high
social competencies and high self control compared to ones who are rated low:
• 95% vs. 58% difference in high school graduation rates.
• Highly social competent kindergarteners were twice as likely to be college
graduates.
• Earning $2,000/mo at age 27 rose fourfold compared to the randomized control.
• 25% decrease in rates of receiving welfare or other public assistance as an adult.
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 8

Conversely, low scoring students were:
• 3x times as likely to be convicted of a crime.
• 3x more likely to earn less than $15,000 annually.
• 2.5x more likely (27% versus 11%) to have multiple health problems by their 30s.
• 2.5x more likely to smoke by age 15.
• 4x more likely to be an unplanned parent than those with high self-control.
Interestingly, non-cognitive factors were as equally predictive as cognitive factors in young
men earning a college degree by age 30. In addition, low self-control also strongly predicted
recurrent depression and substance abuse (Gabrieli, Ansel, & Bartolino-Krachman, 2015),
showing that with some adjustment, schools utilizing RP, SEL and MTSS can become important
protective factors that drastically impact the quality of life for their students beyond education.
These components above are both additional and substantial tertiary benefits to introducing the
ImpactEquality discipline modality in schools, where the educational environment is so
drastically changed that schools begin producing both good students and higher productive
citizens backed by longitudinal data (Fiorillo, 2018).
With restorative practice data specifically, programs are still in their infancy (Hurley et al.,
2015). As such, there are a limited number of evaluations and other longitudinal studies that
specifically isolate RP. However, a review of anecdotal school data shows:
• 15% decrease in students reporting becoming physical to solve problems.
• 14% increase in perceived student ability to solve problems well.
• 35% increase in perceived student ability to solve problems independently.
• Teachers reported that students were better able to self-regulate in circle.
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 9

• 92% of students reported that they felt their classroom was a better place today
than it was six weeks ago (Durham School Board, 2018).
Recent Oakland Unified School District data also shows a 23% district wide decrease in
suspensions after restorative practice implementation, with the intervention receiving favorable
marks from teachers (Jain, et al. 2014), which helped to increase teacher retention. As a result of
higher morale and decreased turnover, more time and money were saved by circumventing the
hiring and training of new teachers, which further helped improve the school social and
professional climate (Hulvershorn & Mulholland, 2018). According to What's the Cost of
Teacher Turnover (2017), each teacher retained reduced the school’s costs by $20,000,
substantially increasing ImpactEquality’s marketing material and leverage to gatekeepers.
3. Social significance
The High Cost of High School Dropouts (2011) provided research that reinforced that
structured and supported changes to a school’s discipline policy can be beneficial at the local,
state and national levels as a result of decreases in the mentioned teacher turnover as well as
higher graduation rates and money brought back into the economy. The article provided
estimates that a 50% dropout reduction for just one high school class nationwide could increase
the gross domestic product by as much as $9.6 billion by the time the students reach the middle
of their careers. Further, each state would also benefit from higher graduation rates, even using
conservative figures: Vermont would likely see its economy increase by $147 million,
Massachusetts would add $2 billion to its economy, and California would see an additional $21
billion over the lifetimes of just one year’s worth of dropouts had those students graduated.
These figures do not take into account any added economic growth generated from each new
dollar put into the economy. As an aggregate, these additional earnings from just a single high
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 10

school class would likely add $154 billion into the national economy. At current rates, nearly 12
million students are expected to drop out over the next decade, resulting in a loss of more than
$1.5 trillion (The High Cost of High School Dropouts, 2011). These figures also do not account
for the additional challenges associated with the negative lifetime impacts of students who drop
out or are caught in the school-to-prison pipeline, where individuals may increase the draws from
state and federal coffers.
Alternatively, Loveless (2017) offers research regarding the potential positive impact of
culture change in the classroom, where it was estimated that within each school year, teachers
lose the equivalent of 38 days of instruction dealing with low-level student misbehavior. In light
of the research above, there is a tremendous opportunity utilizing a restorative training program
that is capable of facilitating positive changes within the post-trained school that ultimately
shows a positive micro, mezzo and macro impact. This impact, initially shown through reduced
exclusive discipline utilization, will decrease demographic disparity and increase the number of
graduates, improving school performance metrics and ultimately resulting in increased quality of
life for students and families, with additional benefits for the local community and American
society.
4. Conceptual framework showing theory of change
The newly developed ImpactEquality capstone modality utilizes Social Learning Theory
developed by Albert Bandura to teach SEL, PBIS and MTSS protective components that are
ideal for high suspension rate schools fueling the school-to-prison pipeline (Hawkins, 2016).
Utilizing these evidence-based restorative practices through the use of school and classroom
interventions—such as restorative circles and providing school staff a structured intervention
comprised of discipline options that are commensurate with students’ behavior—serves to
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 11

protect youth from the risks associated with implicit bias, exclusionary discipline and police
contact serving as significant catalysts to the school-to-prison pipeline (Passarella, 2017).
According to Restorative Practices (2014), RP are an evidence-based practice effectively used
to reduce suspensions, expulsions, and disciplinary referrals. RP focuses on the righting of
wrongs and repairing the harm caused which results in increased problem-solving skills and
decreases in the overuse of exclusionary suspension and expulsions for misbehavior (Restorative
Practices, 2014). The restorative prototype training modality lays the groundwork to create a
supportive, inclusive school environment that changes the attitudes and behavior of
administrators, teachers and students. The subsequent change in discipline norms will reduce
implicit bias, student exclusive discipline disparity and law enforcement referrals while
increasing the performance metrics for all associated parties. School staff receive the modality
via five-day, on-site instruction and then teach and model the modality to their students. The
associated interventions, non-exhaustively, can include activities and outcomes such as
increasing user knowledge, checking in with students prior to class, or appropriately facilitating a
restorative circle to address disruptive behavior. Tracking administrative or police discipline
referrals and exclusive discipline utilization by classroom will serve as an environmental metric,
to ensure that school staff utilize their new tools, receive additional support as needed, and
contribute to the required school environment attitude and behavior change.
Area 3- Problems of practice and innovative solutions

1. Proposed innovation and its effect on the grand challenge
The current educational landscape provides the opportunity for successful restorative practice
interventions that are promoted by a well-positioned organization seeking to reduce exclusive
discipline use, outcome disparity and the school-to-prison pipeline. ESSA national education
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 12

policy requires every state to implement evidence-based interventions that limit exclusionary
discipline and demographic outcome disparity, helping to create a need and market. In addition,
increased opportunity comes in the requirement that schools must report exclusive discipline
rates delineated by respective student demographics (National Association of School
Psychologists, 2017), eliminating the veiled incentive to suspend problematic youth to increase
school metrics established during ESSA’s predecessor, No Child Left Behind national
educational policy (Simson, 2014). With newly required ESSA reporting and accountability
measures, schools must find alternative methods to disciplining youth. The new ImpactEquality
modality provides the components to promote, train and implement new methodology where
school personnel, youth and communities all benefit by keeping youth in school to learn and
grow. After the respective schools are trained by ImpactEquality, they have an increase in
evidence-based discipline options, are better able to recognize implicit bias, are at increased
potential to adhere to national education performance metrics (including exclusive discipline
demographic disparity), are able to lower their annual operating costs and are better equipped to
provide all youth an equitable education. These post training positive school changes, reinforced
by monthly follow-up support by ImpactEquality, will serve to become one important
component to ensuring the healthy development for all youth.
2. Views of key stakeholders
In the early stages of developing an intervention to address the noted social problem above,
obtaining formal stakeholder input was paramount. To gain additional system insight on the
relevancy and feasibility of restorative practice implementation in differing educational settings,
the innovation design process began with public and charter school interviews as well as juvenile
justice staff surveys that totaled approximately 160 responses. Response locations ranged from
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 13

urban, suburban and rural middle and high schools located throughout Southeast and Mid
Michigan. Employees ranged from school administrators (superintendent and principal),
counselors, school psychologists, teachers and an assessment coordinator. The results showed
extreme inconsistency as well as frustration from teachers regarding the need for increasing
school discipline options and consistency across schools—even within the same school district.
Also notable were several teachers who highlighted the pressure felt to deal with behavioral
issues in the classroom without seeking assistance. One former teacher noted being told by
school administration “your classroom management skills are continually being evaluated” in an
effort to minimize referrals from the classroom.
The Detroit, MI area juvenile justice facility, with attached charter school, completed
stakeholder surveys in 2018. Surveys were completed at all levels that include administration,
management, front line workers as well as youth clients/students and the results are included in
the 160-response total. This facility and attached charter school provide an excellent setting to
develop the capstone intervention, test the prototype, and eventually pilot this new restorative
practice training modality. With the valuable stakeholder input and ability to utilize current
facility programming, once described as “therapeutic punishment,” the development of the
current prototype began. Ultimately, a restorative tier system and circle intervention was created
to increase the discipline options available for staff to levy appropriate discipline, while still
supporting the needs of the youth. As the programming and restorative circle changes were
being implemented throughout 2018, the Facility Manager monitored the security video and
audio to assess how the restorative changes influenced the quality and duration of facilitating the
circle intervention. The Facility Manager then reported his observations during monthly
meetings (Fiorillo, 2018). The initial goal involved obtaining stakeholder input and then
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 14

