Unit 2

What can we learn from traditional societies?

A state-based society differs greatly from a traditional society. While the former focuses on direction through setting goals, the latter makes meaning through storytelling. State-based societies aim to accumulate wealth, while traditional societies operate on sharing resources so that everyone has enough. One values empirical studies and mechanical processes, while the other, instead, puts its trust in direct experience and human processes. The consequences of these differences for the respective justice systems take root in opposing conceptions of power: in a state-based society, having power means being in a position to assert your will. In a traditional society, rather, it means being all you can or fulfilling your life’s potential. Through the activity below, we will continue to explore these two models and what they can learn from each other.

To prepare for this week’s tutorial:

1) Take a picture of something that represents a state-based society.2) Take another picture of something that represents a traditional society. 3) Use these two images as a starting point to reflect on the connection between

the systems they represent. What can a state-based and a traditional society learn from each other? Write down a brief reflection.

4) Post your pictures and your reflection on Canvas.5) Bring your pictures and reflection to your tutorial to share in the circle.

NOTE: You are encouraged to make this activity very personal. The images can be of objects or scenes that represent these societies to you. They don’t have to be universal representations of these societies. They can be metaphorical or symbolic, or they can represent one particular aspect of the society. So venture out with your phone or camera, and see what speaks to you!

Unit 3

Thinking/Talking Beyond Punishment

For centuries, philosophers, politicians, actors, anthropologists, spiritual leaders, and many more have written about punishment. They have critiqued forms of punishment, or have defended the systems in place during their time. Very rarely, however, did they question the basic premise of punishment. Like most of us, they grew up in settings where punishment was seen as something “natural” – getting caught taking a cookie from the cookie jar or cheating on tests in school all had consequences. After years of these cause-and-effect learning patterns that connect transgressions great and small with a punishment, it is a challenge to exit these deeply engrained pathways and think beyond punishment when transgressions occur. Restorative Justice calls upon us to embrace alternative pathways, and even create new ones.

As we have seen, cultural patterns and beliefs find their way into justice systems, but they also gather strength and are perpetuated through the language of sayings and quotes. This week, we will explore the concept of punishment through quotes.

To prepare for tutorial:

1) Choose a famous quote about punishment. You can use a quote database for this; googling “quotes about punishment” will lead you to several. Take some time to read through several quotes and select one that stands out for you. They can be words you strongly agree or disagree with.

2) Contextualize the quote: find some information about the author of the quote (when/where did/do they live; what are their political/religious/social beliefs; does the quote refer to a specific historical event). This is merely to help you understand the quote; you don’t need to write down this information.

3) Briefly comment on the quote. What made it stand out for you? Describe your reaction to it.

4) For the second part of this exercise, you will write your own (soon-to-be) famous quote about punishment. It can be a rallying cry for change, or something that speaks to inner change rather than external action, or both. It can be a quote that makes people think, or one that encourages the reader to act. Use last week’s readings and lecture on punishment to write a quote that explores alternatives to punishment, or that questions the clear demarcation between the categories of victim/offender/judge or offense/punishment/reward.

5) Write a brief comment about how you got to your quote, and perhaps about what it means. Which ideas went into the process of creating your quote? What (if anything) did you want your words to elicit in the reader?

6) Post both quotes and your comments/reflections on them to Canvas and bring it all to your tutorial to share with the group.

Unit 4

Justice as a Human Problem

Liz Elliott points out that “[m]ost writing about criminal justice proceeds on the basis that justice is a self-explanatory idea” (52). These writings take for granted that we all agree and know what justice is. In our common usage, we may think of justice as being akin to fairness and based on truth. Sukhvinder Kaur’s story in lecture, however, illustrated that justice in the courts is not necessarily invested in seeking the truth in

order to facilitate a return to fairness. E.g. If you cannot offer proof beyond reasonable doubt in a criminal case, even if the crime occurred, the truth according to the court will be that the crime did not occur.

Media reports on crime cases add another layer of obfuscation to our search for truth. The two truths (by Wally Oppal and Andrew McWinnie) on the current murder case of Serena Vermeersch illustrate that the way we frame the problem is an indication of the way we are going to respond to it. In our media-saturated world, news reports often shape the way we perceive events. The media, however, merely give us their truth, and consulting different media sources often results in different truths. This week, we will further explore this fluidity of truth and justice in the media.

To prepare for tutorial:

1) Find two reports from different media sources (you can mix print, online, TV, …) that cover the same news event. 2) Read or watch the reports carefully and analyze how they determine and represent the truth. What kind of narrative does each report create?3) Compare your experience reading/viewing both reports. As a reader or viewer, how does the way the story is told impact/change your emotional reaction to the events? 4) Post the two reports and your comparative analysis to Canvas and bring them to tutorial to share.

Unit 5

Restorative Justice: A Vision of the Good

As we started thinking about RJ this week, we came across our resistance to letting go of a focus on punishment and the comfort of good/bad dichotomies. After listing its possible definitions, Liz Elliott enumerates the three goals of RJ as follows: 1) considering the needs of the participants; 2) healing harms; 3) embody and reflect the desired/identified core values of the community (68-69).

With this in mind, we will consider the connection between RJ and openness toward and resistance to forgiveness. After having heard Chris Ducharme’s story on Friday, in tutorial, several of you shared your admiration for his strength and added that you don’t think you would be able to forgive. When we are harmed, it requires a lot of strength to open up to the possibility of forgiveness. This willingness, however, lies at the heart of restorative justice. Without truly believing that, as Natalie DeFreitas said, “people are worth more than the worst thing they have ever done,” we remain trapped in dichotomous thinking. Let’s explore the difficulty and ambiguity of forgiveness:

1) Read Chris’s poem that illustrates the divergent emotions he circles through that end on forgiveness. Judging from the poem, what do you think his reasons for forgiveness were? What was the effect of forgiveness for Chris? What might his poem teach us about the process of forgiveness?

2) Now recall an event (or multiple events) in which you gave or were granted, or denied or were denied forgiveness. Get in touch with the circumstances and the emotions you experienced around them. Think about openness, closeness, and transformation. Think about the consequences of each scenario? Who benefits? And how does this relate to healing? Now pour these thoughts into a poem.

3) Reread your poem, think about what it has taught you about forgiveness, and write down some reflections about the link between Restorative Justice and forgiveness. Do you think the former necessitates the latter?

4) Post your reflections on forgiveness in Chris’s poem, your own poem, and your reflections on the connection between forgiveness and RJ to Canvas, and bring your writings to tutorial to share.

Unit 6

Restorative Justice and the Retributive Legal Context

In the webinar, Opportunity and Danger: Implementing RJ in Existing Systems, Catherine Bargen talks about finding moments and spaces within the system that are “ripe” for change. This week’s readings and lectures consider the rationale and the possibilities for RJ within the criminal justice system. Can RJ achieve more when it functions within existing systems? How can RJ avoid being co-opted by the system? Restorative Justice Is The LAW demonstrates that very often the law itself (in the form of human rights) focuses on the same values that are instrumental to RJ. The focus on punishment instead of healing arises from how these laws are practiced and, to some degree, interpreted, rather than from the laws themselves. This creates a space of hope for a transformation of justice systems from within, without the need to tear down the systems and rebuild them from the ground up. Let’s use a contemplative writing exercise to investigate the hopes and concerns related to transformation from within through RJ.

1) Seek out a quiet place to sit, take a few deep breaths, and clear your mind of any momentary thoughts, plans, and worries. Create some space for open reflection.

2) Leaving the readings and lectures in the back of your mind, consider the following question for a minute: What would happen (or what would it look like) if RJ was an integral part of the criminal justice system? Take a few minutes to think and maybe imagine some scenarios. Think of some words or images that moved you or stood out for you in this week’s readings and lectures.

3) Take a pen and a piece of paper, and, timing yourself, write about this question for 2 minutes straight without lifting your pen. Don’t overthink your writing, just let whatever comes to mind first pour out onto the page; you will not have to share any of this writing.

4) Now, read your response, and reflect on it. What did you write about? What was surprising? Did you have any personal reactions to the question? Type up your observations and conclusions from this exercise.

5) Run through the same steps for the following question: What would happen (or what would it look like) if RJ only existed outside the criminal justice system (e.g. in grassroots organizations)? Reflect on the question; write about it for 2 minutes; read your writing, reflect on it; type up a summary of your observations.

6) Post the final step (your observations and conclusions) for both questions to Canvas, and bring them to your tutorial.

Unit 7

Values and Processes: “Being The Change”

This week, we reflected on the connection between personal values and justice systems. In RJ, the values for our daily lives are the foundation for our justice system. The way we relate to and interact with others is heavily influenced by these values. Randy Pausch reminds us that successful interpersonal relationships are built on: 1) telling the truth; 2) apologizing well (which includes three factors: “I’m sorry. It’s my fault. How do I make

it right?”); and 3) seeing the good in people. Liz Elliott quotes the Dalai Lama to suggest that we learn to embody and live by our values not by theorizing them, but by putting them into practice, and by reflecting on that practice (106-7). For example, we become compassionate by practicing compassion, not by thinking about compassion. While justice systems were initially built on the shared values of a community, those values are often no longer traceable in the system. This

week, we invite you to practice apologizing (with self-compassion), and to reflect on the possibilities for including apologies in justice systems.

1) Think about a person you have wronged. This can be recently or a long time ago. It doesn’t have to be a major life event; it can be as simple as cutting someone off in conversation, or not making time for a friend in need. Recall the situation in some detail, as well as the emotions that were/are connected to the events.

2) Write a sincere apology to the person, taking into account the three factors Randy Pausch suggests are part of a sincere apology. We focus on process, not product, so let go of any desired outcome (forgiveness or other) of your apology. If you feel comfortable doing so, you are invited to send your apology to the person harmed. Please also practice self-compassion; while we recognize wrongdoing, we aim to transcend essentializing dichotomies such as that of good versus bad people. As you’re perhaps struggling with the discomfort of self-compassion, consider the words of psychologist John Welwood: “There is a secret about human love that is commonly overlooked: Receiving it is much more scary and threatening than giving it.”

3) Reflect on the process of writing this apology: 1) Spend some time thinking about the vulnerability and courage it took for you to write the letter. How did you feel before, during, and after your writing? What surprised you about the process? 2) Write a brief reflection on what it might look like to incorporate apologies like the one you wrote in the justice system. What might the impact be?

4) Post your apology and your reflections to Canvas and bring them to tutorial to share.

Unit 8

The Geometry of Individuals and Relationships

This week, we reflect on what Jeremy Rifkin calls the first drive of all humans: to belong. Liz Elliott references Rupert Ross, who uses differences in ecological knowing to illustrate western reductionist approaches to learning: in schools, we study plants by

breaking them down into the smallest knowable elements. In that pursuit of knowledge, we neglect the plant’s function in its surroundings and its relationships with other plants and animals in the ecosystem (139-140). This results in a mere partial knowledge of the plant. Our criminal justice system is equally based on fragmentation; we find a culpable and a crime and pick them apart to reach knowledge or truth. Similar to the example of the study of plant biology, we often neglect the victim and the offender’s ecosystems – their histories within the communities and cultures they belong to or interact with. We all belong to a series of communities that in part shape our identity and our

actions – we are someone’s child, student, classmate, teammate, friend, fellow inhabitant of a neighborhood, town, city, province, country, etc. Communities are created around all of these relationships. While communities are formed on the basis of some shared element (geographic location, interest in a particular activity, blood relations, etc.), our “membership” to many of them is somewhat involuntary and circumstantial. This means that we often don’t feel like we belong in the communities of which we are supposedly a part. We’ll explore this further through our own stories.

1) Clear some heart and mind space to think deeply about the following questions: Where do I belong? How do I belong? Why do I belong? When do I belong? Who do I belong to?

2) Now write a personal story about belonging or not belonging (400-500 words)3) Write down a brief reflection on this story. What was the effect of feeling like you

belonged or didn’t belong on your emotions and/or your actions?4) Post both your story and your reflection to canvas and bring them to your tutorial

to share.5) Optional: Share your personal story about belonging for a chance to win one of

two $1,000 prizes from the Canada Council for the Arts. (There are two age categories: 12-18, and 19 and over). Write from the heart about a moment or journey that made you feel like you belonged—or like you didn’t. Share true stories only (no fiction), and limit them to 400-500 words (not including the title). Each person can only submit one story. The challenge closes November 3, 2014.

Unit 9

Psychology of Restorative Justice: The Shame of Being Yourself

Liz Elliott cites Thomas Scheff and Suzanne Retzinger as saying that shame is “the master emotion of everyday life” (153). Elliott refers to Richard Shweder’s definition: “Shame is the deeply felt and highly motivating experience of the fear of being judged negatively” (153). Shame often prevents us from acting. In her TED Talk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psN1DORYYV0), Brené Brown invites us to “Walk into shame,” because working with shame allows us to be vulnerable, and, she adds, “vulnerability is the birthplace of innovation, creativity, and change.”

Similar to the distinctions between guilt and shame drawn in this week’s reading (Elliott 154-155), Brown points out that the message of shame is “I am bad,” while guilt merely

implies that “I did something bad.” Shame, therefore, condemns the person, while guilt condemns the action. Shame makes us feel as if there is something inherently wrong with us, and two main narratives drive it: 1) we are never good enough; or 2) who do you think you are?!

Because shame is triggered by an (often incorrect) anticipation of others’ reactions, we will explore it in dialogue this week.

1) Find someone you feel comfortable talking to, preferably face-to-face, but you can use Skype or phone as well if the person does not live nearby. Your interlocutor can be someone who is also in the class, but it doesn’t have to be. You can also create a slightly larger conversation with 3-5 people if you prefer. The most important thing is to create a setting that makes you (and everyone else involved) feel comfortable.

2) Prepare your conversation by thinking about a recent (or more distant) moment in which shame prevented you from doing something. To locate the workings of shame, remember Brown’s two main narratives of shame listed above. You can ask the other person to watch the TED Talk and think about a moment as well.

3) Have a conversation about shame that starts by sharing your stories and your reflection on those stories in relation to the TED Talk (and the reading). You can ask each other questions to get a better sense of how the other person felt in the episode they are sharing, or you can just be present and listen. You are encouraged to use a talking piece for this, even if it is just two of you.

4) Type up a brief description of the event you decided to share, followed by a brief account of your conversation about it. Most importantly, write down your reflection on sharing these stories. How did it feel to share such intimate thoughts and feelings with someone else? How did you feel when hearing the other person’s story? Post your writing to Canvas and bring them to tutorial to share.

Unit 10

The Psychology of Restorative Justice: Trauma and Healing

This week, we are considering the relation between trauma and healing, and their connection to restorative justice. Liz Elliott quotes Judith Herman, who defines trauma as follows:

“an affliction of the powerless,” which “call[s] into question basic human relationships” (51). … [T]raumatic events “breach the attachments of family, friendship, love and community. They shatter the construction of the self that is formed and sustained in relation to others. They undermine the belief systems that give meaning to human experience. They violate the victim’s faith in a natural or divine order and cast the victim into a state of existential crisis” (51) (Elliott 173-174).

Because trauma disconnects us from our community, healing from trauma needs to happen in community as well. The common set-up for this in RJ, as we’ve all experienced, is the circle gathering. In lecture, Mark said that “Restorative Justice is buried within yourself.” Let’s explore this idea by hosting our own RJ circles and sharing the practice with others.

1) Find a group of at least 4-5 people and host your own circle gathering. You can gather together people from the class if you like, but it would be interesting to do it with people who don’t yet know what a circle gathering is. (You can circle twice or more if you have a small group.)

2) Provide a talking piece, perhaps even something that is related to trauma/healing for you – remember Chris Ducharme’s teddy bear. You’ll have to explain its use and the story behind it to the circle before starting.

3) Provide a basic prompt for the circle. For example, you can ask the group to share some ideas about what trauma means to them, perhaps through a particular story of their own. Alternatively, you could decide to share stories about how someone else’s actions helped you heal from a traumatic experience. You can go first and share freely to set the tone and establish trust in the circle.

4) After the group leaves, write down some reflections on your experience of hosting your own circle. You can add a picture of the circle if you like. Write about how you found people to participate, which changes you noticed when sitting in circle with people you already knew, or whether and how you felt any sense of community with people you didn’t know.

5) Write down what you learned about trauma from the circle. Don’t take notes during the circle (be fully present instead); write about what stood out for you.

6) Post your writings to Canvas and bring them to tutorial.

Unit 11

Restorative Justice as Community Development and Harm Prevention

Since this is Restorative Justice Week as well as our last week of tutorials, we will be looking back on this semester’s journey. The following quote by Liz Elliott framed our explorations of RJ this semester: “I learned that the problems were much deeper than a flawed criminal justice system and that our work needed to begin in our relationships with each other and the natural world and, most importantly, with ourselves.” In the first week, we considered the last part of the quote by writing about how RJ starts with us.

The readings for this week on the role of RJ in community development and harm prevention further encourage us to consider RJ as much more than a fix for problems within the criminal justice system. Let’s take some time to think about the vastness of RJ and the road we have traveled since September.

1) For Restorative Justice Week, you were all asked to attend an RJ event in your community. Which event did you decide to attend? Reflect on your experience. Did the event engage with the different layers of RJ (relationships with each other, nature, and ourselves) that Liz Elliott mentions, and

how? 2) Think about Liz Elliott’s quote as you read through all of your worksheets for the

course. How does the relevance of RJ beyond the criminal justice system resonate with you through/in your worksheet reflections? Which reflections were most meaningful for you personally? Which of your worksheets helped you to truly experience RJ’s relevance beyond criminal justice systems?

3) Post these reflections on Restorative Justice Week and your worksheets on Canvas and bring them to tutorial to share.