Across Queensland, and in Catholic and independent systems nationally, a quiet shift is underway in how schools respond to behaviour. The old reflex — an incident, a consequence, a detention or suspension — is giving way to something that asks a harder but more useful question: what happened, who was affected, and how do we put it right? That is the heart of restorative practice, and for post-COVID student cohorts it is proving far more effective than punishment alone.

This guide explains what restorative practice actually is, what the evidence says, and how to make it work at a whole-school level without it collapsing into “being soft”.

What restorative practice is (and isn’t)

Restorative practice is an approach to relationships and behaviour built on three ideas: relationships come first, students take responsibility for the impact of their actions, and harm is actively repaired. It is not the absence of consequences, and it is not simply “being nice”. A restorative conversation can be more demanding than a detention, because it asks a student to face the person they affected and help make things right — rather than quietly serving time and learning nothing.

Crucially, it complements rather than replaces a behaviour framework. The evidence base on restorative approaches points to reductions in suspensions and repeat incidents when they are implemented with fidelity — and to weak results when they are bolted on without cultural change.

Key restorative practices for Australian schools

  • Restorative conversations — short, structured chats using a consistent set of questions (what happened, who was affected, what needs to happen now).
  • Circles — community-building circles for whole-class cohesion, and responsive circles after conflict.
  • Affective statements and questions — naming the impact of behaviour in the moment (“when that happens, it makes it hard for the class to learn”).
  • Re-entry circles — structured support to bring a student back after a suspension, rather than a cold return to the same dynamics.

The common thread is a shared restorative language that every staff member uses consistently — which is exactly where implementation usually succeeds or fails.

Implementing it at a whole-school level

Piecemeal restorative practice — a few enthusiastic teachers, no shared approach — almost always fizzles. The schools that make it stick treat it as a cultural shift led from the top: leadership models the language, staff are trained together, and the approach is explicitly aligned with the school’s existing Positive Behaviour for Learning or PBS framework rather than competing with it. Restorative practice handles the “repair” when things go wrong; positive frameworks handle the “prevent” by teaching and recognising expected behaviour every day.

Getting staff on board

The most common resistance point is the fear that restorative practice means letting students “off the hook”. It doesn’t — and the way to win staff over is to be clear that accountability is central, not absent. A student who has to sit across from a peer they hurt and work out how to repair it is being held to a higher standard than one who serves a silent detention. The other reliable driver of buy-in is time: restorative approaches feel slower at first, but schools that persist report fewer repeat incidents, which gives teachers their time back. Start with the staff who are already relationship-oriented, let them model what it looks like, and resist the urge to mandate it across the whole school on day one.

The link between restorative practice and recognition

Here is the part schools often miss: restorative practice works best alongside a strong recognition culture. When students are routinely seen and acknowledged for doing the right thing, the frequency of incidents that need a restorative response falls. Recognition builds the relationships and the sense of being valued that make a restorative conversation land, instead of being brushed off. This is why our guide to positive behaviour tracking for Australian schools and the research on why recognition beats punishment are natural companions to a restorative approach — and why trauma-aware, relationship-first classrooms (see our guide to trauma-informed teaching) lean so heavily on both.

Where to start

Restorative practice is not a quick fix — it is a change in lens. If your school is just beginning, start small: train one year level or faculty, agree on a shared set of restorative questions, and pair it with a visible, consistent recognition system so the culture shifts in both directions at once. Done well, it changes not just how a school responds to harm, but whether that harm happens in the first place.

AchievoEDU supports the positive, consistent culture this depends on. See how it works or book a demo.