Martin Howard and Marg Thorsborne OAM (Co-author)
This article is part of Restorative Practices International’s ongoing exploration of emerging forgiveness research and its implications for restorative practice. As the field of restorative practices matures, researchers are increasingly examining the psychological processes that underpin successful restoration and healing. Forgiveness has emerged as a critical yet often underexplored dimension of this work. Throughout this series, we examine how forgiveness research intersects with restorative practice, what the evidence reveals about effective integration, and how practitioners can thoughtfully incorporate these insights into their work with students and communities.
As restorative practices become more established in schools worldwide,[2] a complementary body of research is emerging that deserves our attention. Studies on forgiveness education—distinct from but deeply connected to RP work—are revealing measurable impacts on student well-being, behavior, and academic engagement[1][3] that expand our understanding of what makes restorative processes truly transformative.
For practitioners already skilled in facilitating circles and conferences, this research offers a framework for understanding why some restorative interventions achieve lasting change while others, despite procedural success, leave participants still carrying unresolved emotional weight.[4] The forgiveness literature provides evidence-based insights into the internal processes that complement the external repair we facilitate through restorative practices.[5]
This article synthesizes findings from multiple research streams. Key sources (linked below) include longitudinal studies on forgiveness interventions in adolescent populations, meta-analyses examining behavioral and mental health outcomes of forgiveness education, research from the Greater Good Science Center at UC Berkeley on forgiveness pedagogy, reports from the Learning Policy Institute and Centers for Disease Control on restorative practices implementation and outcomes, peer-reviewed studies on the intersection of apology and forgiveness in restorative justice contexts, and research examining connections between forgiveness capacity and prejudice reduction. Together, these studies provide a robust evidence base for understanding how forgiveness education and restorative practices can work synergistically to support student development and school transformation.
The Evidence Base for Forgiveness in Educational Settings
Recent meta-analyses of forgiveness interventions in schools demonstrate consistent outcomes across diverse populations.[1][3] Forgiveness training significantly reduces anger, anxiety, and depression among adolescents while increasing measures of hope, happiness, and life satisfaction.[3] These effects appear regardless of age, gender, or cultural background, suggesting forgiveness operates as a fundamental psychological mechanism rather than a culturally specific practice.[1]
Notably, the psychological benefits of forgiveness accrue to the person engaging in forgiveness, independent of whether reconciliation occurs or whether the person who caused harm “deserves” forgiveness.[1] This distinction is crucial for restorative practitioners. Forgiveness functions as an internal process of releasing resentment and moving toward emotional resolution, separate from the interpersonal accountability processes central to RP.[4]
Behavioral outcomes are equally compelling. Programs incorporating forgiveness education document reductions in aggressive behavior, bullying incidents, and delinquent conduct.[3] Additionally, and this warrants particular attention, forgiveness training correlates with decreased prejudice and improved attitudes toward out-groups.[1] This suggests that developing forgiveness capacity may cultivate the cognitive flexibility and perspective-taking skills that underlie both conflict resolution and bias reduction.[5]
The Authenticity Requirement in Restorative-Forgiveness Processes
Trained school-based facilitators (deputy principals, student deans, heads of learning, and other welfare staff) report some cynicism from other staff about apology with comments like “students think all they need to do is say they are sorry” and “there’s no commitment to changing their behaviour”. Some students in schools also think that’s all they have to do to get adults off their backs! This points to an important issue about the quality of training of staff, and teaching young people the skills of connection and reconnection. This work must be authentic if we are to bring human-ness to the encounter and for the possibility of healing.
