Corporal Punishment on Students

Judge, Lawyer, Attorney, Barrister
Problem of the study
Although current policy regarding violence in schools states that corporal punishment is banned, we find that it’s being practiced in schools as a common tool for discipline with hardly parents’ ability to stop or report it. Reporting is usually for extreme cases reported about severe injuries or even death of kids that are printed to the public such as the death of a child in one of Punjab schools as a result of a teacher’s beating. There is little record on child abuse or child death caused by violence.
Possible reasons for expanding the use of corporal punishment in schools in spite of its legal ban may be administrative acceptance represented by the school and societal acceptance represented by parents. This phenomenon is stirred by administrative approval represented by the school through not executing the policy efficiently; lack of communication with family; inability to find alternative way of discipline to teachers; and marginalizing the role of social workers. Social acceptance is exemplified by parents’ acceptance; lack of consciousness; applying CP on their children at home; and refrain from reporting actively their kids’ exposure to attack believing that the school won’t take deterrent action.
This study demonstrates that CP is widespread in schools especially in public schools. This failure of execution was mainly attributed to administrative and societal acceptance. We’ll consider in this chapter how to decrease the gap by handling factors involved. We introduced earlier what strategies have been adopted in different countries to apply the ban of corporal punishment. In this section, we’ll create a professional approach to correcting student behavior which best suits the Egyptian context for a strategy for combating corporal punishment in schools, in addition to specifying alternatives to corporal punishment.
Generally, policy enforcement cannot be the responsibility of a party. Rather, all organizations and entities involved in policy making and policy implementation should collaborate to successfully reduce and then eliminate corporal punishment from schools to achieve the best interest for the child. Traditionally, the Ministry of Education represents the policy makers concerning education legislation and policy formulation; however, empirical experience indicates a vital need for other entities and associations concerned with child rights to interfere with new programs for child protection that operate in accordance with the ministry’s policy. To develop an approach to fighting corporal punishment in schools in Pakistan, other strategies that have been successfully implemented by other countries should be taken into consideration and evaluated with terms of the Pakistani context.
In this respect, the following proposed approach would reflect a combination of other states’ experiences in combating corporal punishment regarding the general atmosphere in Pakistan.
To start with the school-based elements, professional programs designed by specialized NGOs such as Save the Children and UNICEF should be introduced and supported by the Ministry of Education. The pilot already implemented by Save the Children in Alexandria demonstrates a way forward in this respect.
The practical experience of this latter project demonstrates that even successful projects can’t avoid going through the long path of bureaucracy in order to scale up their approach. There has to be full awareness that policy enforcement won’t be achieved without providing required facilities that quicken program initiations by entities and organizations assisting in policy implementation. This would also facilitate scaling up these programs. In regards to the UNICEF module, the schools where the program has been piloted should be tagged with a different name such as”child-friendly school” to differentiate them from regular schools, as experimental public schools are distinguished from regular public schools. As explained above, the project is in need for proper financial support to continue as it depends heavily on external donations.
One approach to overcome the budget problem, might be to devote part of their education budget to finance these programs as long as the final outcome would be directly associated with developing education system in schools. Data findings and other studies indicate that eliminating CP from schools will need the MOE to spend some money as a partial step to develop education. This budget allocation would not exceed the cost required to give annual training to teachers, social workers, and school principals across the lines of the yearly training for schools in preparation for the yearly school competition sponsored by the USAID.
At the school level, the role of social workers in schools has to be triggered to match what is stated in their job description. In other words, a social worker would represent a mediator or facilitator between pupils and teachers in order to supervise the relation between them, sustain policy enforcement, report coverage violation cases, and research students’ learning and behaviour problems in order to solve them. In order to add this dimension to the social workers’ job, they need to be empowered by the ministry and receive expert training through specialists in NGOs concerned with education and learning processes. Activating the social worker’s role this way would take from the instructor the burden of correcting students’ deviant or violent behaviour and the use of teacher would be exclusively for reporting and teaching the pupils’ progress to their principals. So as to empower and activate the social worker’s assignment in monitoring policy enforcement and reporting policy violation, they ought to report directly to the Ministry of Education. So, rather than having a general inspector who comes to school once or twice per semester to assess teachers’ performance in class and make sure that everything is going well, with the social worker’s assistance, the entire school would be consistently committed.