transitioning that knowledge into developing and practicing the restorative circle prototype to be
later implemented in the attached charter school.
3. Evidence and current context for proposed innovation
This capstone project is innovative because it has developed a restorative intervention capable
of changing the current school discipline norms that fuel disproportionate exclusive discipline
use as well as the school-to-prison pipeline. Disrupting current school discipline norms will be
accomplished by implementing newly developed stakeholder-informed restorative methodology
that helps to create a supportive, inclusive school environment where the associated parties
ultimately benefit (School Resource Officers likely being the exception). This restorative
intervention practice modality provides users the additional skills to recognize implicit bias,
while keeping and supporting struggling students in the classroom—ultimately changing decades
of established exclusive discipline norms that have been an over-utilized, failed attempt at
solving student behavior problems (Passarella, 2017).
The proposed innovation promotes restorative practices that incorporate evidence-based
interventions that are consistent with the relatively new national policy paradigm within ESSA.
ESSA national educational policy was passed in 2015 and September 2018 marked the point
where all states had their plans approved (US Department of Education, 2018). The components
of ESSA can be leveraged for both the funding of the project through Title I, Title IV and grants,
as well as to incentivize the need for school-wide discipline change in showing school
performance metric and discipline reporting compliance. As a result of ESSA, schools must
report exclusive discipline rates delineated by respective student demographics, thus removing
the incentive to suspend problematic youth whose academic performance could result in lower
school metrics (National Association of School Psychologists, 2017). Further, as schools
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 15

comply with ESSA, they must find discipline alternatives as implicit bias is shown to influence
the rate and severity of discipline utilization across student demographics (Losen, Keith, Hodson,
& Martinez, 2016); if the schools do not comply, they face potential sanctions.
These national education requirement components provide the opportunity for ImpactEquality
to promote, train and implement new methodology where the vast majority of the relevant
internal and external stakeholders ultimately benefit. Because of the inclusive nature of the
innovation, additional hot button topics such as rates of bullying, school shootings and student
dropout also have high potential to decrease. While state plans have all been approved, the
actual requirements of ESSA are still being implemented within respective states. This favorable
educational policy change, coupled with restorative practices being relatively new, offers a
market that supports the capstone project’s implementation, funding, need and growth. In
addition, due to the recent nature of the noted changes, there is no predominant restorative
service provider, despite the overall need for the intervention—a void which the capstone project
seeks to exploit and ultimately fill through continued stakeholder involvement, 2020 pilot data
tracking and expected implementation in six Detroit area charter schools associated with the
Detroit area juvenile justice facility (JJF).
4. Comparative assessment of other opportunities for innovation
Currently, the ImpactEquality capstone intervention modality can be utilized in public, charter,
and private middle schools and high schools. As a testament to its flexibility and ability to serve
the developmental needs of youth, there are additional market opportunities for this modality.
As described above, this intervention is being piloted at a JJF with attached charter school.
Given the opportunity (and importance) for the facility to reinforce the discipline concepts being
practiced at the school, it quickly became apparent, utilizing the association concept described in
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 16

The Innovator’s DNA authored by Dyer, Gregersen, & Christensen (2011) that the modality
could also be utilized in juvenile justice facilities. Anecdotal experience over multiple juvenile
justice facilities has demonstrated that many JJF staff harbor punitive attitudes in levying
discipline to youth that parallels the adult court system. The introduction of new evidence-based
programming in juvenile justice facilities—where youth developmental needs are similar to the
current capstone project population—creates the opportunity to disrupt the current discipline
norms of juvenile justice facilities while introducing a new paradigm that facilitates positive
change.
There is an additional opportunity for ImpactEquality to seize market share and promote
positive change in there being confusion in the juvenile justice field. Through both the review of
literature, and experience in the field, it is apparent there is much confusion within the
“restorative justice” concept as it specifically pertains to correctional programming. The Center
for Justice and Reconciliation (2019) accurately describes the practice of restorative justice as
repairing the harm caused by crime. It further notes that when victims, offenders and community
members meet to decide how to repair harm done, the results can be transformational. It is
important to point out that in this example, the focus is on the individual to repair the harm to the
victim or community. However, the ImpactEquality restorative practice model provides the tools
to change the juvenile justice facility’s environment and culture, enabling supportive, restorative
JJF programming. Ultimately, the programming becomes the catalyst for holistic, intrinsic
change within the individual, who then repairs the harm to the community and becomes a
productive member of society.
The new programming also addresses the current philosophical and programming confusion
regarding the restorative justice concept that was mentioned earlier. This confusion is referenced
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 17

by The Center for Justice and Reconciliation (2019) which notes that restorative justice can be
utilized in a “vindictive” nature under the guise of repairing harm to the community. The
expansion into this new market ultimately seeks to facilitate changing the attitudes of
“entrenched” staff who utilize archaic, overly punitive discipline that cultivates a culture of
punishment, apathy, compliance and shame. The potential expansion to this market offers the
ability to foster a supportive milieu, one that promotes inclusive learning and intrinsic change in
the youth, who will ultimately be released back into the community.
Lastly, to further reinforce the potential for this additional restorative modality opportunity,
juvenile justice residential settings are significantly more insulated from the sudden practice
changes that result from partisan political ideologies surrounding education, as evidenced
through multiple failed or abandoned national educational changes within the past two decades
alone. This new market ultimately offers a quick pivot in the event of sudden educational
landscape changes, while also disrupting norms and creating safer communities.
5. How innovation links to proposed logic model and theory of change
The information above highlights the innovation groundwork, favorable environment and
market potential of the capstone project. It also identifies the problems addressing disparity in
youth discipline, staff implicit bias impacting youth outcomes, overly punitive school culture and
the need to increase students’ social and problem-solving skills. These identified problems
provide the opportunity to develop, implement, and promote changes to school practice and the
culture change that enables positive educational outcomes guided by evidence-based practices
and an overarching theory of change. Utilizing the identified problems above and the attached
Logic Model as a programming beacon, the inputs and activities (master’s level service
provision, evidenced based training materials and supportive components) will be utilized to
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 18

structure the five-day training modality under Social Learning Theory to facilitate the expected
outputs and outcomes representing the post-trained school’s culture and practice change that will
be tracked and shared via data collection. Combining Social Learning Theory with the
restorative prototype ensures that if these respective components are utilized, they will facilitate
the improved expected performance outcomes for the school.
The restorative practice intervention, identified as the Classroom Assist (CA) circle in the
associated prototype, is comprised of the evidence-based practices of SEL, PBIS and MTSS
components. The Implicit Association Test (assessment) will also be used to explore and
highlight the need to recognize implicit bias on day four of the school training. This widely
used, free assessment is to be completed online prior to the training and individuals who did not
complete the IAT are still able to do so prior to implicit bias recognition training. With regard to
the restorative components and CA circle, teaching and modeling will be utilized by the post-
trained educators to reinforce the concepts within both the classroom and school environments.
Utilizing the components of the logic model over the course of the five-day training, the
following goals for students, teachers, and the classroom will be established, with pre and post
Likert user surveys providing additional information and insight on user knowledge and
competency beliefs.
Goals for Teachers
1. Understand the principles of RP and how they differ from traditional or punitive approaches.
2. Appropriately use RP in situations where punitive discipline may have been used in the past.
3. Transition in/out of the CA and switch between circle facilitator and teacher.
4. Utilize effective communication to support classroom discipline and community building.

STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 19

Goals for Students
1. Learn to use proactive, positive avenues to maintain a supportive classroom community.
2. Develop and enhance positive and supportive connections with peers.
3. Develop an understanding of the principles and vocabulary of restorative justice.
4. Learn how to participate in circle dialogues, including the circle guidelines.
5. Learn how to use restorative questions to support conflict resolution.
6. Learn to identify who is affected by misbehaviors, and how.
7. Contribute to developing appropriate ideas for rectifying harms when they occur.
Goals for Classroom Community
1. Establish and maintain agreements about how to participate in the CA.
2. Identify specific issues to address and have honest, authentic discussions about these issues.
3. Establish procedures for engaging in restorative dialogues around issues and conflicts.
4. Establish a safe environment for emotional, psychological, and physical sharing of concerns
about conflicts, issues, and behaviors that are affecting them (Clifford, 2013).
Additional practice component and implementation strategy methodology is detailed below.
Area 4- Project structure and methodology

Appropriate Prototype
The prototype for this capstone project is a comprehensive instruction manual that will be
provided to educators attending the five-day, on-site restorative practice training. Within the
paper manual, the components of the attached logic model are incorporated where participants
will be provided with an overview of the training material, including theory and practice, the
training objectives, need for school change, school change process, and the restorative practice
circle intervention. Participants will also practice the restorative circle intervention, learn the
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 20

importance of data collection (including follow-up) as well as post-training support and
resources that are available to assist in the required school discipline transition and culture
change. These input and activity efforts contribute to the expected outcomes where school staff
receive and utilize additional knowledge and skills that change the school discipline norms and
practices. The prototype has been reviewed and approved by staff in the initial Detroit
implementation setting, though the tabletop exercise will be utilized during phase three of the
project (after initial implementation and user feedback) to inform any respective quality
improvement changes to the prototype and intervention. Additional information can be
referenced directly within the attached facilitator training manual prototype.
2. Comparative market analysis
The school performance requirements of ESSA national educational policy, coupled with data
from the Government Accountability Office (2018) showing the disproportionate impact of
exclusive discipline, graduation rates, and the school-to-prison pipeline relative to race,
disability, sexual orientation and disability, offer significant leverage in the educational
landscape for organizations that facilitate compliance for struggling schools. Additionally,
funding is also provided to schools seeking to make these important changes.
ImpactEquality has combined original restorative methodology with unique service
formatting that provides schools a succinct, lower cost, higher qualified service that harnesses
technology to offer post-training implementation support and data tracking. Currently, while
there are several restorative practice providers seeking to establish themselves in the market,
there are no known direct competitors. A review of current school training offerings and
restorative practice job postings shows that schools’ restorative options vary significantly.
Schools can hire a restorative practice coordinator (RPC), who is typically responsible for
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 21

facilitating the school training, as well as the day-to-day implementation, facilitation and
monitoring. Interestingly, RPC job descriptions show varied educational requirements and
subsequent compensation. A full-time RPC holding a bachelor’s degree in any subject can be
hired for approximately $48,000-60,000 per year. For schools requiring a high school diploma,
part-time RPC positions are paid $18/hr. At minimum, a part-time RPC trainer with a high
school diploma will cost the school $13,248 annually. Another option is hiring restorative
practice trainers that educate the school on the concept of restorative practices with no
programming or additional follow-up services at a rate of $1000-$2500 per day. The Center for
Community Justice, who is likely the most relevant provider in the ImpactEquality market, has a
four-day restorative practice training course that costs $16,000 (Caiceros, 2016). However, this
course is only provided after several sequential trainings totaling an additional $20,500. The
total cost in both time and money for this somewhat comparable training consists of nearly two
weeks of separated, cumulative trainings at a rate of $36,500 for 20 participants (Caiceros,
2016).
Despite offering additional services and supportive face-to-face follow-up packaged in a more
succinct format, the comprehensive ImpactEquality training and monthly follow-up support can
be completed for $9000. Schools can have their staff trained on-site for five days, subsequently
supported and outcome data shared for as low as $72 per attendee. Training facilitation can also
expand beyond the 101 high and middle school staff national average (The National Center for
Educational Statistics, 2007). In addition, to increase user buy-in, training attendees will receive
professional development, state licensing and potentially graduate college credit for their
attendance—at no cost to them. As such, there is immense diffusion opportunity for this
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 22

disruptive capstone project to expand, while changing school discipline norms and helping to
stop the school-to-prison pipeline.
3. Project implementation methods and financial plans
The structure of the diffusing organization will be a low-profit LLC named ImpactEquility.
While ImpactEquility will be technically for-profit, it is a hybrid, social enterprise organization
that has the flexibility to be structured either as a non-profit or for-profit organization. For this
project, the organization will follow the non-profit structure whose end of year surplus can be
funneled back into the organization to promote its mission. With this proposed structure, the
organization will be under the auspices of its board of directors. Organizational strategy,
structure and planning are explored in more detail below.
The development of an organization capable of both disrupting established social norms and
diffusing new school discipline norms across the nation is no easy task. The required
components associated with organizational development, effective programming, 10x expansion
scaling, and data collection have been organized into the phases that are displayed below. The
actual logistics and corresponding budget planning pertaining to the phases directly follow.
Phase One (Fiscal Year 2019-2020)
• Organize course materials: SWOT analysis, budget, mission/vision statements, goals,
Classroom Assist (CA) intervention (prototype), etc.
• Create website/social media platforms, obtain PO Box, insurance, computer, phone, etc.
• Refine, administer, and collect pre-training school performance data and staff surveys.
• Apply for LLC and develop contracts/have them reviewed by lawyer.
• Implement first-year pilot at initial Detroit area charter school.

STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 23

Phase Two (Calendar Year 2020)
• Analyze participant surveys and data (pre-training school performance metrics/personnel
survey data).
• Assemble initial data, prototype and stakeholder feedback to inform the tabletop
discussion for proof of concept. Educators, Social Workers and JJF staff will participate.
• Monitor and change restorative training and intervention as needed.
• Review mission/goals and determine if product is ready for 10x expansion.
• Expand to 5x affiliated Detroit area charter schools.
• Continue to monitor pre- and post-trained school data.
• Recruit ImpactEquality Board of Directors.
Phase Three (Fiscal Year 2021)
• Present at professional conferences/begin to highlight preliminary data.
• Contract additional training staff.
• Expand nationwide to public/private and charter schools.
• Monitor training staff need per intervention demand.
• Continue school trainings and expansion.
• Survey Monkey for school staff email survey and response collection.
• Skype for Business utilized for training support and implementation.
• Continue to attend/present at professional conferences to aid in marketing.
• Collect data (school performance metrics/IAT implicit bias assessments) and review
school staff surveys for quality improvement.
A GANTT chart and quick visual that illustrates the above phase components can be found as
an attachment to this document.
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 24

The Detroit area juvenile justice facility, where the restorative intervention prototype has been
developed, has an attached charter school that has vocalized interest in implementing the
intervention in both this location and their additional five locations. This initial pilot opportunity
will allow the transition into schools where data and outcomes can be tracked and later promoted
for continued innovation expansion.
The aforementioned hybrid structure, low profit LLC will be developed in anticipation of the
training program being implemented at the Detroit area JJF’s contracted charter school. As a low
profit LLC, the direct fee-for-service revenue has much less red tape and the surplus can be
invested in marketing, hiring, promoting school social justice and equality, as well as building
reserves in anticipation of the organization growth requiring additional support staff.
The major costs associated with program implementation include developing and supporting
the LLC. These include applying for the LLC and obtaining insurance for $2000. Developing
branding material (logo development, business cards, table coverings, pamphlets) and creating a
website will cost $2500. Office items for developing and organizing the training material are
$300, the purchase of one laptop is $800, and the first 1000 training material booklets ($3.47/ea)
and a PO Box ($130) for the first year will be $4700. In keeping in line with the model calling
for sound profit margins and low operating expenses, a home office will be established and
personal cell phones will be used (with a free Google phone number). Both these items can be
written off during tax time so there is no monthly rent or phone cost to the organization. The
initial startup cost will be $9200. Reimbursement for flight or travel expenses is allocated at
$450 per training. $450 x 17 first year trainings is $7650. After adding the above costs, the
result for the first year is $16,850.
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 25

The initial trainings will be completed by this writer, a micro and macro master’s level social
worker. The first training at the attached charter school will be viewed as a no-cost founder’s
investment as it is expected to provide the subsequent data for the proof of concept needed to
increase project scope and diffusion. Implementation can then be scaled to the charter school’s
five other Detroit locations. The fee-for-service cost will be $9000 per school for total first
quarter gross revenue of $45,000. A subsequent phase three goal will be to also implement
training in twelve other schools for an additional $108,000 in revenue. Total gross revenue for
the first fiscal year is expected to be $153,000, while only costing the organization $73,590.
As schools can receive funding for the training, the organization will directly target schools
that may be struggling with disproportionate levying of exclusive discipline or with ESSA
performance metrics. The organization will monitor Department of Education data and offer
services to school that must change to adhere to new ESSA policy, taking a proactive approach
that is in the best interest of the school, their students and ImpactEquality.
During phase three, depending on organizational growth and service demand, master’s level
trainers will be contracted through 1099 tax status. Master’s level social workers, educators or
psychologists will help to ensure a consistent message of empathy and seeing beyond the
students’ disruptive behavior as well as to provide sound marketing materials. The master’s
level contractor’s compensation and responsibilities with be modeled after the flexible nature of
the Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities (CARF) accrediting body to help
recruit the 1099 contractors. More specifically, trainers will receive free training (with provided
CEU licensing credits), home office tax benefits, and must be able to complete three trainings in
their first year (Boykins, 2018). As mentioned, training schedule flexibility will be promoted as
staff can largely choose when and where they train. It is expected that the majority of staff will
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 26

utilize the ImpactEquality as supplemental income and no fringe benefits will be offered to
trainers. As a result, labor costs are directly tied to revenue as trainings and are not provided
until payment is received.
Once hired, contractors will provide one week of onsite school training for up to 125 staff for
$9000. School staff will then teach the students the modality, and consistently reinforce the
restorative concepts via modeling. As restorative practices require a large commitment and
school paradigm change, two years of monthly online support will also be offered where
organizational employees can work from home utilizing Skype for business. The total cost to the
diffusing organization will be approximately $4350. As the costs are almost exclusively on an
as-needed, per-training basis, the generated school training revenue will keep the organization
viable between trainings. Per the logistical needs of trainers noted below, administrative costs
will be somewhat high, and direct foundation or government financial support will subsequently
be avoided, resulting in the hybrid structure, low profit, LLC being most appropriate format to
provide services.
When the organization is solvent enough, additional staff will be hired to help grow the
organization. Ultimately, there will be three levels of employees representing the executive,
management and front-line training functions. The executive level will oversee the programs,
monitor implementation of the strategic plan, order materials and marketing the program. This
also includes initial school scheduling and payment processing responsibilities. The majority of
organizational decision making will be vertical and centralized, resulting in the entire
organization following the same model to ensures a consistent product and reliable data. Any
major changes will need approval. However, the respective levels do not lose all creative
freedom as the organization is required to meet the needs of the field in real time. This ensures
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 27

at the very most, a slow, controlled change to the model based on user needs and feedback. All
parties stay informed via regular (weekly) Skype-type regional meetings and quarterly in-person
meetings where regional employees meet with the executive director (Fiorillo, 2018). A full-
time administrative secretary may also be added for scheduling and payment processing. They
will be expected to be paid $18/hr, which includes the cost of benefits x 40 hours = $720 x 4
weeks = $2880 monthly and $34560 annually. In addition, as demand for the organization’s
service continues to grow, the hope is that the initial trainers will become managers as they will
have become well-versed in the paradigm, verbiage, and training material. Expectations are bi-
weekly Skype meetings to address any issues for which they receive $100/hr. Four managers x
one hour x two meetings monthly x 12 months = 96 hours x $100/hr = $9600 annually. The
number of school trainers will be determined by the demand in each respective national region
(North, South, East and West). Managers will still need to provide school training in their region
at a rate dependent on the demand for service and number of employees.

STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 28

Currently, while the project is feasible operationally, politically and financially, there are some
anticipated obstacles that may create additional barriers to achieving the above plans that may
include:
• 1099 trainers will likely use the organization as supplemental income, so trainer attrition
could be somewhat high. The promotion of schedule flexibility, travel, and compensation
will be paramount.
• Teacher or staff knowledge and buy-in will likely wane over time, decreasing
intervention impact and utilization unless promoted by school or agency leadership
(Murphy, 2015). Monthly face-to-face support and refresher courses will be offered to
address this issue.
• Teacher turnover is high across the profession (What's the Cost of Teacher Turnover,
2017) and schools may need to be retrained to ensure training and program consistency to
ensure sound youth outcomes, leading to funding issues for additional full staff
retraining.
• The current Education Secretary Betsy DeVos is posturing to eliminate many of the
ESSA discipline protections, while seeking to arm school personnel, increase police in
schools and reduce protections for vulnerable students (Kamenetz, 2018). Depending on
when this occurs, the availability of data will help with lobbying and could help clear the
space of restorative providers. In addition, due to election cycles, there could be an
upcoming Secretary of Education change. Lastly, the project has a pivot option to
provide services in the JJF market to disrupt discipline norms.
• The potential for ESSA changes may create school hesitancy to receive restorative
training or even abandon the significant time and culture commitment change post-
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 29

training (Kamenetz, 2018) leading to an increase in youth discipline rates and outcome
disparity. Reviewing the performance metrics of schools to both market and hold them
accountable will likely assist in this area. In addition, reminding gatekeepers of funding
availability could also help to generate additional business and revenue.
5. Project impact assessment methods
The initial Detroit area training site is ideal to assess the potential impact of the restorative
intervention as the juvenile justice facility has two separate sites, with two separate schools
under the same charter, on the same campus. As such, one building will receive the restorative
intervention, while the other will act as a comparison group. Adding to the feasibility of the
study, the parent company, staff, teachers, and student populations between the two buildings are
all similar, which helps to aid the strength of the design. With all 130 students participating,
there is no randomization in the study selection, but all other threats to internal validity are ruled
out by way of a quasi-experimental, pre-test/post-test design with the non-probability,
convenience sample just mentioned. The initial research methods and assessment criteria for
2020 pilot data collection and expected outcomes are as follows:
• Initial first year pilot as a quasi-experimental, pre-test/post-test design with non-
probability, convenience sample (data to aid in proof of concept tabletop discussion).
• Student body demographics (age, grade, gender, race/ethnicity, special education status).
• % increase in trainee knowledge and skills (implicit bias via IAT pre/post school training,
knowledge of restorative intervention via survey).
• Post training exclusive discipline/arrests (DOE/ED166, SWIS database).
• Student drop out/graduation rates (DOE/school data).
• Rates of teacher turnover/morale (Survey/school data).
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 30

• Number of schools trained annually (internal data/record keeping).
• Number of school staff trained (internal data/record keeping).
The study will answer the following evaluation questions:
Compared to the school academy location that did not receive the intervention:
(1) Are discipline rates lower for the school academy location that received the intervention?
(2) Are educational achievement rates higher for the school academy location that received the
intervention?
(3) Are school staff more knowledgeable of implicit bias after receiving training on the
intervention?
Rationale: The questions look to assess the efficacy of the intervention in meeting its outcome
goals in limiting school staff implicit bias and student exclusion
Population- Detroit area high and middle school aged youth
Sample- Students enrolled at 2x school academy locations in Detroit, MI
• Quasi-experimental, pre-test/post-test design
• Non-probability, convenience sample, all 15 teachers and 130 students
O X O (Academy- building 1) Staff/teachers receive intervention
O O (Academy- building 2) Comparison group/no intervention
• Their first 6 months will be the baseline measurement (grades/rates of exclusion). They
then receive the intervention, and after the second six months they receive the second
measurement (grades/rates of exclusion)
Data Type/Assessment Tools from Academy’s two JJF locations:
• Student demographics from youth intake forms (records)
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 31

• Student academic achievement: six-week student progress and quarterly report cards
(records)
• Student discipline rates from the discipline logs (records)
• Teacher buy-in quarterly (emailed/anonymous self-report survey)
• Teacher implicit bias knowledge from Implicit Association Test (IAT) (Assessment)
before and after school training
The types and tools above are pertinent and test/retest helps to increase the reliability and face
validity of the study. However, subjective grading and discipline bias could be a concern. With
regard to internal validity, utilizing two groups serves to rule out most threats, though selection
cannot be ruled out because the sample is not randomized. External validity is possible, but there
are challenges in that the study involves a specific residential population, a smaller sample size
and a year-round education provided at this facility, which can serve to limit overall
generalization potential to traditionally scheduled schools.
With regard to reliability and validity of the measures specifically:
• The IAT has been psychometrically measured, with mixed results. However, it was
developed in 1995 and has been used in over 300 published studies and cited in 800
articles. It is anticipated that test/retest will help with reliability and validity.
• 5 point Likert scale will be used to assess teacher morale as well as their beliefs on the
restorative intervention and implicit bias knowledge. There are reliability risks in social
desirability, though not asking for participants’ identifying information should help
decrease this.
• Discipline assessment and reporting can be subjective. In addition, reporting may not be
compatible in different student/youth settings (residential setting vs public school).
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 32

• Teacher grade reporting of student academic performance is widely used, though
reliability and validity cannot be ensured as their overall subjectivity could create issue in
the data.
The proposed short-term outcomes are an increase in school-wide knowledge of restorative
practices as well as increased staff knowledge of implicit bias, SEL, MTSS and PBIS concepts.
This knowledge will result in the intermediate outcomes of increased staff buy-in; increased
school community SEL, MTSS, PBIS, and RP utilization; and effective use of the discipline tier
system, as well as a decrease in student outbursts, discipline referrals and discipline demographic
disparity (as evidenced by school discipline reporting metrics). As the school culture changes,
improved teacher morale is expected as the supportive options are consistently utilized. In time,
rates of student suspension and expulsions will decrease while graduation rates will increase.
As mentioned, within this study, ImpactEquality will be providing five days of school staff
training via the prototype training manual. Teachers then both teach and model the associated
restorative practice material to their students. A refresher course can also be offered as needed,
and monthly face-to-face follow-up support is provided via Skype for Business. Teachers
receive an online Likert scale pertaining to their satisfaction regarding the training, their current
morale, and subsequent annual surveys.
6. Stakeholder engagement plan
Engaging stakeholders will be paramount to the success of both the project and the
ImpactEquality organization. While the initial message to stakeholders will be increasing buy-in
through promoting the merits of the training modality and subsequent classroom benefits, both
stakeholders and users will also receive additional follow-up and support to help with the culture
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 33

change as the school transitions to the predominant use of restorative practices to address student
discipline.
The message to administrators, as gatekeepers, will initially have a marketing focus to inform
them of the availability of ESSA funding as a means to pay for the school-wide training. Also
highlighted will be the ability for ImpactEqualiy’s restorative intervention to assist them in
increasing the performance metrics of their students, while reducing their annual school
operating costs by reducing teacher turnover. Administrators will also receive notification of the
aggregated teacher morale surveys, satisfaction scores and pre- and post-intervention information
pertaining to their discipline and student performance results.
The message to attendees involves providing them professional credit for their restorative
training attendance, as well as the ability to receive additional discipline options that changes the
culture of the school so they have additional avenues to manage the behavior in their classroom.
It is anticipated that this should help somewhat with initial buy-in. Soliciting input and
acknowledging the amount of time they are currently being kept from teaching due to student
discipline while reinforcing that restorative practice have been shown to decrease student
misbehavior will be paramount. It will also be noted that they have the ability to mentor student
leaders who can later address their peers’ negative behaviors—requiring only passive monitoring
of the circle from the teachers, who can then focus their attention on other tasks. They will also
be provided with aggregated satisfaction and morale scores in addition to aggregated student
performance results. Teachers will be encouraged to participate in monthly Skype for Business
support meetings to have their questions or concerns addressed, in an effort to maintain buy-in
and their motivation for the school culture change.
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 34

With regard to the message for students and their parents, they will be informed of the
discipline change process prior to the training of their school and any questions and concerns
will be welcome. However, due to the non-clinical nature of the intervention, family permission
is not explicitly required. While students will benefit from the merits of the capstone
implementation in their school environment, they are not expected to be engaged directly by
ImpactEquality after the project is implemented, aside from the monitoring of their performance
and discipline metrics.
There will also be a tailored message to the relevant disciplines involved in education and
youth development. The data resulting from this capstone project will be used in material for
lobbying to inform external stakeholders—ranging from the ACLU to the Department of
Education—that when schools are equipped with the proper tools, they can increase their
performance metrics and provide more opportunities to the students, with society at large
ultimately benefitting. Additionally, the results will be submitted to journals, and ImpactEquility
will present at professional conferences, both to inform the directly relevant attendees of this
restorative project and indirectly market the program to potential gatekeepers.
8. Ethical considerations
At present, there are no known or anticipated ethical concerns. During the initial pilot that
involves two schools on the same campus, both schools receive the same quality of education.
However, one school receives the restorative intervention while the other acts as a comparison
group with no intervention. It should be noted that after the pilot, the comparison group
subsequently receives the restorative intervention. In addition, no aspect of this intervention is
clinical, so parental permission and informed consent are not required. In the event that, during
the circle process, a student divulges an issue surrounding abuse or neglect, the teacher tactfully
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 35

closes the circle and makes a referral to the school counselor, social worker or psychologist.
With regard to payment, schools receive funding for the restorative intervention training. They
then pay ImpactEquality for the training and support (fee-for-service) and there will be zero
kickback or conflict of interest.
Area 5- Conclusions, actions and implications

