Corporal punishment - should it be considered?

[Bambiraptor]

After spending some time teaching in a comprehensive in a deprived area of this country, I have been asking myself what will help the children who are so difficult in school. With the best of a teacher's intentions some children are just not interested in learning, and teaching becomes a battle. It is more about classroom management than anything else.
There are no consequences for poor behaviour and alot of the time no parental back up at all.
I totally disagree with corporal punishment. Full stop. My dad was is a retired headmaster of a private school in Kent and he is an advocate of corporal punishment as it worked in the school.
By brain is addled.
WHat do you think? DO you think teachers and schools should be given more power to deal with problem students?

Greensleeves I don't think having a decent breakfast is going to help the behaviour of some of the kids I have taught.
I actually think some hard physical work is a good idea as a punishment. Especially if they have to give up their time to do it and they are achieving something, like building a structure of some kind.

In the example I gave the root causes were thought to be ASD - it does not make any difference what support had been given to identify this root cause. These children still make it impossible for their classmates to learn.

It is not acceptable that teachers like TwinSetandPearls are subject to abusive and violent behaviour at work. And it is a disgrace that so many children are missing out on an education because of a lack of discipline in schools.

I actually think that the cane would probably be more effective at an earlier age. But if used it should only be in extreme circumstances. For children, knowing that a teacher has physical authority over them and might if pushed far enough, compel them to bend over and take that punishment would probably make a difference in itself...

I was once a temporary teacher in a primary school - I think a lot of the problems there were down to the children not having any breakfast. Some of them had bottles of SunnyD, crisps and chocolate for a packed lunch and were almost literally climbing the walls after it.

I can't concentrate if I miss out on breakfast and I think those children struggled, probably for years, for that reason,

I went to boarding school where they used corporal punishment (I'm not that old - the headmaster eventually got taken to court but as he was in Loco Parentis he was let off - grrrr!). Whilst no one wanted to get 'the whacks' it was also seen as a badge of honour by some. If you didn't get whacked at least once you were a goody-two-shoes and those who did get whacked lots were almost revered for being rebels.

It's not the major deterrent you think it will be. Kids will still be naughty - just hope not to get caught and if they do, they have a story of two fingers up to the establishment to tell if they get whacked.

More kids should be made to enrol in groups like scouts, RAF training, Army cadets etc. Something that gets them doing exercise and learning discipline and being part of a unit. You don't need to hit a child to teach him/her a lesson. You need to give them tools to have self respect and respect for those around them.

I think you are completely wrong to think that a cane would be the solution

and concerned that it is suggested tbh

"In the example I gave the root causes were thought to be ASD - it does not make any difference what support had been given to identify this root cause. These children still make it impossible for their classmates to learn."

It's not just about identifying the root cause though is it? The support needs to be ongoing and delivered by people who are trained to deal with these issues.

"There needs to be a consequence for bad behaviour that the pupils actually care about. At the moment there is nothing. It is vrey difficult for teachers, and does nothing for the education of the pupils who actually need a 'kick up the backside' to get going!"

What the teachers really need is parental support. Parents need to stand loyal to teachers who meter out discipline instead of standing loyal to their precious child whon can't possibly be all that bad (hmmm, yeah right!) If a child is naughty s/he should be sent to detention to do extra work. S/He should be given 100 lines. S/He should be made to wash all the bunsen burners out from the science wing or polish all the door nobs to the classrooms (i once spent an entire saturday afternoon having to do that one - oh joy!).

I have read most of this thread and find myself nodding in aggrement with many posters.

I went to a school where corporal punishment was the norm. It did work. However I would not like to see it re-introduced for a number of reasons

a. Hitting children with sticks is wrong.
b. I wouldn't want my kids to be hit with a stick
c. I wouldn't want to hit children with a stick, it isn't why I entered the profession.
d. I wouldn't want my kids to be taught by people who wanted to hit them with sticks.

Call me old fashioned!

However dicipline in schools has to be real an meaningful. ATM we cannot use any effect measures against children. I am all in favour, for example in getting children to scrub down tables if tey are caught writing on them, or litter picking if the drop litter. But such things are frowned upon, since it impinges on their 'Human Rights' Tough shit, sez I, act like a human and I'll give you your rights!

Parents have to support the school. And this has to happen from the word go. Yes, school should be reasonable, but so should parents. Rule no 1, when in trouble kids lie. All of them. Parents must support schools when children are diciplined for poor behavior.

This is areal case from where I work, a secondary. A mother complained that her so has been suspended for a week . His action? He was pulling down girls trousers in the play ground. These were 13 year olds not 3 year olds. She complained! WTF?

Agree with custy re parenting classes, also agree with funding levels and appropiate classes/ courses for kis.

Howvere there will always be (because there always have been) kids who cannot be controled in mainstream. And for these kids we need EBD special schools. Where teachers have appropriate treaining and staff/teacher ratios to deal with these kids. And these schools are needed for three reasons
a. So that the rest of the classes can learn
b. so that teachers and kids are not terroriesed in school and
c. So that the excluded child can get the education that he/she needs so much.

But you see this costs money. So the government does fuck all, except blame the schools. Actually they are now branching out into blaming the parents as well. But they still to fuck all to help, because that would cost them.

there are lots of difficult children who don't have parents looking after them, they are in care.
to use cp on aggressive children (eg. children who have caused gbh to other children)would make things much worse. in the unit where i worked we had to try and enforce a no violence rule. you can't tell children they must not hurt eachother under any circumstances and then hit them when they are naughty

agree with you completely mb

Good post Martianbishop, sums it all up I think.

Totally agree with you Martianbishop but it is not just the government that won't pay - it is the general public too.How many people would be willing to see their taxes go up to pay for it?

Upwind - the probelm with beating children as a deterrent is that those who generally don't give a toss about abyone else and throw chairs etc are often those who have been beaten at home since an early age anyway. The young people my project works with (excluded from school, anti-social bhaviour etc) have as often been mindlessly beaten as had no parental attention or discipline at all. A teacher with a stick and soke rules governing how visciously they use it will be no deterrent to these kids.

And it was always the case. Same kids beaten again and again....some deterrent! Meanwhile, the atmosphere is changed for all students: they are in an environment where hitting people with sticks is considered civilized.

Not for me.

God, have things changed then? We certainly used litter picking as a punishment, and scrubbing desks, mending textbooks, cleaning sinks...

I don't think these are humiliating punishments. They are highly appropriate, and lets face it - someone has to do them. It really should be the person who caused the problem in the first place. I think it is treating children with respect to show them that they should themselves behave with respect, and what the consequences of a lack of respect are.

Is it picking up litter that is the punishment or by being seen by all your mates that is the worse punishment

Isn't there a distinction to be made between physical punishment and use of force? My impression is that when corporal punishment was (rightly) banned, an unforeseen side effect was that teachers suddenly found themselves with a lot less room for manoeuvre in using physical force to get the children to do what they were supposed to. While they are still allowed to use restraint within relatively narrow limits, those limits are so narrow that the child often has more power than the teacher, and knows it, because the teacher will be disciplined if s/he oversteps the mark.
I'm assuming a teacher would be allowed to restrain a child to stop them hurting another, but would not be allowed to pick them up and force them into a classroom if they refused to go, but this would have been no problem in the days when they were also allowed to hit them.
Is this right, or am I talking rubbish?

Yo ucannot use force to make children move.

I have been in a situation where a child was removed from a classroom,I was walking with her to the pastoral area. We got half way there and then she refused to move!

I had to get to another lesson, and in he end had toask one of my sixth formers to find another member of staff to replace me! Said member of staff had to stand there for 30 minutes before the child would move.

You can use force to, say, break up a fight. Or to defend yourself. In this it must be seen to be reasonable. And you may well have to defend your position in court.

the general consesus is that, you never, ever touch a child unless absolutly essential

Thanks MB - that's what I thought.

Would it be better if you could, in your view?
I very much wouldn't like physical punishment to return to schools but I do think the power balance needs to be tipped back in favour of the teachers and this would be one way.

Oh by the way there was a case reported recently where a child hit the teacher and the teacher was suspended - here

Madness!

"I had to get to another lesson, and in he end had to ask one of my sixth formers to find another member of staff to replace me! Said member of staff had to stand there for 30 minutes before the child would move."

Blimey! And i thought it was only toddlers that needed reins to keep them under control!

I would just think that it would be reasonable to assume that NT kids enter school able to behave in a reasonable way.

Not angels, you understand. Just reasonable.

In the end you control 95% of classes by sheer force of personality. You have nothing really there to back you up in so many cases.

People even say that you shouldn't shout as this is demeaning.

I think the problems is that parents haven't seen the inside of a classroom since they were in one, and fail to understand how things have changed. Some for the better and some for the worse.

I have caught flack on MN for stating that the kids I teach are not my equals. The hounds were out. I was uncaring, nasty, I didn't value the kids. All that stuff.

Well, they are not my equals. I'm their teacher. I'm older, wiser, more knowledgable, wiser in the ways of the world. Guess what? They are not equal to me. In my room, what I say goes. Because I actually do know better than them!

Don't get me wrong, I love the kids I teach (99% of them). But my equal???? don't make me laugh!

as long as they remember that we all get on just fine and guess what. They like knowing where they stand

at KathyM's link

absurd that children have more rights than those there to teach them

"Well, they are not my equals. I'm their teacher. I'm older, wiser, more knowledgable, wiser in the ways of the world. Guess what? They are not equal to me. In my room, what I say goes. Because I actually do know better than them!"

Well said! You can be my kid's teacher any day and have my full support. Children are children and need to be taught. They should respect themselves and their elders.

When i was at school teachers and parents were a united front. That's how i plan on raising my children.

VioletBaudelaire,

I do have revelent experience.

I actually had experience of working in a special school for children with severe behavioural problems. Is a kinder place than mainstream for really disturbed children.

The teachers have small classes with seven children and at least one learning support assistant. The staff are not in danger because there is help at hand if a child turns violent. The extra staff also mean that things like science practicals, crafts lessons where there is a risk of danger are possible. Children in EBD school get more help with problems like dyslexia because special schools have the man power.

The staff have time to help the children with issues like anger management and support them with the extreme problems in their lives. A mainstream secondary school teacher with the best will in the world can't give children with major mental health problems the support they need.

Some children find the large size and inpersonal atmosphere of a mainstream secondary school difficult to cope with.

I am in favour of inclusion where the special need is mild, but i think the governant has taken inclusion too far.

spot on frances. Better for them as wll as the mainstream school. Inclusion at all costs is so bloody damaging for some kids, cruel, infact.