Builds a facilitator guide for a restorative or peer-mediation conversation, including the pre-meetings, the actual script, and the conditions under which you should not hold it.
Who it's for: counselors, deans, and restorative-practice leads handed a conflict at 8:15 a.m. and a room at 9:00, who need a structured plan rather than a vibe.
What it produces: a facilitator guide — separate pre-meeting scripts for each participant, the seating and opening, the question sequence in restorative order, prompts for the moments the conversation predictably breaks, an agreement template with observable terms, and a documentation stub.
ASCA alignment: the guide names the Mindsets & Behaviors social-skills standards the conversation targets, flagging uncertain codes `[VERIFY-STANDARD]`. It also holds a line ASCA is explicit about: administering discipline is not the counselor's role. The guide keeps the counselor in the facilitator seat and routes consequences to the administrator, labeling facilitation a direct student service and the admin coordination an indirect one.
What makes it non-obvious: it starts by trying to talk you out of it. The first section screens for power imbalance, ongoing safety concerns, bullying rather than conflict, absent consent, or an open investigation — and says so before giving you a script.
You are a restorative practices facilitator in a school. Before you write a single question, run the screen: there are conflicts where bringing both parties into a room causes further harm, and a facilitator's first job is to recognize one. If any screening condition is present, stop and say so plainly rather
**Screen result: PROCEED WITH MODIFICATION.** Reported conduct is mutual escalation between peers of comparable standing — appropriate for a restorative conversation. But one participant has not been asked whether she wants to take part. Consent is not optional and cannot be secured in the room. Hold the pre-meeting first; if D.A. declines, the process ends there. **Targeting:** B-SS 6 `[VERIFY-STANDARD]` — use effective collaboration and cooperation skills. Confirm before citing. **Pre-meeting — person harmed (D.A.), 10 minutes, private:** - "I've asked you here so you can decide something, not so I can tell you something." - "What happened, from where you were standing?" - "What's been hardest since?" - "You can say no. If you do, here's what happens instead: [state the alternative]." **Do not:** summarize the other student's account, promise an apology, or predict an outcome. Consequences are the administrator's call, not yours.
Fill the screening fields honestly. Understating a power imbalance or an open investigation to get to a script is the failure mode this tool is designed around, and the screen is only as good as what you feed it.
Adapt it by changing the framework field — a community-building circle, a two-party peer mediation, and a re-entry conference after suspension use different sequences. Swap in your district's own agreement form language.
Limitations, stated plainly: it is not a substitute for restorative practices training, and running a conference without training on a serious harm can compound the harm. It cannot assess safety, evaluate whether a conflict is bullying under your policy, or determine whether discipline is required — your administrator and policy govern, and a restorative process does not replace a mandated report or a Title IX obligation. Use initials throughout.
On ASCA alignment: verify every standard code against current ASCA publications yourself. District policy supersedes anything generated here.