Concerning the teacher, it is obvious that most teachers lack appropriate qualifications as indicated in previous sections. The procedure for accredited teachers and continuing their development should start at early stages. To start from scratch, teachers should be familiar with options to non-violent disciplinary techniques and behavior-management techniques early throughout the school of education where they first learn the fundamentals of teaching. The two decades of instruction they invest in schools before graduation would be an appropriate venue to practice those techniques and discuss with their professors the challenges they confront. Afterwards, upon actual recruitment, they ought to get regular training by the ministry or technical NGOs as part of a piloted program. Teachers who exhibit excellence and commitment in such training could be awarded a professional certification from a reputable educational organization. As a necessary complement to the promotional and training programs, there should be a well-developed deterrent policy for teachers who still use corporal punishment despite instruction. Depending on the size of policy violation, the sanction policy would say that those teachers would like have a permanent mark in their career file, have delay in their advertising, or be prevented from getting any sort of usual incentives.
Considering disciplinary methods, educators will need to find means of punishment that are not degrading or humiliating to pupils to convey a message to the students that it is the misbehavior that has been punished not the pupil himself. One of the most proactive way of discipline is”Meaningful Work” that curbs the student’s misbehavior through delegating tasks to them such as raising the flag for a while, helping out at the school’s cafeteria or any other tasks that require physical exertion. This strategy is apparently one of the best ones because ostensibly it incurs punishment but actually it satisfies the student’s need to feel important by doing something useful. In-class time outs also are a good alternative technique which aims at temporary isolation for the student from the class to give them a chance to calm down and reevaluate their mistake. Additionally, the student could be punished through depriving his or her from participating in any of the school’s actions or from taking a break. This sheet could be sent daily to the pupil’s parents to involve them in reforming the student’s misbehavior and keep them updated with the student flaws. In cases where none of these approaches work, suspension for a number of days could be used as a punishment resulting in expulsion if the overall numbers of suspension days exceeded a maximum number.
The research findings demonstrated a positive connection between administrative approval and the use of corporal punishment in schools in the sense that school administrators themselves practice corporal punishment. Furthermore, they deal passively with parents’ complaints, don’t communicating with parents, hardly apply sanction on educators violating law, and have neglected to activate the role the social worker. The research findings also proved a direct connection between social acceptance and the use of corporal punishment in schools in terms of practicing corporal punishment at home with kids, poor follow up with the faculty, approval of corporal punishment in school, and refrain from reporting knowingly their children exposure to corporal punishment.
It can be concluded also in the research findings that corporal punishment is not seen by most teachers or parents as an effective way of discipline, even though a minority view it as somewhat helpful. Therefore, there should be sufficient support for non-violent means of discipline if they’re properly selected and implemented. This result denies the traditional assumption that corporal punishment helps pupils to study and acts well, and maintains the teachers’ respect in class. Conversely, the findings support a conclusion that violence triggers more violence among students, produces a grudge against teachers and the faculty, and induces students to challenge teachers.
In response to the study findings which conforms to our hypothesis, recommendations were devised to deal with school-based factors and family-based reasons for corporal punishment in schools. Regarding the school, it’s been recommended that policies must be enforced by applying sanctions on practitioners; that the social worker should be involved in reforming students and coordinating activities; and that teachers need more training on disciplinary techniques. Schools should involve parents more in reforming their children’s behavior. Concerning parents, it’s been suggested that civil society organizations including the media and religious communities might assist in raising parents’ awareness of the requirement to remove CP from school and home, specifying the right course of action to report this, and clarifying the harm of CP on kids.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *