Corporal Punishment - 1
CORPORAL PUNISHMENT IN NEPALESE PRIVATE SCHOOLS: PERCEPTION
OF TEACHERS
Submitted by
Mr. Jeevan Khanal
A Dissertation
Submitted to
Faculty of Education
M. Phil. Program
Tribhuvan University
In the fulfillment of the requirements for degree of
The Master of Philosophy in Faculty of Education
Tribhuban University
Presented on 13th March 2013
Corporal Punishment - 2
Abstract
This study was carried out to find the teachers’ perception on corporal punishment in private
schools of Nepal. The objective of the study was to find the perception of teachers of private
schools on corporal punishment. The questionnaire, observation, focus group discussion and
interview were the different tools adopted for the collection of information. The study was
guided by the social learning theory, discipline theory, power theory and zero tolerance
theory.
The study concluded that traditional teaching style and methods were practicing in the private
schools. Students were not motivated for learning. The environment of learning is not
conductive for them. To control children, teachers used hard punishment instead of looking
for the means to motivate them for learning. Teachers of Nepal had different understanding
about corporal punishment and discipline in comparison with international understanding.
Teachers generally felt disempowered in their ability to the classroom or school premises
when students made noise in front of them. So, they used corporal punishment to keep them
quiet and to maintain the discipline. The culture of non participatory teaching learning
process was also creating the school violence. Teachers perceived the corporal punishment is
the best sources to maintain the discipline. They felt it is the best way to bring the desired
change in the students. Students were seen powerless in front of the teachers and teachers
were seen powerless in front of principal in private school of Nepal. Parents were playing the
suitable role for the punishment. But their view was
punishment from it is necessary to not necessary.
rapidly changing on corporal
Corporal Punishment - 3
…………………..
Jeevan Khanal
Library Release Form
Name of author:
Jeevan Khanal
Degree:
Master of Philosophy
Year of this degree granted:
2013
Permission is hereby granted to Tribhuvan University to reproduce single copies of this thesis
and to lend or sell such copies for private, scholarly or scientific research purposes only.
The author reserves other publication and rights in association with the copy right in the
theses, and except as herein before provided neither the thesis nor any substantial portion
thereof may printed or otherwise reproduced in any material form whatever without the
author’s permission.
…………………………………………
(Jeevan Khanal)
Lekhanath Municipality wards No.12
Kaski, Gandaki Zone, Nepal
Date: …………………….
Corporal Punishment - 4
Declaration
I hereby declare that this thesis is my own unaided work. It is being submitted for the degree
of Master of Philosophy in Education (Leadership in Education) at the Tribhuwan University
of Nepal. It has not been submitted for any degree or examination at any other university.
……………………..
Jeevan Khanal
Date…………
Corporal Punishment - 5
Acceptance and Recommendation
The undersigned certify that we have read, approved, and recommended to the Faculty of
Education, Tribhuvan University for acceptance, a thesis entitled Corporal Punishment in
Nepalese Private Schools: Perception of Teachers Submitted by Jeevan Khanal in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF PHILOSOPHY in education
with specialization in leadership studies.
………………………….
(Prof. Bidya Nath Koirala, PhD)
Thesis Supervisor
…………………………
Krishna Bahadur Thapa , Ph.D.
External Examiner
…………………………….
Peshal Khanal, Ph.D.
External Examiner
………………………………………………………..
Chitra Bahadur Budhathoki, Ph.D.
Research Committee Member
Date: March 13, 2013
Corporal Punishment - 6
Acknowledgements
This study has become possible with the help and support of several people, friends and
teachers. I am grateful to all of them.
Profound gratitude and special recognitions are extended to Prof. Bidya Nath Koirala, PhD,
for his tireless and dedicated leadership as my supervisor. I have received lots of support
from him as my supervisor. He has supervised me in every step of my study. Moreover, I am
very much motivated by his gentle and gracious way in which he led me all the way through
to the thesis to this stage.
I wish to extend my special thanks to principal, teachers, students, parents and members of
school management committee those who provide me time for interactions and interview. I
wish to extend my thanks to Mr. Ramesh Ghimire who supports me for language edition for
this thesis.
I would like to express my honor to my father and mother. Similarly, I would like to thank
my wife Sonu and Son Sajal and other family members for their constant encouragement,
support and co-operation.
…………………
Jeevan Khanal
Corporal Punishment - 7
Table of Contents
Abstract
ii
Library Release Form
iii
Declaration
iv
Acceptance and Recommendation
v
Acknowledgement
vi
Table of Contents
vii
CHAPTER - I
Corporal Punishment: experience and learning
1
Corporal Punishment in the West
6
Justification of the Corporal punishers
7
Statement of the Problem
8
Purpose of the Study
9
Delimitation…
Definition of the key terms used
CHAPTER - II
Literature Review.....................................................................................................................
Corporal Punishment............................................................................................................
Corporal Punishment in Nepal.................................................................................................
Zero Tolerance..........................................................................................................................
Legality...................................................................................................................................
The International Movement to ban Corporal Punishment………………………
India.........................................................................................................................................
China......................................................................................................................................
Corporal Punishment - 8
Canada.....................................................................................................................................
Singapore...................................................................................................................................
United States..............................................................................................................................
South Africa.................................................................................................................................
South Korea..................................................................................................................................
Understanding in Corporal Punishment………………………………………………………
Global Prohibition of the Corporal Punishment……………………………………………
Teachers’ Perception on Corporal
Punishment……………………………………………………..
Theoretical Framework…………………………………………………………………..
Bandura’s Social learning theory (1963)………………………………………………
Power Theory ………………………………………………………………………………
Discipline
Theory…………………………………………………………………………………
Conceptual
Mapping………………………………………………………………………………..
CHAPTER - III
Methodology…………………………………………………………………………..
Research Design........................................................................................................................
Population .................................................................................................................
Research instruments .........................................................................................................
Questionnaire………………………………………………………………………………….
Observation ………………………………………………………………………………...
Corporal Punishment - 9
Focus Group
Discussion………………………………………………………………………….
Ethical
Consideration………………………………………………………………………………
Data collection Method……………………………………………………………………….
Processing and Analysis of Data…………………………………………………………
CHAPTER - IV
Stakeholders’ Belief on Corporal Punishment ………………………………………..
Cultural Belief…………………………………………………………………………..
Necessity of Corporal Punishment in the Eye of Teacher……………………………….
Teacher’s Attitudes towards Corporal Punishment…………………………………….
Teachers’ Strategies to use Corporal Punishment ………………………………………
Teachers’ Response against the use Corporal Punishment………………………………..
Teachers’ Response favoring the use Corporal Punishment ………………………….
Teachers’ Response on Zero Tolerance……………………………………………….
Teachers’ Response on parents support on Corporal Punishment……………………….
Teachers’ Response on Alternative Discipline Approach……………………………….
Teachers’ belief on necessity of Corporal Punishment ………………………………….
Powerless Teachers on Corporal Punishment………………………………………………
Teachers Attitude towards Corporal Punishment…………………………………………
Respect Seeking Mind Set
A Set of Culture
No idea for Alternative Approach ………………………………………….
Faith on Punishment for Best Result
Feeling of superiority
Corporal Punishment - 10
Follow the chain of Command
Aggravated Corporal Punishment during Tiredness
Students’ Response on Corporal Punishment
Parents’ Response on Corporal Punishment
CHAPTER - V
Major
Findings………………………………………………………………………......................
Discussion
Discipline
Zero tolerance on Students talk at class……………………………………………….
Non Participatory Teaching Learning Process…………………………………………………
Corporal Punishments as the best alternative to Teachers…………………………………
Changing view of Parents on Corporal Punishment……………………………………….
CHAPTER - VI
Reflection on Findings
Social Learning Theory and my findings…………………………………………………..
Power Theory and my findings……………………………………………………………..
Discipline Theory and my findings……………………………………………………………
Zero Tolerance and my findings……………………………………………
CHAPTER - VII
Conclusion and Implication………………………………..................................
Conclusion
Implication ………………………………………………………………
References………………………………………………………………………………..
Corporal Punishment - 11
List of tables and figures
Table 1: Understanding in Corporal Punishment…………………………
Table 2: Ban on Corporal Punishment in School
Table3: Validity Approach of Mixed Method
Table 4: Stakeholders' perception on Corporal Punishment………………….
Table 5: Common Punishment……………………………………….
Table 6: Different understanding on Corporal Punishment……………………..
Table 7: Different understanding about discipline…………………………….
Table 8: Parents on their responses to Corporal Punishment…………………
Table 9: Social Learning Theories……………………………………………..
Table 10: Power Theories………………………………………………………
Table 11: Discipline Theories………………………………. .…….
Table 12: Zero tolerance policy……………………………………………..
Table 13: Theoretical Understanding and Findings
Figure 1:………………………………………………………………………
Figure 2:…………………………………………………………………..
Figure 3:…………………………………………………………………….
Figure 4:……………………………………………………………………
Figure 5:………………………………………………………………………
Figure 6:………………………………………………………………………
Figure 7:……………………………………………………………………..
Figure 8:…………………………………………………………………….
Figure 9:…………………………………………………………………….
Figure 10:……………………………………………………………………
Corporal Punishment - 12
Figure 11:……………………………………………………………….
Figure 12:……………………………………………………………….
Figure 13:……………………………………………………………………..
Figure 14:…………………………………………………………………….
Figure 15:………………………………………………………………………..
Figure 16: ……………………………………………………………………..
Figure 17: ………………………………………………………………………
Figure 18:………………………………………………………………………..
Figure 19:……………………………………………………………………….
Figure 20:…………………………………………………………………….
Appendix A……………………………………………………………………………………
Questionnaire………………………………………………………………………………….
Biographical Information………………………………………………………………………
Controversial Statements………………………………………………………………………
Appendix B (Letter to the Principal)…………………………………………………………..
Appendix C (Letter to the Teachers)………………………………………………………….
Main question for interview ……………………………………………………………………
Corporal Punishment - 13
Presented on 13th March 2013
CHAPTER –I
Corporal Punishment: Experience and Learning
When I was in class three, first time in my school life, I got very bad slap from one of the
teacher without any reason and that was my last punishment also. Still I am thinking why
teacher slapped me? I am trying to forget it but I couldn’t. There are certain incidents in our
lives that stand out more than others. Some memories are fresh even after the passes of
several years (Rana, 2006).
I have been in the field of teaching for 15 years and I have the teaching experience of many
private schools. I have seen many type of corporal punishment given by the teachers and
principals to the students. Teachers like me have the concept that to be a good teacher we
should be strict with the children. The teachers who can keep children in control were
considering as good teacher. I have learnt to be a strict teacher with the children and I have
started to give the corporal punishment to the children. When I was mathematics teacher of
class 9 in one of the international school I found some students not doing the home work. I
kept them outside and started to give duster on their hand. Principal was watching from his
office. Immediately he came out from the office and gave me his own big stick to bit the
children.
When I joined to a one of the renowned private school of Kathmandu valley of Nepal I found
the same condition as of other private school. My new friends suggested me "to be a good
teacher here, you should control the children, and there should not be the noise in the class". I
also learnt that teachers who keep the class every time quite, he or she will be taken the best
Corporal Punishment - 14
teacher of the school. Principal of school couldn’t tolerate little bit Noise. When she heard the
noise in the class, immediately she always shouted to the children from loudspeaker saying
why noise is there? I saw many times principal was calling and making the children kneel
down to the ground. Teacher felt insult and from next day he/she started to control the
children and he/she also used the only one weapon of corporal Punishment. I also realized
that teacher from whom the students afraid were appointed as a coordinator or a discipline in
charge. I have seen many teachers who used to beat the children are appointed as a discipline
in charge.
When I followed the same technique to stick the students to those children who did not do
homework, who made noise in the class, who did not have good handwriting. School
management committee started to see me as a best teacher and first time in school history
school gave me a good amount of money declaring a best teacher of the year.
From my teaching carrier to now I had worked for 6 private school of Nepal. I found the
common punishment used by teachers are caning, pulling of ears and hair, and slamming on
the face. To my knowledge, in private school of Nepal, most of the school runs class from
morning to till evening about 9 hours with extra class to get the good result in S.L.C
examination. I noticed most of the teachers giving the written and learning home work also.
They didn’t have time to do it at home. So they could not fulfil the demand set by the teacher
and they should be ready to get the punishment. In the experience of Awashti (2008) most of
the time, students couldn't fulfil the demand set by the teacher, and had to offer his/her palms
to let them do the caning. Besides this, the pulling of ears and hair, and slamming on the face
were common forms of punishment. It was believed that the more ferocious the teacher, the
better. Thus teacher quality was judged on the bases of the amount of terror he/she could
create among them.
Corporal Punishment - 15
As a teacher of private school I found that the life of private schoolteacher is very hard. S/he
has to get up early morning and back to late night. Students wait for him/her at the door. S/he
has to teach them in many groups until the time of departure for the school. S/he takes his/her
meal in hurry and then rushes to the school. Any kind of delay means red mark in his/her
attendance. S/he has to teach several periods or more than 5 depend upon department until the
school is over. Every period was at least 45 minutes yielding no leisure or rest for him/her.
Different guardians come to meet him/her. Before assembly, during assembly and classes,
even at the time of Tiffin and they irrupt him/her with complaints and comments. The
principal also gives unnecessary trouble to him/her. When the school is over, he/she has still
lots of exercise book for correction or tuition class to manage expenses in other hand some of
the teacher still studying in universities. It is very difficult to manage the teaching and self
study for them.
Working with the private school I realized that there are always high level people who make
the decision that makes teachers under pressure. Teacher has to face the many unseen’s calls,
unwanted word and in some condition student also make teacher to punish as rusticate. I also
realized that male teachers are more activated than their female counterparts because of the
sympathetic nature of the private school promoters.
After coming back from school, he/she has to teach students at home. At the time of going to
bed, he/she is so tired falls asleep soon. The responsibility of government to private school
teachers has not been that evident. That’s why job of private schools teachers are not safe.
Due to the teachers union of private schools, conflict has been aroused between school owner
and the teachers for increased salary and other benefit. The owners didn’t want to provide the
training to teacher because they wanted the teachers for short period. The case of government
Corporal Punishment - 16
school teachers were little bit different. The license is compulsory for teaching in government
school but the rule is not implemented for private school.
In government schools teacher are recruited according to number of pupils (1 teacher per 40
pupils in mountain; 45 in hill and 50 in Terai and Kathmandu valley). Private school are
divided into different group as grade A, B, C, D in the basis of their facility and
infrastructure. School owner has the authority to recruited the teacher and to deicide the
number of students in each class.
Private schools have been preparing learners for final exams for higher score and entrance
exam for higher secondary. They are also preparing students for written exam based on rote
learning. These teachers are teaching them mostly for exam preparation or giving what I call,
"exam training" especially in the final years.
From my experience it is clear that corporal punishment of children in private school has
been taken normally. It is the common method of school to keep the children in discipline.
The system can be seen in other part of the world (Maag, 2001). Parents and principal of
school are also encouraging teachers to give the punishment to the children such that they can
keep them in discipline (Plan Nepal, 2011). They are taking it as simplest way of controlling
the children. Many times we heard the News on national daily news paper about the injury of
children by the physical punishment of the teachers.
Children are our future and we should give them best because the behavior and way which
we treat them will reflects in the future society. We teachers and parents also came from the
same schooling and the same punishment system that’s why we are taking it normally. We
are not trying to know its positive as well as negative effects. We always see the system that
the physical punishment gives positive result and has been taken as the weapon to correct the
children. The legacy has been is continuing due to the traditional thinking of teachers, parents
Corporal Punishment - 17
and principal. They think they should be under control of parents at home, under control of
teacher at school and teacher has right to give the physical punishment to their children. From
this we can say that most of parents, teachers and principal give corporal punishment by the
teachers in their childhood. It became a set of culture in private school.
Many times I asked many parents about the reason of coming school to request to the teacher
be strict to the children? Many parents replied that because to make their children's life better
they should be afraid of teachers. And teacher thinks that the essayist way of making afraid to
the children is the corporal punishment. Parents also accept the simple corporal punishment
like pulling hair, pulling ears. Kneel down etc. As I found both parents as well as teachers did
not care about its negative impact.
Corporal punishment is any form of penalty that takes a physical form, by the infliction on
the offender of pain, injury, discomfort or humiliation. Corporal punishment means to inflict
punishment on the body (UNICEF, 2011). Many countries opposed the use of physical
punishment in homes, schools, and all other institutions where children are cared for educated
(Ibid). Many researchers have also demonstrated a link between physical punishment and
several negative developmental outcomes for children: physical injury, increased aggression,
antisocial behavior, poorer adult adjustment, and greater tolerance of violence (NASW,
2012). Paradoxically most parents also want to discipline their children with use of physical
punishment in Nepal (Plan Nepal, 2011). Parents’ disciplinary methods serve as strong
models to children that teach them how to deal with challenges presented by life from day to
day. They use corporal punishment to keep their children in track because both teachers and
parents don’t have a culture to see alternative disciplinary method.
The promoters of non-violent teaching believe that it is important to model appropriate
behavior to replace the corporal punishment. These people also believe that dignity and right
Corporal Punishment - 18
of children must also be respected (NASW, 2012). But the organizational and school culture
has not been ready yet to go against it. These people also advocate that violent discipline can
have a lifetime effect on children who experience it and can influence their own future
violent behavior toward other (Adams, 2000). They hold the knowledge that children learn by
example, but if they are physically punished at school, their future behavior can be reflective
of this early treatment (Youssef, Attia & Kamel, 1998).
Victimization of children by teachers and administration often in the name of discipline is
seldom recognized for its potential contribution to the misbehavior aggression, and alienation
of students (Hyman & Perone, 1998). For instance in USA many children are expelled or
suspended from school each year for bringing weapons to school. Too often the thing that is
overlooked is that the majority of those carrying weapons are doing so in order to protect
themselves not to cause any violence (Adams, 2000).
Corporal Punishment in the West
Corporal punishment is there in the East and the West. Palayet panchavarshani….of
Manusmriti i.e. take care of children up to five years of age, bit them up to the age of 10 and
treat them as friend after the age of fifteen is an example of corporal punishments. The same
thing was recorded in the west as early as 10th century BC from Greece Rome and Egypt
(Wikkipedia.com). It was used there to keep for both judicial and educational discipline. So
states gained reputation for using Sparta in particular, used them as part of a disciplinary
regime designed to build willpower and physical strength. Although it was extreme, corporal
punishment was possibly most frequent type of punishment. In Roman Empire, the maximum
penalty that a Roman citizen could receive under the law was 40 “lashes” or “strokes” with a
whip applied to the back and shoulders (Wikipedia). According to the human right watch,
Corporal Punishment - 19
each year hundreds of thousands of students are subjected corporal punishment associated
with the hitting or padding in even in public school of United States and it is a legal form of
school discipline in 20 states and used against at least 10 thousand students. There, some
parents used to think that discipline means physical punishment, such as hitting and
smacking, or verbal abuse such as yelling or threatening the child. This is not discipline but
children do misbehave when they are frustrated, angry or upset and have no other reasonable
way to express their feelings (www.betterrhealth.vic.gov.au).
In the case of Nepal the rights of the child (CRC) demands that children be respected as
human being with the right to dignity and physical integrity but corporal punishment is
considered necessary to children’s upbringing, to facilitate learning and to instill discipline in
the children (Mishra, 2010). Following CRC we can feel that the weak practices of corporal
punishment is still going on which is attribute to the weak national policy, unhealthy
academic competition among the school, poorly trained teachers, superstitious tradition
beliefs and hierarchical social structure(Thakur, 2010).
Justification of the Corporal Punishers
Corporal punishment is a means of discipline that relief on fear and submissiveness, and
diminishes a child’s capacity to grow up as an autonomous and responsible people (Save the
Children, 1999). Behaviorist approach to teaching enables teachers, students and parents for
corporal punishment in Nepal (Plan Nepal, 2011). Punishment includes hitting children,
isolating them, locking them in the toilet, public humiliation, and forcing them to clean floors
and toilets (UNICEF & Terre des Hommes, 2008).
