Positive psychology has its roots in the development of relationships between adults and youth and influences the effectiveness of programming. Because restorative conversations use an adult as a mediator, a gain in greater effectiveness may be achieved if a positive relationship exists or exists. Can we help students develop a capacity for empathy and a willingness to connect emotionally? The answers can be found through the application of restorative justice. There is a need to review the literature relating to the effectiveness and issues raised by the implementation and practice of restorative justice. Latimer, Dowden & Muise (2005) performed a meta-analysis of data collected “from studies comparing restorative justice programs with traditional non-restorative approaches to criminal behavior. ”Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Researchers examined victim and offender satisfaction with the process, offender quality of restitution, and recidivism of events. Latimer, Dowden & Muise (2005) found that restorative programs were statistically more effective. Daly (2002) used conference research in Australia and New Zealand to show a version of restorative justice that differs from that provided by restorative justice advocates. Daly (2002) has demonstrated that there are documented connections between retributive acts and reparative acts. Daly (2002) used previous research to explain how origin stories are sometimes used to overcome opposition and may not truly convey origin truths. Comparing advocates' stories, Daly (2002) offered a critical review of their efforts. She summarized her article with a reflection on the future of restorative justice and whether the origin story as it is currently told or the real story as she believes will be more beneficial to practices moving forward. Daly (2000) raised the question of the role that punishment plays in the restorative justice process. The article does not answer the question but raises the topic to start discussion on the issue. Punishment is a term that resonates, positively and negatively (in terms of application to an event), with many people. Daly (2000) discussed how this resonates with people regarding the use of the idea of ​​punishment “when it is linked to a restorative justice process, that is, an informal legal process that includes lay and legal actors, which is partly, but not quite state punishment. Daly (2000) strongly believes that we need to discuss this as a concern and a problem with the practice of restorative justice. Gavrielides (2008) “argues that the restorative movement is experiencing a tension between the normative abolitionist and pragmatic visions of restorative justice. “Gavrielides (2008) examined six issues that contribute to the tension between the views and that these influence the theory and practice underlying restorative justice. These tensions are felt by people at the practice level and those doing research, as well as those who create policies and interpret the findings and reports provided to them to make decisions for implementation and programming. Gavrielides (2008) stated that to begin to mediate problems, we need to understand all aspects of them and how they are intertwined, as well as the impact these areas have on practice at the offender/victim level. As restorative justice has been created and implemented, theReparative process has been viewed through the paradigm of critical social theory by social scientists. At the XIII Congress of Criminology, Watchel and McCold (2003) provided a summary of restorative justice as well as its application to social scientists to explain the validity of the practice. Watchel & McCold (2003) defined the foundation of restorative justice as functioning from the belief that "crime harms people and relationships and that justice requires repairing the harm as much as possible." Criminology uses a social process theory with three branches in learning, control and reaction. The learning branch operates from how we learn from what we have seen, control operates from how crime arises from a lack of connection with elements within society, and reaction operates from an idea that criminals are identified as such and assume fully the identity given as one's own. Restorative justice was developed as a social response to crime and as a method of providing connections for offenders to society. Critical social theory begins with a definition that study should improve understanding of society by integrating the mainstream social sciences. Restorative justice addresses the emotional needs of victims and helps offenders find accountability for their actions, as well as the lasting effects of these actions on victims. Watson and Watson (2011) stated that critical social theory “clearly fits into critical theory and its focus by actively seeking to empower individuals and transform systems of society and their policies and processes that replicate oppression and 'injustice. This paradigm fits restorative justice practices extremely cohesively. Using the lens of critical social theory on restorative justice can provide valuable information to social scientists seeking ways to make improvements within social relationships. Wang (2013) wrote that critical social theory is “an influential approach that is driven by critical theory and intends to raise critical consciousness. . . and help marginalized groups and individuals resist social oppression and actively pursue cultural transformation. Wang noted in his article that there are two important aspects to critical social theory. First, critical social theory “has a clearly defined notion of marginalized groups and positions their struggles against domination; in other words, the marginalized other becomes the subject of emancipation. Second, critical social theory “is based on a collective identity: whether class, race, gender, or when multiple identities are recognized, the emphasis is on the coalition between oppressed groups working together to achieve social justice through structural changes. Wang (2013) uses critical social theory to see how social justice education can be used to change the structural levels that inhibit social progress. Action research as a research methodology seems to be the most suitable to answer these questions. Traditional social sciences are challenged by action research through theoretical application that occurs in the moment, as well as by data collection that occurs in frameworks that are refined rather than being based on knowledge conveyed by external experts using samples of research sources. variable data. Within the scope of action research, we must be able to participate in the research by being a part of the process and experiencing what happens during the process by documenting the effects on the social community. Participatory action research seeks to understand the world by trying to change it,collaboratively and following the reflection on the attempted changes. Changes are implemented using a community research approach that emphasizes participation and action by everyone in improving themselves and society. Wadsworth (2005) noted that participatory action research helps remove the “I” from the study in place of the “We. As researchers who are part of a certain society, we have an interest in making sure that our work comes from something good: we must remove the "I" in place of the "we". Participatory action research can be used to examine the effects of using this research in the development of social values, community development and educational practices. Sandwick et al. (2018) writes about critical participatory action research as a connected phenomenon, a fundamental element of social policy in a period in which racial violence and community riots resulting from inequality are clearly manifested. Sandwick et al. (2018) argues that critical participatory action research can “facilitate more just social policy by improving research validity, policy integrity, and organizational capacity. “Empowering those subjected to unequal treatment and community violence is at the heart of critical participatory action research. Sandwick et al. (2018) argues that “those most marginalized contribute specific knowledge to the definition and implementation of research; University researchers work alongside community researchers in designing, collecting, analyzing, and disseminating data. Dupont (2008) highlighted the need for participatory action research in the field of criminology, as well as dialogue about the social values ​​of their research. This research also has the ability to empower those who participate in the research as well. Liu, Gastardo-Conaco, and Wong (2008) used a “qualitative approach to record bottom-up processes of social change and community self-awareness.” The idea that participatory action research can bring about change from the bottom up is exactly what my research question needs and aims to develop. After an event occurs that causes a breakdown in the relationship or a disciplinary infraction occurs in a school, Restorative Circles can be held with the offender and victims. These circles are intended to build community and provide a safe place for teens to share their joys and worries. Conversations within this group can range from discussing what happened over the weekend to working out adverse scenarios using colleagues to solve problems. Using this approach helps students find their place within a social group, thus influencing minimal change in their maladaptive behaviors. Another element that is used within restorative justice practice is restorative chat. After a behavioral incident, a series of questions are asked of the adolescent identified as the perpetrator. The questions that will be used are: Tell me what happened. What were you thinking at that moment? What do you think now? Who influenced this? What do you think is the other person's point of view in the situation? What do you think we need to do about it? How can we make sure this doesn't happen again? What can I do to help you? These questions are intended to help participants in the control group learn how to take responsibility for both their actions and their sense of damage to relationships. With these conversations, victims and other people close to the situation (e.g..