Now, most of you may think that this is no longer applicable, but a rule still existed on my school's books allowing corporal punishment. Never actually applied, but it existed. Should teachers be allowed to strike students as a punishment? If so, what limit should be placed on them?

Corporal punishment is a primitive and ignorantly directed solution for discipline at best. Under the pretext that rebellion for whatever sake is an impediment to learning, it should be realized, and indeed this revelation is finally at light, (Although I underline this statement as dismissing imperative for true intent.) that the learning process differs depending on the individual.
Some learning methods may be different for one person then it is for another, (Learning capacities, mental disorders, parental situation at home, even.) hence it's not reasonable to attempt and cram all basics in everyone's heads the same way, and no less is it any better to punish them all the same way when situations which relate to the learning process and its obstacles arise.

But then again that is merely an excuse, as we all know that school and most educational establishments are nothing but the conditioning of morality for social and individual independence. Cannot really state this as good or bad, but it remains logical that corporal punishment, or derivatives thereof, still and always will exist.

I don't agree with it when concerning conditioned morality, and I really wish I would have been aware of such back at school when some teacher was yelling at me. *Frowns.*

I was wasting my youth indeed, Ms. Barthelette. Up yours.

Corporal Punishment is a terrific idea that should never have been allowed to leave the class room.

This is a simple case of revoking a tried-and-true method of "teaching". There are only two ways I can see justifying the removal of corporal punishment from the school systems and one is: Everyone suddenly became perfect. The other I will save for the end.

Simply stated, school is in place to educate people. There job is no more simple, and no more complex than that. Corporal punishment is, in fact, a very reliable way to teach. Humans, by nature, make every attempt to avoid negative consequences, especially those regarding physical pain. There is no viable reason not to use our instinctual nature to teach ourselves and those around us. Corporal punishment is a tool just as much as say, a hammer, or screwdriver, and should be treated as such.

I understand that there are those that would use corporal punishment extensively, and I can clearly see how that is leaving the bounds of simply teaching. However, instead of removing the act because of a few irresponsible people, we should instead imply a system of checks and balances.

There is no reason to deny ourselves the use of our most simple and effective tools in life. Of course it makes perfect sense that the majority of people would vote against the use of corporal punishment. It all goes back to our instincts. What better way to avoid a negative consequence then to remove the negative consequence itself? It is a much more reliable method than to change one's own behavior.

Of course there is always the matter of exactly how to decide on when corporal punishment should be employed, and to what extent. In this way I can see the removal of corporal punishment until an agreed upon distinction on exactly when it's use should be allowed and when it should not. If no agreement can be reached, then the only other logical course of action is of course to remove the issue entirely.

While I certainly agree that human nature caters to the most primitive of instincts and that the latter will never leave us, humanity and its conditioned environs do change in order to fit the stretches of human awareness.

And with such, I would like to point out that while discipline is evidently linked to the learning process in some minor ways, psychology itself is way more complex then just what you say, (And is also a major factor for this subject.) and encompasses further factors, which I spoke of in my earlier post in here, and can no longer be ignored. Discipline and academic training are not directly linked, and this has been proven and even established by psychological and scientific research.

And even so, allow me to point out that corporal punishment is the conclusion in the face of rebellion and criminal acts, weather around the world or in schools. Corporal punishment was dealt when the student disobeyed or screwed around, not when he didn't learn his shit by heart or failed a test. Therefore, your association with the core elements of learning and this method are rather void, because corporal punishment had morality and social conditioning in mind, not academic values.

And it's a very primitive method actually, all it does is bring up fascist and Nazis, and although, once again, I agree with you about the idea of primal fear and the reactions to such...what we strive for as instinctual beings will always be the same, however the methods to drive us forward to this goal are always changing. If what you're saying is true, we'd still have our fingers bloated and criminals would still be guillotined in the town square.
Evolution is like worn out shoes-gotta change sometimes.
We'll always have Nazis and tyrants, so to speak, but even their intents are a lot more expanded then the sit in church every Sunday stereotype of yesteryear.

Way may be primitive creatures, but we do have the capacity for further comprehension on certain things; tree hugger and activists not included.