Corporal Punishment

[Drakur]

Now, most of you may think that this is no longer applicable, but a rule still existed on my school's books allowing corporal punishment.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?

 

[Casanova]

No, it should never be another person's place to physically harm someone's child as a form of punishment.

 

[Sephirothalpha]

No teachers should not be allowed to hit children but the parents should be allowed to extent. The stories I got off my grandad about the times he got the cain made me cringe.

 

[Erythritol]

God no. I mean, sometimes I think kids who are huge pains in the asses deserve it....but when it comes down to it, teachers should NOT be allowed to lay hands on their students. It's just wrong. It leads to abuse. My father tells me horror stories of what his teachers used to do to him...and he wasn't a bad kid growing up. One of his teachers gave him a black eye.

Also, I remember when I was in first grade, I apparently didn't listen when the teacher told me to stand in line, so she grabbed my hair and dragged me to my feet. Woooo. It was World War III between my father and the school disctrict. If hitting kids were allowed, that sort of thing would go on all the time. School should be a safe environment conducive to learning, not an environment where you fear the teacher.

 

[Mitsuki]

Agreed with the above posts. No way in hell will I tolerate other people, no matter how constructive their jobs are, hitting my kids. They have no right at all. I know that people have a limit when it comes to patience, and if the teachers feel like they're reaching that limit, that is when they need to step outside and take a breather.

I'm a teacher at a daycare center, myself, and I know there's times when my hands actually started shaking due to nerves, stress, and the environment I'm in. Although I didn't step outside the room, I did went into a corner to relax myself, while the other teachers handled the kids themselves.

Sometimes that's all you really need. Relax. There are many ways to relax yourself, so hitting kids is no excuse even if the teachers are going through stress or what have you.

The limit of consequences (I refuse to call it "punishment") that the kids should receive are detentions, having a talk with their parents, and a strict tone of voice. That's it. Sometimes teachers do need to let the kids know where they stand, and that's by enforcing rules in the classrooms. You can be caring and strict at the same time. Just don't hit or else serious problems will definitely arise.

 

[Lord Kaos]

Guess what? In Georgia, they USE IT. I'm proof. Trust me, that shit HURTS. They do it without proof of an offense too and without parental permission. NO BULLSHIT. It should be outlawed.

 

[Das Ende]

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.

 

[OmniscientOnus]

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.

 

[Das Ende]

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.

 

[dimmufan]

Corporal Punishment still exists in my hometown. Although it is the school principal that administers the punishment, not the teachers. When I was in elementary school I recieved swats for fighting all the time. 6th grade was the last time I recieved any corporal punishment. The secondary schools around here would rather send students home for a few days rather than have to deal with them. Also, parents have to sign a waiver form if they want to allow the school principal to punish their children, and guess what, most of them say, "Go for it! If Johnny's bein a bastard then by all means, set him straight!" It sure does hurt, though.

 

[Davey Gaga]

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.

Interesting. The only groups of people I've known to be in favour of corporal punishment are the teachers, who have lost control, or the bitter parents who feel it necessary to bump their gums about how much society has slipped. However, reading this post has just added to my thoughts, really. I'm not particularly against corporal punishment and I do think that it should have stayed in school. Considering how long it's been abolished for, however ... bringing it back can only lead to full-scale riots.

I'm sure no one's missed the television campaigns regarding Domestic Abuse, Bullying, Anti-Social behaviour and such. Ideal places to target with these campaigns and workshops are often schools. If corporal punishment was ever to return, I'd feel confused. The very people who are telling us that domestic abuse is unacceptable are advocating that there's nothing wrong with being struck in an educational environment. Those teachers who already dislike you, for whatever reason, are going to bully you with 'the belt.' The people who are telling us to live peacefully are doing so by hurting us. My ears are numb from the "CONTRADICTION" being screamed at me from this method.

There's also the obvious issue of how far a teacher can go to punish the pupils. A slap on the wrist? A clip on the ear? The odd teacher still does that - not to be violent, though. A belt being taken across your body? Possibly. How thick? How heavy? How much force is "too much"? How many times? What if you draw blood?

You mentioned how instinctual it was to try to avoid a negative consequence. With physical pain, how many living things would fight back? As far as I can think: a lot. Then what do you have there? Could you penalise the child for defending themselves against their attacker?

How I've missed posting with you

 

[Hal Otacon]

Staff should never be allowed to strike children..
its just plain wrong and in humane..