In the school where I worked, giving the corporal punishment was the major tool to keep the
children in control. Most of the teachers think that non- violence teaching is not applicable in
our society because children were getting the punishment from small grade. Even school
Corporal Punishment - 20
leaders requested all the teachers not to give the corporal punishment to children but teachers
were giving punishment for the purpose of to keep quit in the class room and to maintain the
good handwriting, exercise book and text book because it was expected from them by parents
and the school administration. I found parents were complaining frequently of students who
did not study at home and didn't do their homework assuming that they were lazy. One thing
I knew that teachers rarely tried to know the negative impact of corporal punishment.
Corporal punishment is a common phenomenon in the daily life of South Asian children at
home, in school, in places of work and in their neighborhoods (CRC, 2001). It is common
problems of Nepal also. Many researchers been conducted in Nepal about the corporal
punishment in school by international organization like Save the Children (2007), Plan Nepal
(2011), UNICEF and UNESCO (2011). But finding are limited and not effective to improve
the present situation. They have studied the present condition of punishment system and
listed the accident cause by this system and raise the voice against it but no pure qualitative
research has be done on the teachers perception on corporal punishment . Most of the
research focused on community and government school though corporal punishment is very
common in private schools as well. Many teachers and parents were unaware of alternative to
corporal punishment and knew little about physical and psychological impacts of harsh
punishment (CVICT, 2004). The same source shows that physical punishment is most
commonly used against primary school students, while psychological punishment was more
common against secondary level students. Both were frequently used against lower secondary
students. Many teachers and parents reported that they inflicted severe punishment on
children because they were unaware of alternatives to corporal punishment and knew little
about the physical and psychological impacts of harsh punishments (Ibid).
Corporal Punishment - 21
Making the students kneel down or stand for hours, pinching and slapping are the common
form of punishment to validate the saying that children are our future, we should give them
best, and the behavior which we teach them can affect the future society. This belief was
portrayed in one of the studies in Kathmandu that said 82% of students were found to suffer
physical punishment in schools, 80 % students said that alternative methods can be used to
discipline children (The Rising Nepal, 24 December 2006). In this situation it is very
important to know the perception of teachers on corporal punishment and this study tries to
find the present situation of corporal punishment in private schools of Nepal.
Statement of the Problem
There is no consensus of opinions about the effects of corporal punishment on students in
private school of Nepal. While a school of thought views it as harmful and negative, another
sees it as corrective and positive. However, at various times different forms of corporal
punishment have been adopted in private school of Nepal as disciplinary measures and yet,
the deserved ends are usually achieved. Even the efforts from different INGOS like save the
children, UNICEF, Plan Nepal, CIWIN etc the government and some stakeholders in the
education industry towards controlling the corporal punishment have not yielded positive
results in case of private schools.
Both my experience and learning shows that when private school students will be the adults
of tomorrow they would be known for huggers and other violent and delinquent acts. Their
educational, vocational and psychosocial growth and development will be jeopardized. Then
the youths could be involved in anti-social activities.
Thus there is a need to evaluate the perception of private school teacher on the effectiveness
of corporal punishment in Nepal which can be helpful for those who are involving to child
Corporal Punishment - 22
rights sector and educationist. This realization encouraged me to undertake this study on
private school teacher’s perception towards corporal punishment in selected schools of Nepal.
Rationale of the Study
As a teacher of private school, I was curious to know how teachers perceive the corporal
punishment and use their strategies to discipline students. My experience also enabled me to
help school leader and administrator to review their role from a different viewpoint. Many
studies have tried to find the perception of teachers on corporal punishment of government
school. But very few studies were done on it for the private school of Nepal. Similarly their
attention was not enough how to examine the real situation of the corporal punishment and
discipline problem of the private school. Therefore there is urgent need to have study on this
matter and find out the real situation, value and perception of teachers. My experience as
private school teacher also encouraged me to undertake this study.
Purpose of the Study
This study attempts to answer the question like how do private schools teachers perceive
corporal punishment in school under the following theme:
1. Teachers’ beliefs on the necessity of corporal punishment.
2. Their attitudes towards corporal punishments.
3. Their strategies to use corporal punishment
4. Parents support to the corporal punishment.
Delimitation
The discussion on the perception of teachers on corporal punishment is very broad. It is
impossible to analyze the teacher’s perception of all level. So I have delimited this study on
the corporal punishment of the five private schools and their teachers of Kathmandu valley.
Corporal Punishment - 23
Both male and female teachers were included in the study. The results can be contextually
generalized to these and similar others provided the context is similar (Denzin and Lincon,
2005). One area that could limit the study is my reliance on the honesty of the answers of the
participants. Another area that limited me is the inadequate number of research on corporal
punishment in private school.
Definition of the Key terms used
Perception- According to the English dictionary, perception is “the process of becoming
aware or conscious of a thing or things in general: the state of being aware; consciousness;
understanding.” The process of understanding becomes a mediated experience, as it requires
the use of the sense in order to process his/her work. The perceivable is that which can be
interpreted by the body. But for this study I have used the term perception to indicate
understanding or how they have taken corporal punishment as what it is, why it is and how it
is.
a. Private schools- A school run and supported by private individuals or a corporation
rather than by a government or public agency is called private school
(www.thefreedictionary.com). But for this study I have used the term a school run and
supported by private individual and which is registered in private limited company.
b. Private school teacher- a teacher who teaches in private school.
c. High achiever: the students who secured the marks 80% more in achievement test
conducted by the school for final examination.
d. Low achiever: the students who score the marks below 50% in achievement test
conducted by the teacher in the final examination of previous grade.
e. Discipline: systematic instruction given to disciple’s train them as students in a craft or
trade, or any other activity which they are supposed to perform or to follow the
Corporal Punishment - 24
particular code of conduct or order (Wikipedia.com). But in this study I have used the
term as instruction given by school management and teachers to the students as a rule
and regulation to maintain the discipline.
f. Negative Reinforcement-“The removal, delay, avoidance, or reduction of an event that
increases the probability of the behaviour in the future.”(Barnhill, 2005: p.132). But in
this study I have used the term the punishment given to the students to correct their
behaviour.
g. Positive Reinforcement-“The presentation of an event or stimulus that increases the
probability of the behaviour in the future.” (Barnhill, 2005: p.132). But I have used this
term as the activities that schools and teachers are using to encourage the children.
h. Punishments: Severe, rough or disastrous treatment or any pain, suffering, or loss
inflicted on a person because o a crime or offence (brainyquote.com). But in this study
I have used this term as corporal punishment.
i. Suspension –“Short term removal of a student from school or denial of participation in
school activities and classes, usually for no more than ten school days.”(TROYAN,
2003: p.1614). But in this study I have applied this term one or two day's removal of
students from school.
Corporal Punishment - 25
CHAPTER-II
Literature Review
While reviewing literature in this study, I realized the need of consulting literature mainly in
four areas, viz. Corporal punishment, corporal punishment in Nepal, Zero tolerance, Legality,
international movement to ban corporal punishment, and global prohibition of the corporal
punishment.
Corporal Punishment
Corporal punishment refers to the use of physical punishment to correct behavior. The term
corporal punishment refers to the use of physical punishment to correct behavior. The term
derives from the Latin corpus, meaning body. Social scientists are virtually unanimous in
arguing that corporal punishment has more negative than positive effects (GIECPC, 2011).
Corporal punishment is “any punishment in which physical force is use and intended to case
some degree of pain or discomfort”. It can be divided as parental or domestic corporal
punishment, school corporal punishment and judicial corporal punishment (UN committee on
the Rights of the Child, 2004).
Corporal punishment of students is the intentional infliction of pain or discomfort or the use
of physical force upon students in order to stop or change behavior (Hyman & Perone, 1998).
In United States, the most typical form of school corporal punishment is striking a student’s
buttocks with a wooden paddle by a school authority because it is believed that the students
have disobeyed a rule. , the United States and parts of Canada remain the only developed
countries to allow corporal punishment (Robinson, Funk, Beth, & Bush, 2005).
Corporal punishment is a technique that is easily abused, leads to physical injuries and can
cause serious emotional harm (Hyman & Perone, 1998). There is no clear evidence that the
Corporal Punishment - 26
corporal punishment will lead to better control in the classroom, help moral character
development in children, or increase the students respect for the teachers or other authority
figure (Society for
Adolescent Medicine, 2003).
It is believed that corporal punishment does not help the child to correct his behavior, the use
of corporal punishment in schools communicates that hitting is the correct way to solve
problems and violence is acceptable in our society. It does not produce long-lasting changes
in behavior; negative effects the social, psychological and educational development of
students, contributes to the cycle of child abuse, and promotes pro-violence attitudes of youth
(OWEN, 2005; Society for Adolescent Medicine).
According to Flynn (1996), the physical punishment of children has always be an accepted,
even expected in families. In Nepal also we may see it is accepted by the parents and school.
Only the hard injury case comes in media or parents complain to respective places. Parents,
teachers, and even students ignore the minor case of corporal punishment. It is also known
that as parents’ support for corporal punishment increases, so does the frequency and severity
of its use (Straus, 1991).
Straus (1994) defines corporal punishment as “the use of physical force with the intention of
causing a child to experience pain, but not injury, for the purpose of correction or control, of
the child’s behavior”( Straus , 1994) p.4). The term ‘corporal punishment’ is ‘physical
punishment’. It is a kind of punishment that affects the human body adversely. This could be
in the form of beating, thrashing or even whipping. So this is a type of physical torture to a
student and should be condemned and stopped immediately. Sometimes such type of
punishment may physically impair students for his whole life (Rajkoomar, 2010). Here the
purpose of giving the corporal punishment is to control the child misbehavior and to correct
Corporal Punishment - 27
him. We teachers also don’t think there is alternatives way to correct the children behavior,
we always see the only one way that is punishment and it finally lead to corporal punishment.
The methods to discipline a child through corporal punishment are still in practiced and it is
old-fashioned. This implies that teachers should deal with their students patiently, advising,
and guiding them in every sphere of life (Rajkoomar, 2010).
Within the school system, corporal punishment has been found not only to be a problem, but
that its effects are insidious and little recognized. The school has a major influence on the
child’s development and behavior. The teachers play an important role as educators and
disciplinarians, and thus, to assume their responsibilities, they sometimes resort to the use of
physical punishment (Youssef, Attia & Kamel, 1998). Students are physically punished for
violent and nonviolent acts, as well as for behavior that does not conform to the standard of
the educational institution. Corporal punishment is emotionally destructive, and affects the
quality of the teacher-pupil relationship, and cut off all modes of effective communication
that play a crucial role in promoting student’s emotional health and well- being (Youssef,
Attia & Kamel, 1998). This shows that teachers should know that children at the school level
are at an impressionable age. If teacher punish them in any way by giving physical
punishment they may develop a fear to approach the teacher, or even attend the school. When
students respect the teacher, love the teachers then only s/he wants to learn from the teachers.
A teacher or guru is always the role model of the students. These role models require students
to be free and friendly with their teachers, ask questions; clarify his/her doubts. But this type
of respect cannot be demanded forcibly through corporal punishment.
According to Straus (1991), not only does the impact of corporal punishment have an effect
on the individual family, but also on the larger society. Socially accepted forms of violence,
such as spanking, may lead to greater use of force and violence for illegitimate purposes, for
example, criminal behavior.
Corporal Punishment - 28
It is, therefore, important to study societal norms supporting corporal punishment since they
are the antecedents for its use by parents and the school system. It is where researchers,
educators, and policy makers are found to take into account the variability of spanking
attitudes by contextual, as well as by social factors (Flynn, 1996). It also indicates that the
relationship between attitudes towards corporal punishment and its actual use, and the role of
social and cultural variables in influencing the relationship needs to be explored.
(www.history .com)
The decline of corporal punishment is a sign of the progress of humanitarianism,
enlightenment, and civilization. In the latter part of the twentieth century, however, such
optimism has been questioned by Michel Foucault, who has argued that the rehabilitation
theory and the creation of “non-corporal” penal systems generally meant only the insidious
expansion and refinement of penal repression (Hawkins, Gordon, Frase, & Richard, 2002).
The punishment which is the opposite of positive reinforcement, appears much more a
acceptable because of the perception that it does not threaten individuals’ autonomy-people
believe they are free to choose to behave in responsible ways to avoid punishment (Maag,
1996).
Corporal Punishment - 29
From the above discussion I understood that there are many negative impacts of corporal
punishment and positive relationship to control numerous undesirable outcomes.
Corporal Punishment in Nepal
Corporal punishment in Nepal is often considered necessary to children’s upbringing, to
facilitate learning and to instill discipline in the children. This type of practice is still going
on and increasing due to the weak national policy, unhealthy academic competition among
the schools, poorly trained teachers, superstitious traditional beliefs and hierarchical social
structure (APC Nepal, 1011). Besides corporal punishment, sexual abuse in school going
children seems to be frequently but mostly unreported. According to P.R. Khaling (2011)
form World Vision International Communication, Rastriya Nimna Madhyamik Bidyalaya
used to give corporal punishment. This school is located in Kathmandu having kindergarten
to grade 8, there the students feared the punishments doled out by their teachers, small and
big, physical and mental, but always harsh and abusive one year ago. Pulling hair, a painful
pencil clenching punishment, beating with dusters, kicking students out of the classrooms,
making them stand for the whole class or throwing notebooks at them, were common place.
Many students were become aggressive themselves, but parents had no choice to remove
them from this violent school.
The common physical punishment given to children in school of Nepal are beating, pulling
ears and hair of the temples, making them to stand up for the whole day in the sun, kneel
down, making them stand up on the bench, making them to raise hands, pressing the pencil
between two fingers, holding their ears with hands passed under the legs, tying their hand and
caning and pinching cheeks or arms (Mishra, Thakur, Koirala, Sherestha & Jha, 2010). Same
as emotional punishment given in Nepalese school are slapping by the opposite sex, scolding,
abusing and humiliating, giving animal names like donkey, monkey, ox, bitch, buffalo,
Corporal Punishment - 30
calling parents to the school, suspending them for a couple of days, pinning paper on their
back and labeling them ‘I am a fool’., ordering students especially girls to stand in the rain,
making students stand completely naked in the classroom etc (Ibid). Other negative
reinforcement give to the students are detention during the break and lunch, locking them a
dark room, asking the children to bring explanatory letters from the parents, sending them
home or keeping the children outside the gate, making the children sit on the floor on the
classroom, making the child clean the premises, giving oral warning and letters in the diary or
calendar, sending the children to the principal, making them teach in the class, making them
stand till the teacher comes (Ibid).
The corporal punishment in Nepalese School is increasing due to the absence of code of
conduct-banning corporal punishment and prosecution system for CP imposer. Another
reason is private school and its untrained teachers, government less follow up, different
management, unhealthy competition and quantitative learning achievement. Culture is seen,
nurtures the practice of CP and causes it to be continued like any other ritual, from generation
to generation. Students are learning CP is acceptable from teachers and using when they
become monitors or teachers (Plan Nepal, 2011).
In the context of Nepal, corporal punishment is still remains rampant, especially in private
schools. However, the some studies found that training teachers on the alternative to corporal
punishments can significantly reduce the crime (Pathak, 2005, UNICEF). That’s why
UNICEF lunches the training program and expands it in 15 districts.
According to Bhanu Pathak, program officer of the UNICEF child protection division, four
kinds of training packages have been developed in co-ordination with the National Council
for Educational Development, to train the teachers. On the other hand the Supreme Court has
declared corporal punishment in school as ultra virus in recent verdict but the traditional
Corporal Punishment - 31
methods of teaching handed down from one generation to another. (Kathmandu post, 7
October 2007).
Parents who are unable to handle such children give school permission to carry evolved to
such disciplining tactics. Common punishment in schools, as observed by UNICEF in Nepal,
are making students walk or run around the premises 10-20 times, stand in the sun or rain for
45 minutes, slapping, twisting their ears, pinching, pressing a pencil between two fingers,
pulling hair, severe beatings with a thin stick, belt, duster, or fists. In an extreme case, a math
teacher in Pokhara took 18 students of grade one to the school toilet and made them touch
human excreta with the tip of their tongues for not memorizing their tables
(www.wavemag.com.np, 2006).
Similarly 10 years old girl who was severely thrashed and hung upside down from the ceiling
fan by the school principal because she was suspected to have a stolen fruit lying on the
principal’s desk, is now suffering from problems of hallucinations, depression and
nightmares, and has discontinued her studies (UNISEF, 2009). Paradoxically, assaulting
adults is considered a crime but assaulting children is accepted as a parent’s right, a way to
legitimize their authority, teach and make their children stronger(Save the Children, 1999).
Key risk factors for school corporal punishment in Nepal include bullying and making noise,
attending grade three, four and five, memorising contents particularly in English, Computer
Science and Mathematics, most of the graduate teachers have strong belief on Pavlov and
Skinner S-R theory is also reason (Plan Nepal, 2011). The CWIN Helpline receives an
average of 35-40 calls a day from children or individuals for help. They may be the large
number of incidents which are unreported (Wave Magazine, July 2006).
Corporal Punishment - 32
A study on barriers to education for children with disabilities in Nepal found that this could
contribute to the children’s lack of access to education (Human Right Watch, 2011). In the
context of Nepal, corporal punishment still remains rampant, especially in private schools.
However, by training teachers on the alternative to corporal punishment can significantly
reduce the crime (Bhanu Pathak, 2005). Adolescents who were more likely to engage in
fighting, bullying, and victimization of others reported that their parents engaged in corporal
punishment as a disciplining method. Parental use of corporal punishment may also pose a
risk for violent behaviors among youth (Ohene, S., Ireland, M., McNeely, C., & Borowsky, I.
W. (2006).
Zero Tolerance
The term Zero tolerance was reported by Skiba and Peterson (1999) to the drug war in the
1980s (www.kershawknives.com). Its success in that initiative perhaps foreshadowed in
eradication of delinquent behavior among students. There is little evidence to support that
zero tolerance procedures have increase school safety or improved student behavior (Skiba &
Pererson, 2000). Faced with disruptive and aggressive behavior, a typical response of the
school system has been the punishment and exclusion of students exhibiting challenging
behavior (Skiba & Peterson, 1999). With the zero tolerance policy it tends to punish both
major and minor incidents severely in order to “send message” those certain behaviors will
not be tolerated (Ibid).
Noguera (1995) has argued that the disciplinary policies are adopted less for their
effectiveness than for their strong symbolic value, attempting to reassure administration,
parents, and teachers that strong action are being taken in response to a perceived breakdown
of school order. Schools that rely heavily on zero tolerance polices continue to be less safe
than schools that implement fewer components of zero tolerance policies. Over-reliance on
Corporal Punishment - 33
physical security procedures appears to be associated with and increased risk of school order,
and the misuse of school security measures such as locker or strip searchers an create and
emotional backlash in students (Hyman & Perone, 1998).
The philosophical basis of zero tolerance states that no exceptions will be made in relation to
disobedience, and immediate action (usually in the form of suspension or expulsion) is
encouraged (Shartel, 1999). It is suggested, by Shartel (1999), that the implementation of
zero tolerance procedure take place after, and only after, students and their parents have been
made aware of requirements, prohibitions, and consequences saying consistent with the
systems approach to student discipline.
Research supports the thought that zero tolerance causes more controversy than good
(Fuentes, 2003; Ayers, 2001). For example, there is no known documentation that the
enforcement of zero tolerance policy that improves and/or encourages academic excellence.
Due to the fact students are being suspended and expelled as a result of zero tolerance. Ayers
(2001) exclaim it is evident that students are being deprived of critical classroom instruction
in the zero tolerant situations. The result of the suspension expulsion from zero tolerance
policies and classroom deficiencies are clearly synergistic. Students are excused from
classroom instruction for perceived disobedience and, in turn, fall behind in curriculum.
Ayers et al. (2001) also warn that falling behind in curriculum often results, in frustration of
academics, which feds right back to the cycle of acting out in class. It is much easier for
students to disrupt a class and be excused than to sit and feel inferior to peers excelling in the
same topic area.
Annette Fuentes (2003) refers to the zero tolerance policy as the school-to-prison pipeline.
Fuentes states, “we’re seeing very minor conduct becoming a criminal act” (pg. 19). Often
times, educators are quick to make a phone call to the authorities instead of dealing with the
Corporal Punishment - 34
disruptive behavior himself. Clearly, zero tolerance is a stringent, punitive method of
discipline that hinders the learning and social growth of student and his surrounding
environment.