Newly required ESSA national education policy requires schools to limit exclusionary
discipline use through the implementation of evidence-based interventions. The inclusion of
implicit bias in ESSA creates additional training opportunity, as schools must now report
exclusive discipline rates delineated by respective student demographics (National Association
of School Psychologists, 2017). Structured and supported changes to a school’s discipline policy
can be beneficial at the local, state and national levels due to lower teacher turnover, higher
graduation rates and more dollars brought back into the economy (The High Cost of High School
Dropouts, 2011). Given this information and current landscape, schools must find alternative
methods to disciplining youth to limit the discipline disparity to minorities, LGBTQ youth, those
with disabilities, and those of low SES. The non-clinical capstone intervention incorporates the
required components of ESSA policy, which provides funding and requires the tracking of
exclusionary discipline data (National Association of School Psychologists, 2017). These ESSA
components can be leveraged to provide a five-day, on-site school wide training that utilizes
Social Learning Theory to both teach and reinforce the evidence-based practices capable of
lowering the rates of exclusive discipline use, student drop-out, bullying, and adult implicit bias,
while lowering the school’s annual operating cost by reducing teacher turnover (What's the Cost
of Teacher Turnover, 2017).
The capstone project was informed by approximately 160 school administrators, teachers,
counselors and youth throughout Southeast Michigan. In time, a restorative practice prototype
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 36

training manual and subsequent 2020 pilot were developed for a Detroit area JJF with attached
charter school (Fiorillo 2019). During the pilot, a quasi-experimental research study will occur
at the two schools on the same campus, where Likert scale surveys and pre-/post-test training
school performance record data will be collected.
This capstone project is innovative because it changes the current school discipline norms by
keeping struggling students in schools where they continue to learn and grow as active
participants in their supportive school culture. This intervention has no known direct
competitors offering a comparative level of service. In addition, it can be implemented at a
lower cost than current restorative trainers attempting to establish themselves in the market,
while still providing the additional services and supports essential to changing school discipline
norms. There are implications however, as most restorative intervention users will be mandated
reporters. Therefore, it is important to clarify this term for the students, and to provide periodic
reminders. Users must also clearly describe the type of items that must be reported. The process
can become complicated when students share sensitive information about their family lives that
may have impacted their thinking, feelings and negative behaviors.
There are also anticipated risks associated with the project, as School Resource Officers will
likely experience less of a demand for their services, resulting in police union lobbying efforts to
limit ImpactEquality’s market and financial viability. In addition, as DOE Secretary Betsy
DeVos has positioned herself to potentially limit the levers associated with current ESSA policy
requirements and funding. This undoubtedly has the potential to decrease a significant amount
of market and growth for the project. However, the ImpactEquality name is purposefully vague
so as to not limit its setting potential, and the program could easily pivot with its current
prototype to providing training services to juvenile justice facilities. There is opportunity to
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 37

expand services for juvenile justice facilities that want to change the current punitive norms of
their program to a supportive, evidence-based program focused on data and successful outcomes
for their program, youth and greater community.
The opportunity to begin scaling the post pilot project in schools is available in the Detroit
area market, with additional opportunity aided further by ImpactEquality providing data to help
market the intervention directly to schools struggling with ESSA requirements. Data will also be
utilized to help ensure evidence-based restorative practice modalities stay in schools with the
sharing of information with lobbying entities (ACLU/Advancement project), professional
conferences (National Drop-Out Prevention Conference) and professional journals (ENGAGE:
The International Journal of Research and Practice on Student Engagement) will occur. This
will be in an effort to both influence the potential need for restorative trainings overall, and to
provide marketing material to reach potential ImpactEquality clientele.
ImpactEquality, with the developed prototype, is well positioned to provide pertinent,
effective, high value services as it works towards changing school discipline norms in an effort
to limit student exclusive discipline outcome disparity, stop the school-to-prison pipeline and
ensure the healthy development for all youth.

STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 38

Reference Page

Balonon-Rosen, P. (2015, December 08). Report: Non-Academic Skills Are Key Ingredient To
Student Success. Retrieved from http://learninglab.legacy.wbur.org/2015/12/08/report-non-
academic-skills-are-key-ingredient-to-student-success/
Boykins, D. (2018). Become a surveyor. Retrieved from
http://www.carf.org/About/BecomeaSurveyor
Caiceros, C. (2016, May 20). Restorative Practices for Schools Training Options. Retrieved from
https://centerforcommunityjustice.org/restorative-practices-for-schools-training-options/.
Chafouleas, S.M., Johnson, A.H., Overstreet, S. and Santos, N.M. (2016), “Toward a blueprint for
trauma-informed service delivery in schools”, School Mental Health, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 144-162.
Clifford, A. (2013, February). Teaching Restorative Practices with Classroom Circles(Tech.).
Retrieved https://www.ocde.us/HealthyMinds/Documents/RP Resources/Teaching Restorative
Practices with Classroom Cirlces.pdf
Dyer, J., Gregersen, H. B., & Christensen, C. M. (2011). The Innovators DNA: Mastering the five
skills of disruptive innovators. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press.
Durham District School Board. (2018). PROMOTING AND SUPPORTING WELL-BEING.
Restorative Practice & Results-Based Accountability “Cultivating Community” Project(pp. 1-
52). Durham, ON: Durham District School Board.
Fiorillo, M. (2018). School Systems and Discipline. Unpublished manuscript, University of Southern
California.
Fiorillo, M. (2018). 712, Proposal. Unpublished manuscript, University of Southern California.
Fiorillo, M. (2018). 723, Design Brief. Unpublished manuscript, University of Southern California.
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 39

Fiorillo, M. (2019). 713, Capstone Problem, Solution, Evidence and Data. Unpublished manuscript,
University of Southern California.
Fronius, T., Persson, H., Guckenburg, S., Hurley, N., & Petrosino, A. (2016). Restorative Justice in
U.S. Schools: A Research Review. The WestEd Justice & Prevention Research Center. Retrieved
from https://jprc.wested.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/RJ_Literature-Review_20160217.pdf.
Gabrieli, C., Ansel, D., & Bartolino Krachman, S. (2015). Ready To Be Counted: The Research
Case for Education Policy Action on Non-Cognitive Skills(Vol. 1, pp. 1-40, Working paper).
Boston, MA: Transforming Education.
Gilliam, W., Maupin, A., Reyes, C., Accavitti, M. & Shic, F. (2016). Do Early Educators’ Implicit
Biases Regarding Sex and Race Relate to Behavior Expectations and Recommendations of
Preschool Expulsions and Suspensions? Retrieved
from http://ziglercenter.yale.edu/publications/Preschool%20Implicit%20Bias%20Policy%20Brie
f_final_9_26_276766_5379.pdf.
Grand Challenges for Social Work and Society. (2018). United States: Oxford University Press.
Hawkins, B. (2016, April 8). The Power of Restorative Justice in the Classroom. US News and
World Report. Retrieved from https://www.usnews.com/opinion/knowledge-bank/articles/2016-
04-08/public-charter-school-is-transforming-discipline-with-restorative-justice
Hearing on Ending the School-to-Prison Pipeline, Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights,
and Human Rights, Senate Committee on the Judiciary Cong., 1-18 (2012) (testimony of Judith
A. Browne Dianis).
Heitzeg, N. A. (2009). Education or Incarceration: Zero Tolerance Policies and the School to Prison
Pipeline. Forum on Public Policy, V2009 (N2) 1-21.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ870076.pdf
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 40

Hulvershorn, K., & Mulholland, S. (2018). Restorative practices and the integration of social
emotional learning as a path to positive school climates. Journal of Research in Innovative
Teaching & Learning,11(1), 110-123. doi:10.1108/jrit-08-2017-0015
Hurley, N., Guckenburg, S., Persson, H., Fronius, T., & Petrosino, A. (2015). What further research
is needed on restorative justice in schools? San Francisco: WestEd. Available from
http://jprc.wested.org/project/restorative-justice-practices-in-u-s-schools/
Jain, S., Bassey, H., Brown, M. A., & Kalra, P. (2014). Restorative Justice in Oakland Schools
Implementation and Impacts. Oakland, CA: Oakland Unified School District. Retrieved from
http://www.ousd.org/restorativejustice
Jarvis, S. N., & Okonofua, J. A. (2019). School Deferred: When Bias Affects School Leaders. Social
Psychological and Personality Science. doi: 10.1177/1948550619875150
Kamenetz, A. (2018, December 18). DeVos To Rescind Obama-Era Guidance On School
Discipline. Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/2018/12/18/675556455/devos-to-rescind-obama-
era-guidance-on-school-discipline
Losen, D. J., Keith, M. A., II, Hodson, C. L., & Martinez, T. E. (2016). Charter Schools, Civil
Rights and School Discipline. The Center for Civil Rights Remedies. Retrieved from
https://www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/resources/projects/center-for-civil-rights-
remedies/school-to-prison-folder/federal-reports/charter-schools-civil-rights-and-school-
discipline-a-comprehensive-review/losen-et-al-charter-school-discipline-review-2016.pdf
Loveless, T. (2017). HOW WELL ARE AMERICAN STUDENTS LEARNING?(Vol. 3, pp. 23-33,
Rep. No. 6). Washington DC: Brookings. doi: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-
content/uploads/2017/03/2017-brown-center-report-on-american-education.pdf
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 41

Murphy, M. (2015, July 02). In Change Management, Start With Champions, Not Antagonists.
Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/markmurphy/2015/06/25/in-change-management-
start-with-champions-not-antagonists/
National Association of School Psychologists. (2017, June 20). The Every Student Succeeds Act:
Details of the New Law[Press release]. Retrieved from https://www.nasponline.org/research-and-
policy/current-law-and-policy-priorities/policy-priorities/the-every-student-succeeds-act/details-
of-essa
National Center for Education Statistics. (2018). The NCES Fast Facts Tool provides quick answers
to many education questions. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=28
Passarella, A. (2017, May). Restorative Practices in Schools (Rep.). Retrieved
http://edpolicy.education.jhu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/OSI-
RestorativePracticemastheadFINAL-1.pdf
Restorative Practices - schottfoundation.org. (2014, March). Retrieved from
http://schottfoundation.org/sites/default/files/restorative-practices-guide.pdf
Samuels, C. A. (2018, June 20). What Are Multitiered Systems of Supports? Retrieved from
https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2016/12/14/what-are-multitiered-systems-of-supports.html
Simson, D. (2014). Exclusion, Punishment, Racism and Our Schools: A Critical Race Theory
Perspective on School Discipline(p. 520, Rep. No. 61). UCLA. doi:
https://www.uclalawreview.org/pdf/61-2-5.pdf
The Centre for Justice & Reconciliation (2019). Lesson 3: Programs. Retrieved from
http://restorativejustice.org/restorative-justice/about-restorative-justice/tutorial-intro-to-
restorative-justice/lesson-3-programs/#sthash.3yGhqNmW.dpbs.
STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 42

The High Cost of High School Dropouts: What the Nation Pays for Inadequate High Schools (pp. 1-
6, Issue brief). (2011). Washington DC: The Alliance for Excellent Education.
The National Center for Educational Statistics (2007, June). Status of Education in Rural America.
Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/ruraled/tables/table3_12.asp.
Ulmer, J. T., & Bradley-Engen, M. S. (2018). Handbook on punishment decisions: Locations of
disparity. New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
US Department of Education (2018). U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos Approves Florida's
ESSA Plan | U.S. Department of Education. [online] Available at:
https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-secretary-education-betsy-devos-approves-floridas-
essa-plan
USA, Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights. (2016). KEY DATA HIGHLIGHTS ON
EQUITY AND OPPORTUNITY GAPS IN OUR NATION’S PUBLIC SCHOOLS(pp. 1-13).
Washington DC: Department of Education. Retrieved from
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/2013-14-first-look.pdf.
United States Government Accountability Office. (2018, April 04). K-12 Education: Discipline
Disparities for Black Students, Boys, and Students
What's the Cost of Teacher Turnover? (2017, September 13). Retrieved from
https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/the-cost-of-teacher-turnover

STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 43

First Year Budget
Revenue
Fee for Service 153 17 trainings x $9k
Total Revenue 153

Expenses
Personnel
Stipend 49.3 $2.9k x 17
Total Personnel 49.3

Operating
Travel 7.6 $0.45k x 17
Startup 4.5 LLC, insurance, branding, website
Material / Office supplies 4.7 Laptop, training materials
Total Operating 16.8

Total Expenses 66.1

Gross Surplus 86.9
Tax 17.4 20%

Net Surplus 69.5 Reserve

STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 44

Gantt Chart – 2020
Event
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Charter meetings
Organize material
Establish LLC
Recruit board
Brand/website
Laptop/PO Box
Insurance
CEU application
Develop survey
Initial pre data
Pilot study trainings
Market program
Monthly Support

STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 45

ImpactEquality school recruitment, training, assessment, support and expansion phase procedure quick visual

STOPPING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE CAPSTONE PROJECT 46

Logic model

Disparity in youth
discipline

Staff implicit bias
impacting youth outcomes

Overly punitive/toxic
school culture

Need for student social /
problem solving skills

Glossary
RP- Restorative Practices
SEL- Social Emotional
Learning
MTSS- Multi-Tiered
Systems & Supports
PBIS- Positive Behavioral
Interventions & Supports
SRO- School Resource
Officer

Contract master’s level
social workers or
psychologists $1400/wk or
$35/hr

RP, SEL, MTSS and PBIS
training material $3.47 per

Infrastructure for online
marketing and support

Laptops for employee
training / support- $800 per

$300/day per diem per
training

$450 per flight

2 years online support
$1820/yr per employee

Contract (1099) master’s level
social workers or psychologists
to train and provide support

On-site training on restorative
practices, implicit bias, SEL,
MTSS and PBIS

Monitor school district arrest
data

Monitor annual DOE school
data for potential school
clientele

Diversify funding streams to
increase viability (public,
private, charter school training
revenue)

Create infrastructure for online
support

40 hours of teacher and
administrator onsite training

5 hours on administrative tasks
per school including:

Annual review school discipline
data w/ report

Annual teacher morale email
survey

Annual staff turnover review

Annual graduation rate review

Monthly online support as
needed for 2 years

Short term
Increase school-wide knowledge of RP,
SEL, MTSS and PBIS concepts

Increase staff knowledge of implicit
bias

Intermediate
Increase in school staff buy-in and
utilization of SEL, MTSS, PBIS and RP

Effective use of discipline tier system

Effective use of CA intervention

Decrease in student outbursts and
discipline referrals to SRO or
administration

Increase in teacher morale

Long term
Decrease in demographic exclusive
discipline disparity

Decrease in teacher turnover

Decrease in school operating cost

Increase in student graduation rates

PROBLEM INPUTS ACTIVITIES OUTPUT MEASURE OUTCOME MEASURE

RESTORATIVE PRACTICES
TRAINING MANUAL

PREPARED BY: Michael Fiorillo
PREPARED FOR: Capstone Committee
DATE: 11/22/2019
1

STUDENTS
EDUCATORS
OUTCOMES
2

MISSION AND VISION
+ POINT OF CONTACT

MISSION
To establish restorative practices in schools to limit exclusionary
discipline and stop youth from entering the school-to-prison pipeline

VISION
A supportive school culture for every student to learn and grow

POINT OF CONTACT
Impact Equality
Michael Fiorillo, LMSW, LISW
200 W. 2
nd
St.
PO Box #129
Royal Oak, MI 48068
#920-550-1754

Impact Equality is a hybrid, social enterprise organization with a non-
profit structure that operates as a low-profit LLC. In this format, any
end of year surplus is utilized to promote the organization’s mission
while increasing our positive impact in the community, under the
auspices of the board of directors.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Day one
Mission, Vision and Point of Contact ........................................................ 2
Timeline ........................................................................................................... 4
Info and Overview ............................................................................................... 5
Training Objectives ........................................................................................ 6
Target Population .......................................................................................... 7
Day two
Training Info and Preparation ..................................................................... 8
Change Process .............................................................................................. 9
Intervention Need and Theory ................................................................... 10
Day three
Theory and Practice ............................................................................... 11-12
The IAT ................................................................................................................. 13
Implicit Bias .................................................................................................. 14
Day four
Methods and Process ............................................................................. 15-20
Negative Behavior List ........................................................................... 21-22
CA Practice ................................................................................................... 23
Day five
Responsibility ................................................................................................ 24
Data and Surveys .......................................................................................... 25
Information and Conclusion....................................................................... 26
References ………………………………………………………27-28
3

4

Overview
Objectives
Target Population
Training Info / Prep
Change Process
Intervention Need
Methods + Process
Negative Behavior List
CA Practice

Theory + Practice
IAT + Implicit Bias
Implementation
Practice Data + Surveys
Questions
Post Training Resource +
Support Utilization
Surveys
TRAINING TIMELINE

Day 1 Day 2

Day 4 Day 3

Day 5 Post
As the intervention is implemented and culture of the school
focuses on inclusion and restorative practices, a positive impact on
the post trained school’s performance metrics is expected.
5

2018
8
2019 2020

TRAINING INFO + OVERVIEW

During 2018/2019, this intervention was informed by public and
charter middle and high schools throughout the Metro Detroit, MI
area. Administrators, counselors, teachers and students,
representing a variety of demographics, all took part in structuring
the intervention. Subsequent intervention components were then
tested in 2019 via group format, with additional stakeholder input
and critique assisting with proof of concept. Additional Detroit
area testing and data gathering is planned for 2020.

Stakeholder
input
Intervention
tested
Testing
and data

Intervention
developed
Stakeholder
critique

As trainees utilize the restorative theory and concepts, an inclusive
school culture (representing a new school norm) is established. This
new norm changes everyday stakeholder interactions that result in a
positive impact on the school environment and performance metrics
(outcomes) listed on the following page.
TRAINING OBJECTIVES

What we’ll be covering
1. The importance of restorative practices, implicit bias, positive
behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) and multi-tier
system of supports (MTSS) modality concepts.
2. The benefits of these concepts in the classroom.
3. The Class Assist (CA) intervention for a struggling student.
4. Importance of and intro to data/survey completion.
5. Additional school year resources and supports.
Why ?

Objectives - Increases Evidence
Discipline options for school staff Training manual
Trainee RP knowledge and skills Survey
Teacher morale Survey
Graduation rates DOE data
ESSA metric adherence School data
Objectives - Decreases Evidence
Exclusive discipline / arrest rates DOE data
Demographic discipline disparity DOE data
Student drop out rates DOE data
School operating costs Budget
6

TARGET POPULATION
7

This five-day on-site training is tailored to middle and high schools,
their staff, administrators, school resource officers, teachers and
students. These identified users are primarily from schools who are
struggling to achieve proficient performance metrics. In some
instances, schools have contacted Impact Equality for assistance. In
others, school gatekeepers have been contacted and accepted Impact
Equality’s offer of training assistance. The training can
accommodate staff well beyond the 101 school employee average
1
.

Teachers

Admin
Supportive
School
Culture
Students

Staff

SRO
8

TRAINING INFO + PREP

It’s important to note that for training and school culture change to be
effective, the attitudes and mindsets of the school users will need to
change from established, punitive exclusive discipline first to
promoting a supportive, inclusive school culture focused on increasing
student/school skills and performance. This modality is not a clinical
intervention and is intended to increase both the skills of the user and
the available discipline options in an effort to increase the overall
performance of the school.

Please write down two of your main concerns regarding the training
or school changes below, and the barriers or challenges you anticipate
within the concern.

9

CHANGE PROCESS

We are here to support you during this transition! In addition to this
training, monthly follow-up support is provided via Skype for
Business. Please check-in regularly with any questions or concerns!

A shortened refresher course is also available if needed.