Research examining apology and forgiveness within restorative justice frameworks consistently emphasizes a critical factor, which is authenticity.[4] When apology and forgiveness emerge from genuine understanding and voluntary choice, they provide powerful symbolic reparation and facilitate emotional healing. However, coerced or performative expressions of either apology or forgiveness undermine these benefits entirely.[4]
This creates both a limitation and a clarification for practice. Restorative practitioners can create conditions that support forgiveness—through skilled facilitation, appropriate sequencing, and psychoeducation about forgiveness as a process—but cannot mandate its occurrence.[1][4] The research suggests this limitation is not a flaw but rather essential to forgiveness functioning as genuine emotional work rather than compliance behavior.[4]
The implication for RP implementation is significant: effective practice requires holding space for forgiveness as a possible outcome while simultaneously communicating that it is neither required nor expected. This distinguishes forgiveness from other restorative outcomes like taking responsibility, making amends, or following through on agreements—elements that can be appropriately expected within restorative processes.[2][5]
Academic and Engagement Outcomes
While the connection between social-emotional skills and academic performance is well-established in SEL literature,[5] the specific pathway from forgiveness education to improved academic outcomes merits examination. Studies document that students who receive forgiveness instruction report increased classroom participation and engagement.[1][3] Teachers observe corresponding improvements in grades and academic behaviors.[3]
The proposed mechanism is cognitive rather than mystical. Unresolved anger and hurt occupy working memory and attentional resources that would otherwise be available for learning.[1] When students develop capacity to process these emotions through forgiveness—moving from rumination toward resolution—cognitive resources become available for academic tasks.[3] Additionally, classrooms where forgiveness is taught and modeled tend to exhibit safer emotional climates, which independently supports academic risk-taking and engagement.[1][5]
For restorative practitioners advocating for comprehensive implementation, this research provides an additional rationale beyond discipline reduction.[2] Forgiveness education and RP work together may remove barriers to learning that traditional discipline approaches not only fail to address but often exacerbate through exclusion and shame.[2]
Forgiveness, Prejudice Reduction, and Equity
The finding that forgiveness training reduces prejudice opens intriguing possibilities for schools using restorative practices as part of equity and inclusion initiatives.[1] The correlation appears to operate through enhanced empathy, increased perspective-taking, and reduced tendency toward dehumanization—all skills cultivated through both forgiveness education and restorative processes.[1][5]
This connection suggests that forgiveness capacity may be understood not merely as an interpersonal skill but as a cognitive-emotional competency that counters the psychological mechanisms underlying bias.[1] When students repeatedly practice recognizing the full humanity of people who have harmed them—and acknowledging their own capacity for causing harm—they develop mental habits that resist categorical thinking and stereotyping.[5]
Combined with the established evidence that restorative practices reduce disciplinary disparities affecting students of color and students with disabilities,[2] this research points toward forgiveness-integrated RP as a multi-level equity intervention addressing both structural inequities in discipline systems and interpersonal bias in school communities.[2][5]
Community-Level and Cultural Impacts
While much forgiveness research examines individual outcomes, studies of school-wide implementation reveal broader cultural effects.[1][2] Schools incorporating forgiveness education into their RP frameworks report enhanced sense of belonging, increased prosocial behavior, and improved peer relationships across the student body—not only among students directly involved in restorative interventions.[1][5]
This diffusion effect suggests that explicit teaching about forgiveness creates shared language and concepts that normalize both accountability and healing.[4] Students develop collective understanding that people can cause significant harm and still be welcomed back into community; that experiencing harm does not require permanent resentment; and that healthy communities make space for the full complexity of human relationship.[2][4]
These cultural shifts align with research on school connectedness, which identifies restorative practices as key to building environments where students feel genuinely seen, valued, and supported.[2][5] The addition of forgiveness education appears to deepen these effects by addressing not only how schools respond to harm but how individuals and communities metabolize it.[1][3]
Partnering with Parents to Support Student Forgiveness Journeys
As schools integrate forgiveness education into restorative practices, engaging and informing parents becomes essential to creating coherent support systems for students’ emotional development. MacDiarmid’s research on restorative justice acknowledges that parents naturally play an important role in supporting apology and forgiveness processes, making parent education a critical implementation component. When families understand that forgiveness functions as a tool for releasing emotional burden rather than minimizing harm, they can better support their children’s healing. Practitioners can share compelling evidence that students who develop forgiveness capacity experience reduced anxiety and depression alongside increased hope and life satisfaction.[1][3] Parent education should emphasize forgiveness as internal emotional processing, distinct from external decisions about reconciliation or relationship boundaries.[1][4] This distinction alleviates concerns that forgiveness means vulnerability. Research from the Greater Good Science Center demonstrates that forgiveness serves as a developmentally appropriate skill supporting long-term wellbeing.[1][5] When parents understand forgiveness through this research-informed lens, they become allies in encouraging authentic student exploration while maintaining appropriate protective boundaries, honoring both forgiveness as voluntary and families’ vital role in nurturing social-emotional development.
Integration Considerations for Practice
For schools with established RP programs, integrating forgiveness education involves strategic additions rather than wholesale revision:
Curriculum Development: Incorporate age-appropriate lessons on forgiveness as psychological process, its distinction from reconciliation, and its documented benefits.[1] Integrate into existing SEL curricula or advisory programs.[5]
Parent Education and Engagement: Develop accessible parent resources—workshops, newsletters, or video modules—explaining forgiveness research and how families can support students’ emotional processing at home. Include practical strategies for discussing forgiveness with children and clarifying common misconceptions.
Language Shifts: Explicitly name forgiveness as a possible outcome of restorative processes while emphasizing its voluntary nature.[4] This makes forgiveness discussable without compulsory.
Facilitator Training: Ensure practitioners understand forgiveness research and can respond skillfully when it arises in conferences or circles—neither pushing prematurely nor dismissing when authentically offered.[4]
Distinguishing Internal and External Work: Help students understand forgiveness as internal emotional work separate from external actions like apology or restitution.[1][4] Someone can forgive without reconciling; someone can complete a restorative process without forgiving.
Developmental Approach: Position forgiveness capacity as a skill developing over time through practice and reflection, not a one-time decision.[3]
Synthesizing the Research: A Broader Framework
The convergence of forgiveness research and restorative practices literature suggests a comprehensive framework for understanding how schools can effectively respond to harm:[2][5]
External Repair (primarily addressed through RP): Acknowledgment of harm, accountability, restitution, changed behavior, relationship repair, community healing[2][4]
Internal Healing (addressed through forgiveness education): Emotional processing, release of resentment, choice about ongoing relationship, personal meaning-making, cognitive-emotional growth[1][3]
Effective practice requires attending to both dimensions. Restorative processes without attention to internal healing may achieve compliance but not transformation.[4] Forgiveness education without restorative accountability may support individual emotional health but fail to address harm’s interpersonal and community dimensions.[2][5]
Schools implementing both approaches report the most comprehensive outcomes: reduced disciplinary incidents and disparities,[2] improved school climate and connectedness,[2][5] enhanced academic engagement,[3] decreased anxiety and depression,[3] increased empathy and prosocial behavior,[1][5] and more equitable, inclusive communities.[2]
Moving Forward: Research and Practice Directions
As this integrated approach gains traction, several questions warrant continued investigation and practitioner attention:
How do developmental factors influence students’ capacity for forgiveness at different ages, and how should this inform age-appropriate implementation?[3] What role does cultural background play in how students understand and engage with forgiveness, and how can implementation honor diverse cultural frameworks?[1] How can schools support forgiveness processes while protecting students from pressure toward premature or coerced forgiveness?[4] What training and ongoing support do educators need to facilitate forgiveness-integrated RP effectively?[2][5]
The research base continues to expand, and practitioner wisdom remains essential for translating findings into context-appropriate, culturally responsive, and developmentally sound implementation.
Conclusion
The evidence for integrating forgiveness education with restorative practices is substantial and growing.[1][2][3] For practitioners seeking to deepen the impact of their RP work, this research offers both validation and direction: validation that the emotional dimensions of harm and healing matter profoundly, and direction toward specific, evidence-based approaches for supporting students’ full healing journey.[5]
As restorative practices mature from innovative alternative to established approach,[2] the forgiveness research provides a framework for the next evolution—one that addresses not only how we respond to harm structurally and relationally, but how we support the internal emotional work that makes external repair sustainable and transformative.[4][5]
Based on my research, here’s your enhanced bibliography with author information and detailed annotations:
Bibliography
[1] Greater Good Science Center at UC Berkeley – Forgiveness for Students
Greater Good in Education, University of California, Berkeley
https://ggie.berkeley.edu/student-well-being/forgiveness-for-students/
This comprehensive educational resource provides age-appropriate guidance for teaching forgiveness to students from preschool through high school. The material defines forgiveness as a process of letting go of resentment and negative judgment without requiring reconciliation or condoning harmful behavior. It includes developmental frameworks showing how forgiveness education should be adapted for different age groups, from introducing concepts of inherent worth to elementary students through implementing sophisticated forgiveness process models with high schoolers. The resource emphasizes that forgiveness is a personal choice that brings peace of mind and freedom from anger, while noting that it should never be pressured and doesn’t require automatic reconciliation, especially in cases of ongoing harm like bullying.
