Government behaviour adviser Tom Bennett has played down the role of restorative practices in the hubs scheme he helped to develop, after an evaluation report found around half of participating schools had shifted towards the approach. Bennett, who led the development of the behaviour hubs programme under the last Conservative government, is critical of relying on restorative practices to manage pupils鈥 behaviour and has publicly defended strict approaches to discipline. But, at the end of last month, a government-commissioned evaluation of the original hubs scheme The evaluation鈥檚 survey of participating schools found 52 per cent of those that responded had shifted towards restorative behaviour management while on the programme. Rewarding good behaviour Schools also adopted clear behaviour standards and increased their focus on preventing misbehaviour and rewarding good behaviour, the evaluation found. But, speaking to Schools Week, Bennett denied that the hubs programme leaned towards restorative practice. 鈥淭he evaluation does not conclude that behaviour hubs leaned away from so-called 鈥榸ero tolerance鈥 approaches or towards restorative practice,鈥 he said. 鈥淔or starters, I have publicly campaigned for years against zero tolerance policies鈥 You can be strict (as in highly consistent rather than highly punitive) without being zero tolerance.鈥 The survey defined restorative approaches as 鈥渟trategies that focus on repairing harm and restoring relationships rather than simply punishing individuals for their actions鈥. Restorative measures adopted by participating schools included 鈥渞estorative conversations with pupils following a behaviour incident, as well as, or instead of, punishment鈥. Reframing detentions Schools also reframed detentions as a chance for pupils to reflect on their behaviour, reducing the frequency or length of suspensions, and considering external circumstances such as home life when deciding how to deal with misbehaviour. Just 18 per cent of participating schools shifted towards zero tolerance measures 鈥 defined in the survey as 鈥渢he strict enforcement of rules, often with immediate consequences for even minor infractions鈥. Bennett said: 鈥淣one of the schools that were assigned as lead schools operated on a zero-tolerance model, nor did any of the partner schools. 鈥淭he behaviour hubs actively encouraged schools to adopt greater levels of consistency, rigour and predictability, as ways to build healthy cultures, alongside pastoral and proactive strategies.鈥 Bennett has often defended high-profile schools with strict disciplinary policies. He denounced a safeguarding review of the Mossbourne Victoria Park Academy, launched in response to reports of abusive disciplinary practices, as a 鈥渉it job鈥. Zero tolerance However, he is critical of zero-tolerance policies that do not make exceptions, though he said this week that none of the schools he has visited took such an approach. He told Schools Week the evaluation survey used categories based on 鈥渟elf-reported staff perceptions鈥. 鈥淭hey are not independently verified measures of practice, nor do they map neatly onto defined models such as restorative justice or zero-tolerance frameworks.鈥 For example, he said that 鈥渋ncreasing behaviour standards鈥, 鈥減revention activity鈥 and 鈥渞ewards鈥 were 鈥渁ll entirely consistent with schools operating highly structured, rules-based systems. 鈥淭hey are not philosophical alternatives; they are complementary components of effective behaviour cultures. 鈥淪imilarly, the report does not define or measure a specific restorative model. References to restorative practice are inferred from reported shifts in activity, not from programme design or anything directly measured.鈥 Restorative actions were not the most frequently adopted strategy among schools participating in the hub programme. Seventy-two per cent of schools created behaviour standards, 66 per cent increased activities aimed at prevention, and 57 per cent increased rewards for good behaviour. Biggest improvements The schools that saw the biggest improvements commonly focused on rewarding good behaviour and increasing teachers鈥 responsibilities. The behaviour hubs evaluation said that several schools had relied on punishing misbehaviour rather than rewarding good behaviour before joining the hubs programme, and in some cases used de-escalation techniques that 鈥渁ppeared to focus on shame鈥. Bennett鈥檚 2017 report on school behaviour, Creating a Culture, described both sanctions and rewards as 鈥渆ssential鈥 parts of school behaviour policies. He told Schools Week the hubs programme sought to help schools build 鈥渃oherent, sustainable behaviour systems鈥 rather than seeking to 鈥渕ove schools away from firm sanctions鈥. 鈥淚 think the evaluation shows many schools strengthening systems, expectations and supports,鈥 he said. 鈥淚t does not evidence a shift away from structured discipline, boundaries, high expectations, nor a move toward purely restorative models.鈥 Overall, the behaviour hubs evaluation found 鈥渃onsistent positive change in the behaviour of pupils鈥 in participating schools, but with difficulties for schools facing substantial external challenges. The Labour government has introduced integrated attendance and behaviour hubs as a successor to the Conservatives鈥 separate hubs programmes, with Bennett continuing in a lead role.