You can also find applicable links and additional resources on our
website- www.impactequality.org

SUCCESS!
Live Support
5-day training
Implementation
10

INTERVENTION NEED
+ THEORY

Why?
• Black youth are suspended three times as often as White children
2

• LGBTQ and youth with disabilities are 2x likely to be excluded
3

• Exclusionary discipline disparity starts at pre-k (AA, 17% of
population, 47% of exclusions)
4

• Schools with higher suspension rates had lower math and
reading scores for non-suspended students
5

• Teachers lose the equivalent of 38 days of instruction annually while
addressing low-level misbehavior
6

Theory
The intervention utilizes Social Learning Theory to guide the five-day,
on-site training modality that utilizes a restorative practice
intervention comprised of the evidence-based practices of SEL, PBIS
and MTSS components. School staff then model and teach their
students the intervention. The Implicit Association Test (IAT)
assessment will be used to explore implicit bias during the training.
11
THEORY + PRACTICE

Restorative Practices
Restorative practices allow schools the creative freedom to tailor
inclusive discipline relative to the student’s disruptive behavior
7
.
Currently, exclusionary discipline and implicit bias, coupled with
limited options for school staff, are creating outcome disparities in
youth and represent a large social justice issue
8
.
Restorative practices change the discipline paradigm by keeping
struggling children in schools by creating a supportive environment
where they learn empathy, social and problem-solving skills while
allowing the school to adhere to new national education (ESSA)
policy regulations
9
.
Restorative practices require a school-wide culture change. While
the change can be challenging in the beginning there are a
multitude of positive benefits to school administrators, teachers,
students and parents.
12
THEORY + PRACTICE

Schools utilizing MTSS and PBIS have committed to focusing on
both behavioral and academic concerns concurrently, recognizing that
they often correlate, especially with non-traditional or struggling
students
10
. These skills are associated with high school and college
success, increased likelihood of future employment, positive health,
higher earnings and a decreased chance of incarceration
11
.

These interventions also include strength-based, proactive steps,
including;
• Checking in with students prior to class
• Assigning small tasks to students who may need redirection
• Showing/promoting appreciation
• Recognizing positive attributes or strengths
• Recent positive changes/quality of work
• Increasing/promoting user knowledge within the school
• Creating a restorative circle to address student verbal
aggression

13

THE IAT

The Implicit Association Test (IAT) measures association strengths
between concepts and evaluations (e.g., good, bad) or stereotypes
(e.g., athletic, clumsy).
When completing the IAT you are asked to quickly sort words into
categories on the left and right side of the computer screen. The
IAT has five main parts.
#1- Sort words relating to the concepts (e.g., fat people, thin people)
into categories.
#2-Sort words relating to the evaluation (e.g., good, bad).
#3- The categories are combined and you are asked to sort the
concept and evaluation words. Example- the categories on the left
hand side would be Fat People/Good and the categories on the
right hand side would be Thin People/Bad.
#4- The placement of the concepts switches. If the category “Fat
People” was previously on the left, it would now be on the right.
#5- The categories are combined opposite of what they were before.
If the category on the left was previously Fat People/Good, it
would now be Fat People/Bad
12
.

**You should have completed the IAT assessment and brought your
results to the training. Please turn in your anonymous results!**
14
IMPLICIT BIAS

Implicit Bias

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) reports that
this research highlights implicit bias as a factor in school discipline
and provides insight on the exclusive discipline utilization disparity
across demographics
13
.

Introducing restorative practices to schools that show a higher rate
of discipline towards minority and disabled youth can increase
accountability, community safety, and competency development;
reduce racial and ethnic disparities in school discipline; reverse the
negative academic effects of archaic exclusive school discipline
policies; and reduce contact between police and students on school
discipline issues to limit the school-to-prison pipeline
14
.

15
METHODS / PROCESS

The Class Assistance (CA) Problem-Solving Meeting

The Class Assistance Problem Solving Meeting (CA) is a meeting that
is requested by a school staff or student leader to address the negative
behavior of another student. A student leader may ask for Class
Assistance when they notice that another student is exhibiting a
behavior that is described on the Negative Behavior List.

The Negative Behavior List defines a set of common problems that
can be discussed within Class Assistance Problem Solving Meetings.
Most problems outlined on the Negative Behavior List should be
solved in Class Assistance Meetings, as opposed to quick referral to
school administration or school resource officer. Please note, CA
participation by school administration or school resource officer is
encouraged for relationship building and commitment.

16
METHODS / PROCESS

PART 1. REQUESTING A CA MEETING
A. Requesting a CA Meeting:
A Staff or student leader may notice that another student is exhibiting
a behavior that is described on The Negative Behavior List and may
request staff call a CA meeting.
B. Possible Reasons to Request a CA Meeting:
To address a problem outlined on the Negative Behavior List.
C. Timing of the Meeting:
If appropriate (and time allows) the CA should be held immediately.
If not appropriate (the student is in school or the class is attempting
to avoid something they are supposed to do), write the need for
assistance on the CA section of the board to be addressed later.
Ideally, the CA should be held on the same day the discipline and/or
meeting is requested.
D. Structure of the CA Meeting:
The CA meeting must be held in a controlled environment.
The class should put their chairs in a circle.
Everyone should be sitting, not standing.
CA's should last a minimum of 15 minutes.
CA's should be held before the “fun” activities, as policy allows.
METHODS / PROCESS
17

PART 2. RUNNING THE CA MEETING:

School staff or student leader procedure

A. Re-explain the process to the class prior to conducting the
CA meeting.
B. Identify the problem.
1. The class gives an initial definition of the CA issue, starting with
the person who asked for the CA Problem Solving Meeting (issued
the CA).
2. Start by asking or explaining why the CA meeting was required. Use
behaviorally specific terms, using language from the Negative
Behavior List.

C. Determine what the issue is and who/what needs
Assistance.
1. Identify why the CA was called and who it was called for.
2. School staff or student may lead the discussion; however, staff
must always be in proximity/control of the process and class.

METHODS / PROCESS
18

PART 3. RUNNING THE CA MEETING:

Student needing assistance (SNA) procedure.

A. Get the Student's Perspective:
1. The SNA should explain the SITUATION from their perspective.
2. The SNA should explain their THINKING about the situation
BEFORE they acted and now.
3. The SNA should explain their FEELINGS BEFORE they acted.

B. Get the Class Perspective:
1. A minimum of three class members and/or staff should provide
feedback to the SNA.
2. Each selected class member should explain the SITUATION from
their perspective.
3. The class should question the student's stated THINKING about
the situation.
4. The class should explain their FEELINGS about the student's
actions.

19
METHODS / PROCESS

PART 3. RUNNING THE CA MEETING:

C. Give Class Assistance:
1. Have the student and class continue to clarify Steps A and B
until it is clear what Negative Behavior occurred and what needs
assistance in the class.
2. The SNA should now label his behavior using the Negative
Behavior List.
3. The SNA should now determine: What needs to be changed?
4. If the SNA cannot do this in a satisfactory manner the class
should help.
5. Make a final decision on what Negative Behavior needs assistance.
6. Ask the SNA to review the situation, and his thoughts, feelings,
and behavior in light of the class's help.
7. Ask the SNA to explain his current perspective about how his
actions.
D. Move the Discussion to the Impact.
1. The SNA should give an initial impression of how their thinking
and behavior harmed the class, the other student(s) and self.
20
METHODS / PROCESS

E. Discuss Alternative Solutions for the Problem
1. List positive choices that would prevent this situation in the future.
2. Choose an option and make a commitment to follow through.
3. Determine- why should this be done? How this can be
accomplished?
4. The student should make a verbal commitment to change the
behavior and then develop a plan for change.
5. The class should make a commitment to offer assistance if needed.
F. Get New Commitment
1. Identify what the staff and class can do to offer assistance.
2. The student and/or the class should commit/contract to try new
behaviors.
3. The class can exit the circle and resume regular activities
15
.

NEGATIVE BEHAVIOR LIST
24

Negative Behavior List

A. Harmful to Others- These are negative behavior patterns
that are disrespectful and hurtful to others:

• Breaking trust; which includes omitting factual information
and/or twisting the truth to create a false impression.
• Using offensive language or gestures toward others.
• Encouraging another person to do an inappropriate behavior
and/or break rules.
• Making false allegations about another person, student or staff.
• Treating other persons in negative, hostile ways: putting other
people down, making fun of or trying to embarrass others.
• Threatening, intimidating, coercing or bulling others. Challenging,
provoking, hassling others, etc.
• Blaming and conning others, using angry outbursts & temper
tantrums to control others.
• Choosing to touch others in an effort to disrupt or annoy.

NEGATIVE BEHAVIOR LIST
25

B. Harmful to Classroom- Behaviors that demonstrate harm to
your classroom include the following:
• Defiance, disrespect and/or disobeying school or classroom
authorities, rules or policies (Ex. disruptive behavior or contraband).
• Not completing disciplinary action when given.
• Stealing from others or taking possession of materials belonging to
another student or staff.
• Soliciting others to break rules.
• Disrespecting the property of others or to deface, misuse, or break
property.
• Lying to or blaming others for your actions.
• Not taking responsibility or denying that others in the classroom
were injured by your negative acts.
• Falsely playing "poor me victim" as an excuse to hurt others.
C. Harmful to Self- These behaviors include doing things that
are not in your best interest or lack self-respect:
• Joining the negative behavior of others.
• Self-sabotage in your choices and behavior.
• Being negatively controlled by others.
• Exhibiting self-pity and Low Frustration Tolerance.
• Denying responsibility for your actions or inappropriate
behaviors
16
.
21

PRACTICE!

Organize into groups of 10-15. Practice the methods and process
section. Your training facilitator will circle the room and visit your
group to offer feedback and answer questions

Please write any questions below!

22
RESPONSIBILITY

Teachers, school staff or student leaders (if applicable) have the
responsibility of determining the classroom assist for a fellow student
needing assistance based on the behaviors listed in the Negative
Behaviors List.
The classroom assist is a tool to assist schools looking to increase
support and inclusion to enable a supportive school culture capable
of increasing school performance metrics. This tool is not meant to
replace crisis situations that may require additional assistance from
the School Resource Officer, school counselor, or school
administration.
Post training, you will be tasked with teaching and modeling these
new restorative concepts to your students. Please make groups of 10-
15 people to practice teaching these concepts and the training
facilitator will circle the room to provide feedback.

