Socrates in Aotearoa: teaching restorative justice in New Zealand

Abstract

Much introductory material on restorative justice presents the subject from an idealistic point of view, in which assertions of its ethical superiority and advantages over retributive justice systems frequently go unchallenged. In New Zealand, this problem is particularly pronounced, as there is often a naïve acceptance that restorative justice is more culturally appropriate for offenders and victims with indigenous backgrounds. This article argues for a more nuanced approach to the teaching of restorative justice, using critical investigation of claims concerning its efficacy and examination of its problems in order to explore its promises and realities. One possibility for such an approach is the use of the Socratic Method, a teaching method with a demonstrated ability to engage students and foster critical thinking, but one that has also received criticism for its ability to intimidate and demean students. This method is widely used in law schools, but much less so in the social sciences. This article explores the use of this method in a New Zealand university class on restorative justice, examining both student perceptions of the use of the Socratic Method, as well as the efficacy of this approach in terms of knowledge retention and critical engagement.

Keywords:

• restorative justice
• teaching
• socratic method
• criminology
• New Zealand

Notes

1. Our search looked at the current course offerings for criminology and criminal justice programs at these universities, course catalogues (when available), course descriptions (when available), and the ‘search’ functions on each of these university’s websites. We were unable to determine how often restorative justice may be taught as part of other courses.

2. International Journal of Clinical Legal Education; European Journal of Legal Education; Journal of Legal Education; The Journal of Legal Studies Education; Legal Education Review.

3. Ethics approval for student interviews was granted by AUT Ethics Committee on 8 Sep 2011. Appropriate consent was asked and given by all interviewees.

4. The interview schedule included the following questions:(1) Could you briefly summarize what you have learned about restorative justice during this course? (2) What were the most profound ideas/thoughts you have taken away from this course? (3) The lecturer informed you about the teaching method she employed in the beginning of this course. Can you remember the name of the teaching method? (4) What was different about the teaching method this lecturer employed compared to other courses you have taken during your degree? (5) How did you experience the change of the tutorial setting from a typical class room environment to a ‘sentencing circle’? (6) What methods used by the lecturer helped you most in your learning process? (7) What methods used by the lecturer impeded your learning process? (8) Do you think you have transferred more or less information into your long-term memory about the subject matter in this course compared to other courses? Why do you think that is? (9) What did you enjoy most in the classes? (10) What did you enjoy least in the classes? (11) What improvements would you suggest to the lecturer regarding topic and teaching methods? (12) What specifically made the learning environment in lectures and tutorials comfortable for you? (13) What specifically made the learning environment in lectures and tutorials uncomfortable for you?