Consider the student who has been disciplined with the teachers and school authority and
spends their seven hours a day sitting in a desolate room with nothing but a chair and desk.
How can anyone argue or support the idea that this student is being provided a proper
education? This implies that schools must make provisions to make conducive environment
to the students than to give corporal punishment to them (Fischer & Sorenson, 1996).
Raffaele Mendez & Knoff (2003) break it down to a simple task of comprehensive
documentation and reactive planning. They suggested that schools provide thorough baseline
data of what behaviors are occurring and the disciplinary response to it. From there the
function of the behaviors is occurring and a plan is developed to remedy future disruptive
behavior. This concept utilizes a reactive process to develop proactive intervention and
relates directly to functional behavioral assessment.
Legality
Article 7 of the Children Act (1992) states: “No child shall be subjected to torture or cruel
treatment.” About the legal defense, Article 4 of Chapter 9 of the Muluki Ains states that
guardians and teachers shall not be held responsible for grievously hurting a child in the
course of education or defense, and article 7 of the Children’s Act exempts “the act of
scolding and minor beating to the child by his father, mother, member of the family, guardian
or teacher for the interests of the child” from the prohibition of cruel treatment. In 2005
Supreme Court of Nepal ruled that the restrictive clause in article 7 was unconstitutional and
declared the clause “give him/her minor beating” (Supreme Court decision 6 January 2005).
The near universal social acceptance of corporal punishment in childrearing necessitates
Corporal Punishment - 35
clarity in law that no level of corporal punishment is acceptable. Article 7 of the children’s
Act and the relevant provision in the Muluki Ain should be repealed to reflect the Supreme
Court ruling and the law should explicitly prohibit all corporal punishment and other cruel
form of punishment (UNICEF, 2008).
There is no explicit prohibition of corporal punishment in the Education Regulation (2003),
though severe punishment would be prohibited under article 7 of the Children’s Act. In
November 2010 as Education Bill was under consideration but still it is in processing.
The Government of Nepal made a commitment to prohibition of corporal punishment in all
settings, including the home also at a meeting of the South Asia Forum in July 2006,
following on the regional consultation in 2005 of the UN Secretary General’s Study on
Violence against Children.
The Interim constitution (2007) prohibits cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment (article 26). The
Children’s act, defining a child as under 16 (article2), prohibits cruel treatment (article 7) and
subjecting a child to handcuffs, fetters or solitary confinement (article 15) and does not provide
sentencing to corporal punishment (article 11). Under the Act, children aged 14-15 are liable to
reduce sentences under criminal law (article 11) and older children face full sentences under
criminal law. Criminal law (the Muluki Ain and other laws) does not provide for judicial corporal
punishment.
From the above I understood that there are some rules and regulations, which are lawful but
corporal punishment in school is not prohibited legally.
Corporal Punishment - 36
The International Movement to ban Corporal Punishment
The long historical debate over the physical discipline and punishment of children arose from
different perspectives on appropriate forms of child rearing and pedagogy. In one side some
educators and policy makers who believed that the disciplinary equipments like the rod and
the strap are needed to maintained the social order, moral behavior. At the other side many of
them felt that physical punishment would lead to the abuse of children.
As spokespeople for the children of Europe, we believe that eliminating violent and
humiliating forms of discipline is a vital strategy for improving children’s status as people,
and reducing child abuse and all other forms of violence in European societies. This is the
long overdue reform, with huge potential for improving the quality of lives and family
relationships. Hitting children is disrespectful and dangerous. Children deserve at least the
same protection from violence that we adults take for granted for ourselves (European
Network of Ombudsmen for Children, 1998). The succeeding paragraphs present the country
specific approach to ban corporal punishment.
India
Indian government has banned corporal punishment in schools. Spare the rod, or end up in
jail is the latest warning to teachers who resort to corporal punishment. The Ministry of
Women and Child Development has issued a new set of guidelines that bans physical
punishment of students (www.ndtv.com). It says that first violation of the ban will invite up
to one year in jail, or a fine of R. 50,000 or both. For subsequent violations, imprisonment
could be extending to 3 years with an additional fine of 25,000 rupees. It also says that Heads
of schools will be responsible to prevent corporal punishment. This further explains that
teachers found guilty could be denied promotion, and even increments. There has also been a
provision of child rights cell in all schools where children can lodge complaint
(www.ndtv.com). Apart from this, the government is also working on the final draft of the
Corporal Punishment - 37
Prevention of Child Offences bill where even parents, relatives and neighbors can be
punished for hitting children. The draft bill is expected include not just physical or sexual
abuse, but also verbal abuse, molestation and ragging. This ban becomes amidst and angry
debate on the issue of corporal punishment in schools across India. The debate was sparked
off by the death of Rpuvanjit Rawla, the 12-year old boy who committed suicide in February
(2010), days after being humiliated and caned by the principal of his school, the prestigious
La Martiniere School for Boys in Kolkata (IST,2010).
China
Corporal punishment is not allowed as a method of teaching children to obey in any school in
china. There is clear statement in the Principles for Teachers, which is applied in every
school throughout the nation, the teachers are not allowed corporally punish students. So the
law against corporal punishment in school protests children. In China corporal punishment is
a fundamental breach of children’s rights, and is disrespectful to their human dignity, as well
as to their physical and mental integrity (USA Today, Washington D.C., 9 May). Chinese
believed that corporal punishment is neither a wise not an effective way to teach children.
Both parents and teachers agree that discipline takes time. They also believe that Children
should learn self-discipline from gentle kids' ways such as discussion, communication after
school or taking responsibility. In Chinese culture, from thousands of years ago, teachers had
been highly respected and taken an example for children. Children easily mimic the actions
of their teachers. Some studies of China have suggested that corporal punishment is a
significant factor in the development of violent attitudes and actions (People’s Daily, Beijing,
and 31 July 2005).
Corporal Punishment - 38
Canada
There is a growing consensus that corporal punishment of children does more harm than
good. It has been banned in virtually all Canadian schools system; and the federal ministry of
health has mounted an educational campaign teaching that hitting children is wrong.
Canadian attitudes towards corporal punishment are changing. An increasing number of
Canadian adults believe that many forms of corporal punishment, at one time considered
acceptable, are no longer acceptable (Justice David McCombs, in a judgment - currently
being appealed - rejecting a constitutional challenge to corporal punishment in Canada, July 5
2000).
The Toronto B of Education pioneered the abolition of corporal punishment in 1971. In most
other Canadian jurisdictions, the strap continued to be an important instrument in the
teacher’s disciplinary arsenal until the 1990s. It was not until 2004 that the Supreme Court of
Canada ruled that corporal punishment was an unreasonable application of force in the
maintenance of classroom discipline (www.cea-ace.ca/education-canada/article).
The report of the Provincial Committee on Aims and Objectives in the Schools of Ontario,
known popularly as the “Hall-Dennis Report (1968)”, which sharply condemned corporal
punishment and the use of the strap. It found no “educational advantage in pain, failure,
threats of punishment and the use of the strap”. The Ontario Minister of Education agreed on
it (www.cea-ace.ca/education-canada/article).
The law is in force in all provinces and territories of Canada. Attempts have been made to
repeal section 43, either by action of the Federal Government or the courts. None have been
successful. However, a 2004 ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada has limit corporal
punishment to very mild force, and only on children from the age of 2 to 12. No instruments
Corporal Punishment - 39
like a paddle or belt are allowed. Heating the face or the rest of the head is banned. The court
has banned corporal punishment in schools, punishment of developmentally delayed children,
and any punishment involving “degrading, inhuman or harmful conduct (Edmonton Journal
Alberta, 1st February 2004)”.
The Supreme Court decision is also cite worthy that says:
Every school teacher, parent or person standing in the place of a parent is justified in using
force by way of correction toward a pupil or child, as the case may be, who is under his care,
if the force does not exceed what is reasonable under the circumstances (R.s.c.C-34, s.43.).
Singapore
In Singapore school, corporal punishment is legal for male students only. Corporal
punishment is fully encouraged by the government in order to maintain strict discipline. Only
a light rattan cane may be used. This can be done by the school management in a formal
ceremony after due deliberation, not by classroom teachers. Most secondary schools and also
some primary schools and one or two post-secondary institutions, use caning to deal with
misconduct by boys. The Ministry of Education has stipulated a maximum of six strokes per
occasion. In some cases the ceremony is performed in front of the other students
(www.wikipedia.com/article caning in Singapore).
United States
Individual US states have the power to ban corporal punishment in their schools. Currently, it
is banned in public schools in 31 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. Two of states New
Jersey and Lowa, it is illegal in private schools as well. The 19 states that have not banned it
are mostly in south. It is in declining degree in some public schools in Alabama, Arkansas,
Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee and Texas. Most school, even in states where it is
Corporal Punishment - 40
permitted, has abolished corporal punishment. Report collected by the federal government
show that, use of corporal punishment has been declining consistently, in all states where it is
used, over at least the past 20 years. The anti spanking campaign Center for Effective
Discipline, extrapolating from federal statistics, estimates that the number of students
spanked or paddled in 2006 in U.S public school was about 223,000 (Lyam Rick, 2006).
Black and Hispanic students are more likely to be paddled than white students possibly
because minority- race parents are more inclined to approve of it. Federal statistics
consistently show that around 80% of school padding’s are of boys, most likely because boys
exhibit more often than girls the kind of misbehavior for which corporal punishment is
thought appropriate (www.stophitting.com). The rate of corporal punishment with disabilities
are disproportionately high, approximately twice the rate of the general student population in
some States.
Corporal punishment in American schools used to be administered to the seat of the student’s
rousers or skirt with a specially made wooden paddle at classroom or hallway, but nowadays
the punishment is usually given privately in the principal’s office. A bill to end the use of
corporal punishment in schools of United States introduced into the House of Representatives
in June 2010 during 111th Congress but it was not brought up for a vote and did not become a
law.
South Africa
The use of corporal punishment is prohibited by the South African Schools Act, 1996.
According to the section 10 of the act:
1. No person may administer corporal punishment at a school to a learner.
2. Any person who contravenes subsection (1) is guilty of an offence and liable on
conviction t a sentence which could be imposed for assault.
Corporal Punishment - 41
The Constitutional Court rejected a claim that the right to religious freedom entitles private
Christian schools to impose corporal punishment.
The use of corporal punishment as a judicial sentence was prohibited by the Abolition of
Corporal punishment Act of 1997. The use of corporal punishment in alternate care setting
was prohibited by amended regulations enacted under the Child Care Act in 1998. South
Africa adopted the African Charter on the Right and Welfare of the Child in 1998. The
defense of reasonable chastisement of children by their parents existed in South African
common law. Work on the children’s Bill began in 1998- at which time; corporal punishment
was banned in all spheres of a child’s life except the home (Wikipedia.com).
Because of these legal provisions, corporal punishment has been effectively disappeared from
middle-class formally white school, but it is still relatively common in township schools.
This is due to the belief of teachers that corporal punishment is necessary for orderly
education to take place (Robert Morrel, 2006).
South Korea
Corporal punishment used to be lawful and widely used in South Korean schools. Teachers
are allowed to use the stick to maintain the punishment used as well as other tool such as
sawn-off billiard cues and hockey stick are used as well. Government recommendations are
that the stick should not be thicker than 1.5cm in diameter and that the number of strokes
should not exceed than ten. Teachers are allowed to give such type of punishment inside the
classroom or corridor in front of other students but procedure is generally less formal and
premeditated than in some other countries such as Singapore. It is common for several
students to receive corporal punishment together. But recently in 2012, the Seoul
Metropolitan Office of Education has announced a decree that prohibited corporal
Corporal Punishment - 42
punishment of students in elementary, junior high, and high schools. The major has brought
mixed reaction. This can be done in a table form like
Table:1
Understanding in Corporal Punishment
Corporal
punishment in
Country
South Korea
China
India
South
Unite
Africa
d
Singapore
Canada
understanding
States
Value
Korean
Chinese
The first
Because of
Use of Corporal
There is a
believed that
believed
violation
legal
corpor punishmen growing
corporal
that
of the
provisions,
al
t is fully
consensus
punishment is
corporal
ban will
corporal
punis
encourage
that
necessary to
punishment
invite up
punishment
hment
d by the
corporal
maintain
is neither a
to one
has been
has
governme
punishment
discipline.
wise not an
year in
effectively
been
nt in order
of children
effective
jail, or a
disappeared
declin
to
does more
way to
fine of
from
ing
maintain
harm than
teach
R.
middle-class consis
strict
good.
children.
50,000
but it is still
tently,
discipline.
or both
relatively
in all
common in
states.
township.
Legal
Prohibited for
Corporal
provision
elementary,
punishment
Corporal
The use of
Illegal It is legal
It has been
corporal
in
banned in
for school
Corporal Punishment - 43
junior and
is not
high school
children
punishm
punishment
most
children.
virtually all
allowed as a ent in
in alternate
of the
Judicial,
Canadian
method of
schools
care setting
states
prison,
schools
teaching
is
was
and
reformator
system;
children to
banned.
prohibited
still
y, military
obey in any
by amended
legal
school and
school in
regulations
in few
domestic
china.
enacted
states
private
under the
school
Child Care
Act in 1998.
Monitoring
18 regional
Principle of
There
Head
High
system
offices of
school
has also
teachers in
school
and
education
monitors
been a
these schools
distric
education
report to
the school
provisio
t has
district
sixteen
because if
n of
given
together
metropolitan
corporal
child
the
monitor the
And
punishment
rights
author
school
provincial
is found in
cell in all
offices who in the school,
schools
turn report to
principal
where
Ministry of
will fired
children
education,
from the
can
science and
school.
lodge
complain
fail to report
teachers to
the local
education
authority (as
they
should),
ity to
monit
or
Not at all
Local body
Corporal Punishment - 44
technology
t
(MEST).
any others
Government
Some
It also
Any person
It is
Canings
It was not
recommendati studies of
says that
who
still
are
until 2004
ons were that
China have
Heads of
contravenes
not
allowed
that the
the stick
suggested
schools
subsection
banne
for boys
Supreme
should not be
that
will be
(1) is guilty
d by
only.
Court of
thicker than
corporal
responsi
of an
the
Canada
1.5cm in
punishment
ble to
offence and
gover
ruled that
diameter and
is a
prevent
liable on
nment
corporal
that the
significant
corporal
conviction t
of the
punishment
number of
factor in the
punishm
a sentence
countr
was an
strokes should developmen ent.
which could
y.
unreasonabl
not exceed
t of violent
be imposed
e
than ten
attitudes
for assault.
application
before 2012.
and actions.
of force in
the
maintenanc
e of
classroom
discipline.
Corporal Punishment - 45
Global Prohibition of the Corporal Punishment
Despite the rule of corporal punishment in South Korea governments around the globe have
banned on corporal punishment. The reason for this ban is to apply child rights in classroom
and deal them as free human beings. Here in below is the list of countries and their ban on
corporal punishment.
Table: 2
Ban on Corporal Punishment in School
Country
banned
Country
banned
Country
banned
Country
banned
Country
banned
in
in
in
in
in
School
School
School
School
School
Sweden
1979
Cyprus
1994
Germany
2000
Hungary
2005
Spain
2007
Finland
1983
Latvia
1998
Iceland
2003
Greece
2006
Luxembourg
2008
Norway
1987
Croatia
1999
Ukraine
2003
Netherlands
2007
Tunisia
2010
Austria
1989
Israel
2000
Romania
2004
New
2007
South Sudan
2011
Zealand
www.endcorporalpunishment.org
The tables above showed that the corporal punishment has been prohibited in 117 countries
and still it is legal in 81 country of the world.
Teacher’s Perception on Corporal Punishment
Despite the ban on corporal punishment in most countries, there are still reported acts of
corporal punishment being used by teachers. The corporal punishment is banned by law but it
is not easy to ban in classroom. Most teachers still support the use of corporal punishment
and this view of teachers has not changed much since corporal punishment was first banned
in schools. A research conducted in Australia found that most teachers view the use of
Corporal Punishment - 46
corporal punishment as necessary and many would like to use the cane as a last resort
(www.education.qld.gov.au).
Corporal punishment in Pakistan has been used in school for nearly 143 years (Iqbal, 2003).
Recently, effort has been made to ban corporal punishment. Teacher’s opinions supporting
this ban are growing. A poll conducted in USA by ABC news on the title “Support for
Spanking” it was found that sixty five percent of American approve of spanking although
only 26 percent say that grade-school teachers should be allowed to spank kids at school
(www.search.abcnews.go .com/query.html). Teachers in Bangkok are unhappy about the ban
on corporal punishment and fear that it will results in students becoming more aggressive
(Bangkok Post, 13 September 2000). A secondary school executive association member in
Bangkok felt that the “ban would infringe on the rights of teachers”, and a teacher further
stated “if I cannot control them, I have to hit them in these cases” (The National, 14
September 2000). Teachers use corporal punishment in school of Kenya and Botswana
because the punishment is expected by the parents. Parents endorse the use of corporal
punishment as it is the method they themselves use to discipline their own children at home
(UNICEF Asian Report, 2001 & Human Rights Watch Kenya, 1999).
Before the ban of corporal punishment in South Africa, male teachers tend to favor corporal
punishment, as they do younger teachers under the age of 25 years (Rice, 1987). Students
entering training colleges bring with them their own discipline experiences and ideas of how
to discipline. These trainees brought strong beliefs about caning to colleges of education
primarily from their schools rather that their homes (Tafa, 2oo2:19). The reason was that
teachers were poorly trained for classroom management and hence they brought their own
drawing as experiences to discipline the child with the cane (UNICEF Asian Report, 2001:
Human Rights Watch Kenya, 1999). It appears that as students get older, teachers administer
Corporal Punishment - 47
less corporal punishment possibly as a result of being afraid of retaliation. In a study in Teenagers it was also found that teachers with emotional problems are more likely to use corporal
punishment (Hyman, 1990).
As we know the corporal punishment is ban in South Africa, Cohen (1996) conducted a study
on teachers and pupils attitudes towards corporal punishment found that “teachers are
ambivalent towards corporal punishment, their views are still not totally in line with the
literature, nor with the aims of the new education policy”. The majority of teachers in the
study felt that corporal punishment was necessary in order to maintain discipline. A research
of teachers’ perception towards corporal punishment in South Africa found that many school
principal as stating they missed corporal punishment because some boys ask for it (KwaZulu
Natal, The Teacher, March 1999).
From above or above research, it seems that numerous educators and teachers in world
continue to believe that corporal punishment has benefits. Many teachers feel that without
corporal punishment classrooms are out of control. Furthermore, they feel that they are not
equipped with alternatives to effectively deal with classroom management.
The discussion is evident that there is different view of teachers about the effect of corporal
punishment. Within the literature there are those that support and those that oppose the use of
corporal punishment. Researchers on the other hand opposed the corporal punishment and
viewed about the harmful effects of corporal punishment as not only lasting childhood but
often well into adulthood. It has more negative impact rather than positive impact.
Theoretical Framework
Bandura’s Social learning Theory (1963)
Corporal Punishment - 48
Bandura’s Social Learning Theory (1963) explains that how social variables have an
influence on behavior. This is suitable when examining the school context, as teachers are
social variables that have influence over learner’s behavior. The relevance of acquisition and
imitation of behavior, especially when a social model is involved (Bandura & Mac Donald
(1963). They stated that “imitation is an indispensable aspect of learning of which the
acquisition period can be shortened through the provision of models". Within the teaching
context, the teacher is a social variable that is likely to be a positive role model (through
which learning should occur) in the face of more negative modeling directly after it is learnt,
they may do so at another time (Bandura & Mac Donald, 1963). Bandura also explains that
learning does occur without reinforcement through observation, even when the behavior is
not reproduced during acquisition, and is not immediately apparent. Imitation is important in
the acquisition of all behavior whether positive or negative changed (Bandura & Walters,
1963). The reinforcement of the behavior is not necessary for new responses be learnt and
existing hierarchies of previous responses to be changed . Children learn behavior that they
have observed from their parents and others (Bandura & Walters, 1963).
In many cultures children do not do what adults tell them to do but rather what they see adults
do changed (Bandura & Walters, 1963:19). Observing models produces three effects:
observers may require new responses, inhibitory responses may be strengthened or
weakened, and observation can elicit previously learnt matching responses changed (Ibid).