23
DATA + SURVEYS

Data collection ensures we are able to evaluate the impact of this
training. It also allows us to improve based on the information you
provide to us.

You will be emailed two anonymous surveys after the training. The
first will be to gauge your knowledge of the training material and
provide an ongoing evaluation of teacher morale during and after
implementation. The second will be to provide feedback regarding
the quality of the training. Please return these surveys in exchange
for free licensing or professional credit. Thank you in advance!

Exclusive Discipline

Performance Metrics
26

INFORMATION + CONCLUSION

Professional Contact Information

Name:
School:
Grade:
License or certificate number:
E-mail Address:
Date:

Conclusion
We appreciate your commitment to applying these concepts and
increasing the potential for your students! Please feel free to follow-
up with us using the contact information in the front of this manual.

Questions?
27
REFERENCES

1. Provasnik, S. (2007, July 25). Status of Education in Rural America. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/ruraled/tables/table3_12.asp
2. USA, Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights. (2016). KEY DATA
HIGHLIGHTS ON EQUITY AND OPPORTUNITY GAPS IN OUR NATION’S
PUBLIC SCHOOLS(pp. 1-13). Washington DC: Department of Education. Retrieved from
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/2013-14-first-look.pdf

3. USA, Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights. (2016). KEY DATA
HIGHLIGHTS ON EQUITY AND OPPORTUNITY GAPS IN OUR NATION’S
PUBLIC SCHOOLS(pp. 1-13). Washington DC: Department of Education. Retrieved from
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/2013-14-first-look.pdf
4. Loveless, T. (2017). HOW WELL ARE AMERICAN STUDENTS LEARNING?(Vol. 3,
pp. 23-33, Rep. No. 6). Washington DC: Brookings. doi: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-
content/uploads/2017/03/2017-brown-center-report- on-american-education.pdf
5. Wadhwa, A. (2017). Restorative justice in urban schools: Disrupting the school-to-prison pipeline.
London: Routledge, an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group.
6. Loveless, T. (2017). HOW WELL ARE AMERICAN STUDENTS LEARNING?(Vol. 3,
pp. 23-33, Rep. No. 6). Washington DC: Brookings. doi: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-
content/uploads/2017/03/2017-brown-center-report- on-american-education.pdf
7. Wachtel, T., & McCold, P. (2001). Restorative justice in everyday life: Beyond the formal
ritual. In H. Strang & J. Braithwaite (Eds.), Restorative justice and civil society (pp. 114-129).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
8. Fiorillo, M. (2018). 712, Proposal. Unpublished manuscript, University of Southern
California.
9. Payne, A. A., & Welch, K. (2013). Restorative Justice in Schools. Youth & Society, 47(4), 539-
564. doi:10.1177/0044118x12473125
10. Samuels, C. A. (2018, June 20). What Are Multitiered Systems of Supports? Retrieved from
https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2016/12/14/what-are-multitiered-systems- of-
supports.html
28
REFERENCES

11. Balonon-Rosen, P. (2015, December 08). Report: Non-Academic Skills Are Key
Ingredient To Student Success. Retrieved from
http://learninglab.legacy.wbur.org/2015/12/08/report-non-academic-skills-are-key-
ingredient-to-student-success/
12. Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual
differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 74(6), 1464-1480.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1464
13. United States Government Accountability Office. (2018, April 04). K-12 Education:
Discipline Disparities for Black Students, Boys, and Students with Disabilities. Retrieved from
https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-18-258
14. Passarella, A. (2017, May). Restorative Practices in Schools (Rep.). Retrieved
http://edpolicy.education.jhu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/OSI-
RestorativePracticemastheadFINAL-1.pdf
15. Sloan, J. (2012). Problem Solving Meeting. Unpublished manuscript.
16. Sloan, J. (2012). Problem Solving Meeting. Unpublished manuscript.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The school-to-prison pipeline is the result of an accumulation of policies that originally targeted adult offenders and, over the past several decades, have been shown to create significant outcome disparities for youth in schools (Heitzeg, 2009). Despite a decline in school violence, highly publicized juvenile crimes resulted in new laws and policies that both criminalize developmentally appropriate youth behaviors and increase the severity of punishment for youth in the classroom (Browne-Diani, 2012). In response, a capstone project was developed over the past two years that is guided by the goals within the Grand Challenges for Social Work and Society (2018), to help Ensure the Healthy Development for All Youth. The capstone project developed the methods to limit the disproportionate impact of exclusionary discipline policies that contribute to the school-to-prison pipeline in an effort to disrupt current school discipline norms and change how students are disciplined in schools. Currently, exclusionary discipline and implicit bias, coupled with limited options for school staff, are creating significant outcome disparities for students and represent a large social justice issue (Fiorillo, 2018). Increased school staff turnover and the lost potential taxed income due to lower student graduation rates beg for system change. The proposed innovation to combat these issues consists of a newly developed, non-clinical, restorative intervention that will be diffused through a low-profit, LLC called ImpactEquality. This organization will provide a five-day restorative training modality to educators in middle and high schools that must embrace the required national educational components of Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) (Fiorillo, 2018). This organization is structured to provide more supportive services at a comparatively lower cost, increasing the potential scope of diffusion and positive disruptive change as evidenced by better stakeholder outcomes. ImpactEquality is guided by the mission “to establish restorative practices in schools to limit exclusionary discipline and stop youth from entering the school-to-prison pipeline” with a vision of “a supportive school culture for every student to learn and grow.” Guided by these mission and vision statements, the organization seeks to disrupt current school exclusive discipline norms by providing newly developed alternatives to ensure the healthy development for all youth at the local, state and national levels. ❧ In its early stages, the capstone project was informed by school administrators, educators and students throughout Southeast Michigan. These stakeholders expressed frustration in both their lack of discipline options and support in the classroom. After applying this information to guide the programming prototype composition, the project will be introduced in two separate charter schools that share the same campus in Detroit, MI. There, a research study and subsequent collection of data will occur during the 2020 pilot. This outcome information will be later shared with both educators and those in helping fields that are vested in youth development and positive outcomes. After the first-year pilot, the capstone project will expand to the charter’s five other Detroit area locations as it continues to grow to scale, while increasing the potential for all stakeholders and working toward achieving the organization’s mission to promote change. ❧ Within the five-day onsite restorative model training, which is guided by the affiliated training manual prototype, educators will learn social and emotional learning (SEL), multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS) and positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) methodology. During the training, this information will also be practiced and reinforced in an effort to limit the overuse of exclusionary discipline and promote an inclusive school environment driven by data tracking and improved user outcomes. This includes utilizing Likert scale surveys to assess user attitudes and knowledge, as well as the Implicit Association Test (IAT) to determine pre and post training changes in user implicit bias. In addition, school performance data such as exclusive discipline utilization and student graduation rates will be tracked to determine the impact that the capstone training modality has on post-trained schools. ImpactEquality has developed a new restorative modality, informed by stakeholders, users and evidence-based practices, in an effort to change the post-trained school’s prevailing exclusive discipline norms. This change provides the opportunity for increasing positive student outcomes, through restorative practices, while lowering the operating costs of the school, adhering to ESSA requirements and reducing the risk factors associated with exclusive discipline and the school-to-prison pipeline (Fiorillo, 2018).

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Rate IT!: A classroom solution to disrupt the school-to-prison pipeline through the analysis of student heart rates

PDF

Building a trauma-informed community to address adverse childhood experiences

PDF

Zero-tolerance policies in urban America

PDF

Social emotional learning the future of education

PDF

Unto the least of these homeless ministry: ending homelessness within the co-occurring population

PDF

Beacon: a curriculum for change

PDF

Game over concepts, mental-health support for college student-athletes

PDF

The role of empathy in curtailing the disproportionate disciplinary actions towards Black students leading to the school-to-prison pipeline in Georgia

PDF

Paved with good intentions: auditing higher education’s commitment to race and gender inclusion

PDF

The Senior Social Isolation Project (SSIP): a comprehensive response to a growing aging population

PDF

Capstone proposal: utilizing trained medical interpreters: a workshop for medical providers

PDF

Helping parents cultivate social capital in educational settings to achieve equal opportunities and justice for African American students

PDF

Rural minds initiative: navigating mental health wellness together at Gorham Middle/High School

PDF

Promoting emotional intelligence and resiliency in youth: S.U.P.E.R. peer counseling program ©

PDF

Commercial sexual exploitation of children: the impact of awareness education in the Los Angeles Unified School District

PDF

Inter professional education and practice in the health care setting: an innovative model using human simulation learning

PDF

We are our neighbors' keeper: an innovative field kit of outreach and assessment tools to help end homelessness

PDF

WISER women’s program: well-being innovation with support and education for resilience—a homelessness prevention intervention

PDF

SCALE UP: an integrated wellness framework for schools

PDF

Warrior tribe: veteran utilization of aquaponics to fight loneliness

Asset Metadata

Creator Fiorillo, Michael (author)

Core Title Stopping the school to prison pipeline: a restorative intervention for educators

School Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work

Degree Doctor of Social Work

Degree Program Social Work

Publication Date 12/17/2019

Defense Date 11/22/2019

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Discipline,Educators,implicit bias,intervention,manual,methods,MTSS,OAI-PMH Harvest,PBIS,restorative,school to prison pipeline,Schools,SEL,Students

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Manderscheid, Ron (committee chair), Katz, Irv (committee member), Rank, Michael (committee member)

Creator Email Mfiorillo2@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-255749

Unique identifier UC11674137

Identifier etd-FiorilloMi-8090.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-255749 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-FiorilloMi-8090.pdf

Dmrecord 255749

Document Type Capstone project

Rights Fiorillo, Michael

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA