The main differences between restorative justice and retributive justice are considered and the precursors to the emergence of restorative justice practices are discussed. Restorative justice practices have been used by different cultures throughout history to settle disputes, even before the emergence of formal criminal or juvenile justice systems. The theoretical basis of restorative justice practices can be found within reintegrative shaming, exchange theory, and social disorganization theory. Restorative justice practices can take many forms. The various forms are discussed and the six main goals for any restorative justice program are identified as: (1) empowerment; (2) restoration; (3) reintegration; (4) emotional and social healing; (5) procedural fairness; and (6) satisfactory outcome. The main objectives, practices, and typical locations of restorative justice models are presented, as are the types and degrees of restorative justice practice. In particular, the authors focus on victim-offender mediation, family group conferencing, neighborhood reparative boards, and peacemaking and sentencing circles as the main types of restorative justice practices. Research on the effectiveness of restorative justice practices is presented, particularly in terms of satisfaction and compliance with the process and recidivism. Finally, the authors consider the main problems and issues plaguing restorative justice models, which include lack of victim participation and its inability to address serious violent crimes. Four discussion questions help guide classroom discussion and assignments. Key terms are listed. Figures, tables