Through observation children learn new responses. One of the new behaviors observers such
as children can acquire is aggressive responses to situations. And experiment of Bandura’s
studying the transmission of novel responses revealed that “the children who observed the
aggressive models displayed a great number of precisely imitative aggressive responses,
where such responses rarely occurred in either the no-regressive model group or control
group changed (Ibid: 61)”. Once children have learnt aggressive responses as domain ones,
Corporal Punishment - 49
there is high probability that they will display this reaction when feeling frustrated as well
changed (Ibid). For example, when children fight teachers and parents often deal with the
situation using an aggressive response such as corporal punishment. Through this reaction,
they are reinforcing the behavior they are trying to eliminate.
Previously learnt matching responses can be elicited through generalization, that is, “the
similarity between the original learning situation and the novel sets of cues” changed
(Bandura & Walters, 1963: 8). There is the possibility that the learnt behavior will be
repeated in a similar situation, thus the behavior in one context could repeated in another
context, which may not always be appropriate. For example, children do not learn do
distinguish between the appropriate display of violence used in a boxing ring as opposed to
violence when fighting with the sibling. The difficulty arises with irrelevant cues. Learners
observe behavior in the school and classroom environment and maladaptive behavior may
result if appropriate generalization and discrimination are not learnt.
Social training produces the effect of strengthening or weakening responses. This is achieved
through the positive reinforcement of desirable behavior as well as the inhibition and
suppression of undesirable responses. As we grow older our learnt responses need to be
modified and children are taught to comply with social demands changed (Ibid). Some
parents, teachers and society try to teach learners appropriate behaviors and alter
inappropriate ones through the use of physical punishment.
According to changed Bandura and Walters, (1963: 12) “punishment is primarily concerned
with the direct administration so a noxious stimulus to an organism, the behavior of which is
intended to change”. Social learning theory also views punishment as a way of inhibiting
responses as opposed to producing avoidance responses. It believes that punishment does not
Corporal Punishment - 50
necessarily lead to real change in behavior, but rather to the discovering of ways in which to
avoid being found out or punished. External cues such as an adult who administers
punishment can result in emotive responses such as shame, fear or anger (Mowrer in Bandura
& Walters, 1963). Through the learning of the emotional cue children are then able to stop
the sequence of behavior or avoid the punishment. The production of emotionally
conditioned response is similar to non- reward as they both focus on socially disapproved
behavior. However with the punishment the emphasis is placed on the removal of the
disapproving behavior using physical and verbal punishment, rather than relying on its
disappearance through lack of reinforcement.
The resulting effect between non-reward and conditioned emotional response is different
Non- reward generally result in the extinction of the responses (Azrin 1959 in Bandura &
Walters, 1963) and aversive stimuli (physical and verbal punishment) suppress rather than
eliminate unapproved of responses and can sometimes result in generalized inhibition. That
is, the incorrectness of the behavior is not learnt. According to Bandura and Walters (1963:
15) “emotional responses established through aversive conditioning may motive socially
undesirable behavior patterns that are highly resistant to extinction”. Miller’s conflict
paradigm (in Bandura & Walters, 1963:16) also states that “inhibitory (fear or anxiety)
responses and the responses with which they compete, generalized to stimulus situations
similar to those in which they were originally learned”.
According to social learning theory, models are an important source for learning new
behaviors and for achieving behavioral change in institutionalized setting. Albert Bandura
(1965) mentioned that observational learning can occur in Live model, Verbal instruction
and symbolic. Bandura’s social learning theory also states that individual’s behavior is
influenced by the environment and characteristic of the person like person’s behavior
Corporal Punishment - 51
environment; personal qualities all reciprocally influence each other. It emphasizes the
importance of observing and modeling the behaviors, attitudes, and emotional reactions of
others. It is sometimes called social cognitive learning. Social learning theory talked about
environmental and cognitive factors to influence human learning and behavior. People learn
from one another by observational learning, imitation and modeling (Abbott, 2007).
This model had been applied to Social Learning theory and accounts for aggression response
being directed to someone other than aggression when there is similarity between the
observation of aggression and strength of the original fear response. This is known as
displace aggression. Aggressive responses can be displaced onto a scapegoat when the agent
of frustration is feared. Displaced aggression is relevant as children who are subjected to
corporal punishment may act aggressively not on the person with whom they are angry, but
rather onto another target.
Within the context of the school and classroom, teachers are “social variables” that influence
and model behavior for learners. Teachers model both good and bad behaviors. Social
learning theory also tells us that children often imitate adult’s behavior; an act such as
corporal punishment in the classroom could be imitated elsewhere. Once children have
observed behavior such as corporal punishment, they do not associate it strictly with the
classroom. On the plain ground children might see an incident or experience a situation
similar to the classroom and generalize the behavior. Furthermore, if punishment of a
physical nature is used, children learn ways of stopping the sequence of events or avoiding
the punishment. This implies that children have not internalized the lesson about the wrongs
of their behavior. It is important to consider that an important aspect of teaching is to
discriminate between right and wrong behavior and also to model right and wrong behavior.
Corporal Punishment - 52
Thus, social variables are able to influence behavior. Children acquire behaviors from
observing others and can use learnt behavior in similar situation. Aggressive responses which
children have learnt through observation can be displaced into innocent targets and not on the
original aggressor.
Power Theory
Power can be seen as evil or unjust, power makes action possible (Lukes, 1974). Steven
lukes outlines two dimensions through which one dimension is power is decision making,
exercise in formal institutions and measure it by the outcomes of decisions and in two
dimension: Decision making and agenda-setting, institutions and informal influences,
measure extent of informal influence and their techniques are influence, inducement,
persuasion, authority coercion and direct force. Social psychologists John R.P. French and
Bertram Raven (1959) developed a schema of sources of power by which to analyze how
power work in a specific relationship. According to French and Raven, power must be
distinguished from influence in the following way: A-B in such a way that A use power for
A’s desired changed in B more likely. So power is fundamentally relative. It depends on the
specific understanding and A and B each apply to their relationship and interestingly, requires
B’s recognition of a quality in A which would influence B to change according to desire of A.
Following the wrong power exercise can have negative effects, including a reduction in A’s
own power.
Discipline Theories
All theories of student discipline stress the need for clear communication and consistency
(Liz MC, 2010). According to Mc (2010), discipline theories of students’ behavior and
classroom behavioral management such as the models of Glasser, Skinner, Canter and Jones
Corporal Punishment - 53
emerged in the nineteen seventies by educators in response to the concerns among teachers
about students’ behavior. These theories are supplemented by logical consequences,
transactional analysis, teacher effectiveness training, judicious discipline and discipline with
dignity.
As a theory, explains Mc (2010), the Glasser model suggests that teachers should act as
helpers to children. Teachers should also create the climate and curricula that foster
appropriate behavior by satisfying the needs of belonging and feelings of empowerment by
the students. The assumption of this theory as first posited by Willian Glasser, according to
Edwards (2000) is that students have the ability to make their own positive choices or
become more responsible in a behavioral sense (p. 184). The Skinner model takes the
behaviorist approach to classroom management according to Mc (2010) in which teachers
train students behavior in order to achieve desired outcomes. This involves constant positive
and negative reinforcement so that good behavior is reward and bad behavior is ignored or
punished immediately. The central model is a theory of assertive discipline. Edwards (2000)
explain that assertive discipline is based on achieving rewards or avoiding punishment and is
guided by firm rules which give it a preventative orientation and places the responsibility for
bad student behavior on the teacher. The assumption guiding the Jones model is that children
need to be controlled to behave properly and is appropriate to pressure students to behave by
reducing the time they are allowed to spend in preferred activity. Logical consequences are
the expression of the reality of the social order and results that can be expected whenever and
individual fails to abide by the rules of living that all human beings must learn in order to
function effective. The consequences are related directly to the misbehavior and devoid of
any moral judgments. The assumption of transactional analysis is that behavior is an
outgrowth of information stored in the subconscious mind that has been learned by
interacting with others. The critical assumption of teachers’ effectiveness training is that
Corporal Punishment - 54
human beings are self-regulating and can thus learn to manage their own behavior. Students
therefore commonly rebel when their teachers actively regulate their behavior. Rewards and
praise may undermine intrinsic motivation. Gathercoal (2000), not violate school interest.
This theory also assumes that students can help create valid rules for the classroom while
consequences provide a better way to improve the class room behavior of children that
punishment. Discipline with dignity is undergirded by the philosophy of humanism. It is an
approach, according to the creators Curwin and Mendler (1988) that values the self-esteem of
students. It is the belief of the pioneers that students will protect their self-esteem or dignity
at all costs.
The review showed that there is no research done in private school that relates to corporal
punishment. Since this is “close door world” in Nepal. I was very much interested to do
research on it because I had both the access to private school and desire in understanding
such study.
Conceptual Mapping
The social learning theories, power theories, discipline theories and zero tolerance are used to
analysis the perception of teachers. I have tried to see how these theories contribute in
designing the teacher’s attitudes. The society from where teachers come, they acquire
knowledge through formal education, they live in a specific school environment, they abide
school rules and regulation and they follow school leaders' desire are the component which
shape the teachers perception and activities. For the smooth exploration, I developed the
following conceptual map of my study.
Social learning theories,
power theories discipline
and zero tolerance theories
Teacher’s knowledge
through education
School environment
Rules and regulation
School leader direction
and perception
Corporal Punishment - 55
Teacher’s knowledge
attitudes and
understanding
Teacher’s action
Findings
The above frame of research explains that there are three agents of learning which helps
teachers to develop their attitudes towards punishment and fix their activities in school or
classroom activities. In this background I have used the concept of social learning theories
that says most human behavior is learned observationally through modeling: from observing
others one forms an idea of how new behaviors are performed, and on later occasions this
coded information serves as a guide for action.” There are three core concepts at the heart of
social learning theory. A) People can learn through observation B) Internal mental states are
an essential part of this process c) Something has been learned, it does not mean that it will
result in a change in behavior.
