Restorative justice in education (RJE) is a philosophical framework that centers relationships in schools, calls attention to issues of justice and equity, and provides processes to heal harm and transform conflict. The use of restorative justice (RJ) in schools gained large-scale attention from teachers and school boards since the 2010s. In the 1990s and early 2000s many school boards around the world took up what was generally known as “zero tolerance” approaches. It meant that punitive responses, such as suspension, expulsion, and exclusionary practices, were used by administrators and teachers more readily and frequently. Research continues to show that exclusionary punishments are harmful—especially to Indigenous students, students of color, and other marginalized students—in many ways, for example, increasing dropout rates, decreasing overall student achievement, and strengthening the school-to-prison pipeline. Gaining more momentum in the 2010s (although practiced by many teachers and communities before this), RJ approaches became a way to challenge a system that was simply not working and further harming students. Many educators and school boards saw RJE as a means to reduce suspensions and expulsions and to increase their graduation rates. Others have seen RJE as a critical process for facilitating school equity and racial justice. This continuum of approaches to RJE impacts how research is conducted, what research questions are asked, who is included in the research process, and how it is disseminated. While some researchers still position RJE as solely an alternative to punitive disciplinary models, an increasing number of researchers view RJE as a paradigm shift for how people relate to one another in the context of schools, including through relational approaches to pedagogy. This relational way of being centers people’s humanity and promotes shared accountability within learning communities.

This study examines the impact of students’ identities on how students participate in classroom discussions in postsecondary courses. Participation in such discussions is known to increase students’ learning, but, despite this, little is known about how students’ identities influence how and whether they choose to participate. Drawn from a larger study on the experiences of postsecondary instructors and students, this article focuses on students’ perspectives and experiences. Survey data were collected from undergraduate students enrolled in an interdisciplinary undergraduate program. Students’ race, religion, gender, and their first- or continuing-generation university status were found to have varying influences on their participation in classroom discussions. Most students with marginalized identities opted out of actively participating in discussions about contentious or sociopolitical topics. This study suggests that inclusive approaches to classroom discussion can be useful in promoting students’ engagement and academic learning.