 

[OmniscientOnus]

The very people who are telling us that domestic abuse is unacceptable are advocating that there's nothing wrong with being struck in an educational environment. Those teachers who already dislike you, for whatever reason, are going to bully you with 'the belt.' The people who are telling us to live peacefully are doing so by hurting us. My ears are numb from the "CONTRADICTION" being screamed at me from this method.

You must take into account that this teaching method should not be looked at as an act of violence. There should be no anger behind the act, no intention to cause bodily harm. The infliction of varying, yet small, amounts of pain in order to reaffirm an idea in a persons mind is not "bullying".

I can see where the messages seem to get mixed, though. Young children especially will find it difficult to interpret the message. Thankfully, however, the human mind constantly passes old information into a sort of filter all the time. Every time your mind is capable of perceiving an action, or idea, differently, all the old information crammed into your subconscious passes through this new filter and becomes interpreted differently. I have theories that this is part of the explanation of "eureka!" moments.

What I'm saying though, is that while the child may be slightly confused about the messages, they won't have the capacity to really interpret what is going on as "violent" (unless the teacher goes overboard into beating the student). Once they grow up, they will understand the world differently, and the memory of being physically punished will re-filter through this new mind set. After the new information is re-interpreted, the now young adult/adult should be able to understand the reasoning behind the physical punishment, and will no longer view it as an act of violence.

The contradiction appears to be there, but is dealt with by the inner workings of the mind.

There's also the obvious issue of how far a teacher can go to punish the pupils. A slap on the wrist? A clip on the ear? The odd teacher still does that - not to be violent, though. A belt being taken across your body? Possibly. How thick? How heavy? How much force is "too much"? How many times? What if you draw blood?

Clearly this issue exists. I do believe I made slight mention of it at the end of my post that says that this must be dealt with before any thought of reinstating this procedure.

You mentioned how instinctual it was to try to avoid a negative consequence. With physical pain, how many living things would fight back? As far as I can think: a lot. Then what do you have there? Could you penalise the child for defending themselves against their attacker?

At this young age, most children (with the large exclusion being those who have been beaten) will merely comply with the punishment. I could try and explain it, even prove it, but it would be easier to just ask someone you know you lived through it. It hasn't been gone all that long. Children didn't fight back, mostly because they feared the physical punishment would also come from home. Home, by the way, is where you will find that most of the beating actually took place. School got you a slap on the wrist, and home gave you the black eye. So to speak.


Also, I have missed posting with you also.

Staff should never be allowed to strike children..
its just plain wrong and in humane..

This is a debate forum. Please put more thought and reasoning into your answer. We can't read your mind and therefore you must tell us exactly how you reached your conclusion. For instance, why is just "plain wrong and inhumane"?

 

[Mitsuki]

Well...you guys do have a point there.

I know that back in the Philippines, Corporal Punishment did exist (not sure if it still exists now), even in my school. I distinctively remember that one of the staff members would take kids the same age I was (seven years old at the time) to a separate room and used a belt as one of their tools of punishment.

I heard cries, yelps, and fear in their voices that I naturally got scared, not wanting to have the same fate as my friends, which thankfully, I didn't.

Now, while I believe that it helps the children in the long-run, I still am against the idea of other adults (teachers) disciplining children not their own, at school. As far as I'm concerned, any sort of discipline that involves physical punishment should stay at home. That is the parents' responsibility, not the teachers.

...Especially if those kids are going to private schools (which I forgot to mention, the school I went to was a private one). Parents pay these private schools, in hopes of having their kids receive a formal education...and having their kids come home with bruises along with their report cards.

Don't get me wrong. I do believe in discipline, even ones that involves physical punishment. I grew up in that kind of environment and I am thankful - yes, thankful - that my parents did use the belt on me. I grew up respecting everyone, especially the elders, and unspoiled.

My point is, the primary growth and development of children comes from home. School helped, yes, but I honestly think that if I received any form of physical punishment from those teachers back then, it really wouldn't have made a difference in my life.

It may have to others, but it just doesn't apply to me.

 

[Davey Gaga]

You must take into account that this teaching method should not be looked at as an act of violence. There should be no anger behind the act, no intention to cause bodily harm. The infliction of varying, yet small, amounts of pain in order to reaffirm an idea in a persons mind is not "bullying".

While I agree behind this idealistic approach, I'm sure I'm not the only one who's heard the stories of the teachers leaping into the air and smacking the pupil with as much force as possible, or the teachers who'd "miss" your hand - all of which are much like over-enthusiastic circus trainers with their animals.

At this young age, most children (with the large exclusion being those who have been beaten) will merely comply with the punishment. I could try and explain it, even prove it, but it would be easier to just ask someone you know you lived through it. It hasn't been gone all that long. Children didn't fight back, mostly because they feared the physical punishment would also come from home.

Granted. However, in this modern day and age where, I would say, human morals and ethics are much more "in-depth," if you will, I honestly can't see corporal punishment being accepted, if it was to return. As a child, possibly on the receiving end of the punishment, I would fight its return. Although, generally speaking, when a new factor is introduced into any environment, there's always a bit of a stir. People do change and adapt to new situations and, so, if it was to return, I imagine it would take a long time to properly be considered in place, as opposed to a "new solution."

 

[SeoJi]

When I lived in Italy and went to a catholic school, I got spanked once for writing the number eight in the wrong way. This did prompt me to write it correctly and I don't completely disagree with the idea other then the magnitude at which the punishment is given is not severely damaging to body and mind.

 

[Doc Holliday]

I heard cries, yelps, and fear in their voices that I naturally got scared, not wanting to have the same fate as my friends, which thankfully, I didn't.

Well then that shows that Corporal Punishment had not only an effect on your classmates, but also you, you know that person is getting hurt so you work not to be punished like they was, that's another good reason for Corporal Punishment to be reinstated in schools.

Now, while I believe that it helps the children in the long-run, I still am against the idea of other adults (teachers) disciplining children not their own, at school. As far as I'm concerned, any sort of discipline that involves physical punishment should stay at home. That is the parents' responsibility, not the teachers.

True, it is the parents' responsibility, but surely if the child had been raised properly, there'd be no need to hit the child at school? These days parents are far too soft and lenient with their children, and this has lead to children becoming more and more rebellious, because they know they can get away with more, if the parent doesn't give a child basic morals at a young age, you have the majority of the youth today, unruly, rude and frankly quite intimidating.

...Especially if those kids are going to private schools (which I forgot to mention, the school I went to was a private one). Parents pay these private schools, in hopes of having their kids receive a formal education...and having their kids come home with bruises along with their report cards.

The parent'sll want their money's worth won't they? If they send their children to a private school, it shows that they know what their children need for the future, a good education and discipline.

 

[Mitsuki]

Well then that shows that Corporal Punishment had not only an effect on your classmates, but also you, you know that person is getting hurt so you work not to be punished like they was, that's another good reason for Corporal Punishment to be reinstated in schools.

Yes, I was intimidated and scared, but never did I say anything about that making an influence in my behavior, whatsoever. I behaved in school because I was taught to behave in a certain way, and I chose to follow those rules.

Now, even if I did behaved badly, and received physical punishment from the teachers, I probably still would not change my ways for that reason alone because it is only human nature to do bad choices every now and then. It's just a matter of learning from those mistakes. And no, physical punishment as means of consequence from someone I don't really know is the right method in my eyes.

Of course, when I heard my classmates, it was a natural feeling to not want that same fate. That doesn't mean I thought that corporal punishment was put into good use right there and then, or that it had an effect on me in any positive way. But then again, I can't really say the same for others. Maybe it helped them in some way - who knows? Corporal punishment just doesn't apply to my way of thinking.

True, it is the parents' responsibility, but surely if the child had been raised properly, there'd be no need to hit the child at school? These days parents are far too soft and lenient with their children, and this has lead to children becoming more and more rebellious, because they know they can get away with more, if the parent doesn't give a child basic morals at a young age, you have the majority of the youth today, unruly, rude and frankly quite intimidating.

Right, I agree. I know there are so many misbehaved and rebellious kids, but what can we do about it? It is not our place to say, "They should be physically punished by teachers so that they would behave properly." It just doesn't work that way. Kids make bad choices everyday. That's normal. What goes on at their home is not our business. Whether the parents choose to discipline their kids or not is entirely up to them. Is it the children's fault that they were raised in a way that isn't pleasing to everyone?

The parent'sll want their money's worth won't they? If they send their children to a private school, it shows that they know what their children need for the future, a good education and discipline.

Uh, are you sure that it includes physical punishment? Sure, maybe some would adhere to that statement, but I can bet that for the majority, that would certainly not be the case.