[2] Darling-Hammond, S. (2023). Fostering Belonging, Transforming Schools: The Impact of Restorative Practices
Learning Policy Institute
https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/impact-restorative-practices-report
This rigorous research report by Sean Darling-Hammond examines the effectiveness of restorative practices in schools, making a critical distinction between restorative programs (training initiatives) and restorative practices (the actual actions implemented). The study found that students exposed to more restorative practices showed significant improvements in behavior, mental health, and disciplinary outcomes. The report documents how restorative approaches reduce exclusionary discipline, improve school climate, and address racial disparities in school discipline, with Black students disproportionately benefiting from these practices. The research emphasizes that successful implementation requires multi-year investments, supportive policy frameworks that move away from zero-tolerance approaches, and accountability systems that track both suspension rates and implementation of restorative practices.
[3] Mental Health Center for Kids – Research on the Benefits of Forgiveness for Adolescents
https://mentalhealthcenterkids.com/blogs/articles/research-on-the-benefits-of-forgiveness-for-adolescents
This resource synthesizes research from a study conducted in Junior High Schools in Ghana examining forgiveness interventions with 60 students across 8 schools. The article discusses two evidence-based forgiveness models—the Enright Process Model and the REACH model—both of which proved equally effective regardless of students’ age or gender. Key findings include that forgiveness education helped students feel emotionally lighter and calmer, increased self-acceptance and confidence in handling challenges, and improved coping skills. The resource translates academic research into practical strategies for parents and caregivers, emphasizing the importance of modeling forgiveness at home, helping children develop empathy, and acknowledging hurt feelings before encouraging forgiveness. The article highlights that forgiveness education can significantly improve adolescents’ emotional health and reduce anger and depression.
[4] MacDiarmid, L. (2025). Apology and Forgiveness Rituals in Restorative Justice: Victims’ Experiences with Justice-Involved Youth
International Review of Victimology, SAGE Journals
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/02697580251314901
This qualitative research study by Laura MacDiarmid explores the apology-forgiveness cycle through the lens of 14 victim participants who engaged in 16 restorative justice programs through Youth Justice Committees in Canada. The research reveals that victims assess apology sincerity based on three critical elements: the youth’s acceptance of responsibility, expression of appropriate affect demonstrating recognition of harm, and concrete steps toward making amends. The study provides valuable empirical insights into how victims experience the ritual significance of apology and forgiveness exchanges in restorative justice contexts, addressing a gap in understanding what makes remedial work meaningful and effective from victims’ perspectives. This research contributes important knowledge about the conditions under which apologies facilitate forgiveness and healing in youth justice settings.
[5] Lodi, E., Perrella, L., Lepri, G.L., Scarpa, M.L., & Patrizi, P. (2022). Use of Restorative Justice and Restorative Practices at School: A Systematic Literature Review
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(1), 96
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8751228/
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19010096
This systematic literature review analyzed 34 peer-reviewed studies published between 2010-2021 examining restorative justice and restorative practices in schools serving students aged 6-18. The comprehensive review found that the most commonly used restorative practices are circles (n=26), followed by restorative conferences (n=17), peer mediation (n=10), and restorative conversations (n=8). The research demonstrates that restorative practices improve school climate, reduce suspensions and exclusions, prevent conflicts and misbehaviors (including bullying), and promote positive relationships between peers and between students and teachers. Additionally, these practices facilitate the development of social and emotional skills and encourage prosocial behaviors. The authors note growing interest in implementing restorative approaches in schools while acknowledging that more research is needed to establish direct causal correlations and address implementation challenges.