John R.P. French and Bertram Raven (1959) developed a schema of sources of power by
which to analyze how power work in a specific relationship. There is a one defined
relationship between the teachers and students as a guru and chela. Teachers are considering
as powerful person so he alone can take decision for the activities of the children. Teachers
use power for his/ her desired change in students more likely. So power is fundamentally
relative. Here I have used the concept that how teachers used his/her power to change
students' behavior. How teachers activities influence students to change according to desire of
teacher. To what extent teachers want to go (corporal punishment or alternative method) to
maintain the discipline.
Corporal Punishment - 56
CHAPTER III
Methodology
This chapter describes the methodology used in the research design for the study procedure,
data collection and analysis to find the answer of research questions. Illustration of views and
opinions of teachers are mainly based on the primary sources and various literature and
reports are reviewed for the secondary sources.
Research Design
Prior to decide the methodology for this study, I studied number of approaches to do
research. By this I came to know that research methodology is a broader guideline of theories
and analysis of preceding a research (Koirala, 2009:18). It may comprise of many methods
and techniques. So it is not method itself. Methods are combination of procedures, tools and
techniques in the process of research (Subedi, 2009:58). When setting up methodological
frame work for a research, it is necessary to consider a type and nature of the research.
As per the nature of the study, the research design was qualitative and quantitative (mixed).
Quantitative research is about numbers and the counting and measuring of things-objective
hard data. It involves the use of the structured questions with a limited number of
predetermined response options. Usually, a relatively large number of respondents are
involved. The main aim of quantitative research is an accurate, reliable explanation. In
quantitative data all aspects of the study are carefully designed before data is collected.
Researcher uses tools, such as questionnaire to collect data. Here I used structured questions
(see appendix A) as a questionnaire with twenty predetermined options where little bit large
sample one hundred teachers was involved.
Corporal Punishment - 57
Axiologically I hold the belief that corporal punishment is a wrong approach to apply.
Epistemologically I believe that I generated information from various sources.
Methodologically I applied mixed method for data generation and interpretation.
Qualitative research is collecting, analyzing, and interpreting data by observing what people
do and/or say. It is much more subjective than quantitative research and typically uses
individual interviews focus group discussion and observation. These three tools are suitable
to find the perception of individuals. So here I have used these there instruments for this
research. On the other hand it is a research that produces finding not arrived at by any means
of statistical procedures or other means of quantification, it also tells about persons, lives,
stories, behavior, but also about organizational functioning, social movements, or
international relationships. Strausss and Corbin (1990, p.2) say “ the qualitative methods of
data gathering and analysis are used due to its validity in giving satisfactory results” and
according to them the reason for using qualitative methods is also to get new and fresh views
on issues about which some have already been known.
Qualitative research generates data/ information by interviewing, observing, focused group
discussion and dairy keeping processes. Since I have used qualitative approach to research it
provides description of individual, community, a society or any event or any other
investigation (Thakur, 1997). The description also gives the characteristics of individuals,
describes facilities, and states the habits of the teachers and their attitudes. Qualitative
research is an approach to gathering and analyzing information using informal and formal
techniques of data collection and analysis (Wolff & Pant, 2005, p.116). In qualitative
research personal experience, life history, interview, observation, discussion is generally
used to collect the information (ibid).
Corporal Punishment - 58
Based on other discussion, I think the mixed method designs has focused on the use of
component (parallel and sequential) designs in which different elements are kept separate
(Creswell, 1994). Here I tried to keep the quantitative data and qualitative data separately
allowing each element to be true to its own paradigmatic and design requirements. Most
reports of mixed methods studies report either parallel or sequential component designs.
Mixed method is helpful for two separate studies which happen to be about the same topic.
Few studies report truly integrated designs (Greene et al., 1989)-perhaps because the
technology for managing integrated analyses is still in development (Bazeley, 2012). The
mixed methods may not provide corroborative evidence; they may well add depth or breadth
to a study and perhaps even hold the key to understanding the process which are occurring
(Jick, 1979).
Table 3
Validity Approach of Mixed Method
Sample integration
The extent to which the relationship between
the quantitative and qualitative sampling
designs yields quality meta-inferences.
Inside-Outside
The extent to which the researcher accurately
presents and appropriately utilizes the
insider’s view and the observer’s views for
Paradigmatic mixing
purpose such as description and explanation.
The extent to which the researcher’s
epistemological, ontological, axiological,
methodological, and rhetorical beliefs the
underlie the quantitative and qualitative
approaches are successfully i) combined or b)
Corporal Punishment - 59
Multiple Validities
blended into a usable package.
To extend to which addressing legitimating
of the quantitative and qualitative
components of the study result from the use
of quantities, qualitative, and mixed validity
type, yielding high quality meta-inferences.
Sources RESEARCH IN THE SCHOOLS
Mid-South Educational Research Association 2006
As this study was intended to analyze teachers’ perception on corporal punishment. I have
thought that the mixed method is very useful to look into the problem from multi-dimensional
perspective. Another advantage of mixed method is that different methods are necessary to
view or construe the object of the research in different ways. To labeled respondents,
subjects, participants or informants variously (Barbour, 1998), I have thought that mixed
method is very appropriative and hence applied mixed research paradigm for this study.
Population
The area which is taken for the study purpose is Kathmandu. The study population consisted
of teachers from 5 private schools of Kathmandu. Therefore the sample size for this study
consists of 100 teachers, drawn from a total population of 200 teachers. The study sites were
selected for my convenience to observe regularly and to distribute the questionnaire. Schools
which I have selected had a large number of teachers with economic, cultural, social, ethnic
and geographical backgrounds. Out of the 100 participants, 59% were male and 41% female.
The sample was mostly composed of teachers age 20 to 34 years of age (67%) with the
remainder age between 35 and above of age (22%). The majority of the sample (66%)
indicates that they had been teaching for less than 8 years. 34% of the teachers had been
teaching at school for 8 years or more. It is relevant to note that 68% of the sample had been
Corporal Punishment - 60
teaching the English, math and science and rest 32% teacher had been teaching Nepali and
other subjects.
Research Instruments
Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected to triangulate for their authenticity. The
quantitative data were collected through the use of questionnaire, which was used to elicit
information on teachers’ perception on the corporal punishment in selected private schools of
Nepal. This was complemented with qualitative data generated through observation,
interviews and focus group discussions. Close observation and key information’s’ interview
were the methods applied in the study for the purpose of information collection. I have used
different types of tools to generate and gather data. These tools that I used were as follows.
Questionnaire
The questionnaire contained three different sections (see appendix B). The first section
requested biographical data of research participants such as information about sex, level of
teaching, age; subject taught etc. participants were provided with spaces to fill in relevant
information. The second section consisted of a selection of controversial statements on
corporal punishment. The statements found in their section were to determined teachers’
attitudes to corporal punishment and their alternative strategies. A five point rating scale
ranging from strongly agree, undecided, disagree and strongly disagree was used for
participants to rate their responses. There were 21 controversial statements and teachers were
asked to tick on the statements which subject indicates his or her response. Because Likert
items are often accompanied by visual analog scale, the items sometimes called scale
themselves. This the source of much confusion so I applied Likert item refer to an individual
item.
Corporal Punishment - 61
In third section consisted of open ended questions on teachers, views on corporal punishment.
Principals of schools from the sample were contact through my own personal relation. The
principals agreed to distribute the questionnaire among staff, a formal letter requesting
permission (see appendix D) for their staffs’ participation in the study was address to each
principal. Furthermore a formal letter address to teachers was attached to each questionnaire.
This letter explained the teachers the aim of the study and requested their honest
participation. Participants were able to respond freely and state their beliefs and opinions.
Observation
I was aware that observation is a direct way of gathering information by observing events as
they occur. It is also the process of recognizing and noting people, objects and occurrences
rather than asking for information (Wolff & Pant, 2005, PP.233-234). This tool helped me to
see the real situation of the school and teachers and coordinators' behaviors towards the
students because my eyes were the only instruments to capture information of the
environment. It is also the reaction of sensory apparatus that a person sees, smells, hears and
feels (Baker, 1994 cited in Dhakal, 2009).
Direct observation provided me into first-hand contact with its reality. The process was
conducted through visiting, observing and noting the incidents which were happened inside
the classroom and school premises (Wolf & Pant, 2005). Kitchin and Tate (2000, p.219)
mentioned that observation can be done either in the field or in the laboratory. This directness
also provides a degree of validity as it concentrates upon what people really do as opposed to
what they say they will.
On the process of the observation, I myself presented in the field indirectly so that teachers
would not know propose and he/she would not feel uneasy and the naturalistic environment
Corporal Punishment - 62
could not be disturb. I sat outside the classroom from where I could observe all the
phenomena. I noted down the entire information and daily incident related to punishment on
the piece of the paper rather than note book so that the teachers would not have any feeling
that I was observing something from outside. I made note while I returned to my home which
I had used as a raw data. I have tabulated all the information in the form of the sentences. To
be clear many time I informally asked the reasons of the punishment to the respective
teachers as well as students separately which helped me to know the teachers perception.
After the classroom observation I informally communicated with the teachers who had
leisure, on about the reasons of punishment which students got and about students’ classroom
activities and the faced problem. In this process other teachers also expressed their opinion,
which helped me to get more information. Generally teachers were sharing their problems
with the other teachers in groups. In this process also I noted down their reaction and
perception about the incidents which was happened in the class room. To see the school
leader and co-coordinator activities, I sat in the side of the assembly square and noted down
the everyday activities.
Focus Group Discussion
A focus group generally involves 6-10 teachers. Generally this number of teachers was found
in every time in teachers’ staff room. So each day I did discussion with them in an interesting
way. Many questions were kept to them during the discussion (see appendix D). This process
was more suitable for me to collect information; particularly, the inner feelings and emotional
attitude of the informants with respect to the situation (Wolf & Pant, 2005). It also helped me
to bring out the hidden information during the discussion between each other. This turned out
to be more suitable for me to generate insightful information and to encourage the
participants to give more meaningful answers through interactive discussion (Gurung, 2009).
Corporal Punishment - 63
The purpose of this method was to acquire information from the teachers about their
perception on corporal punishment. The discussion was conducted several times in the staff
room during the Tiffin time. Participation were divided into several group to make
homogenous group because if they were in heterogeneity such as male and female, young
and old etc. there would not come out the information by equal term as expected (Khanal,
2003, p.86). Khanal also suggested that, some informants would not like to share their
internal feelings among many others. Therefore, I changed my role as a good mediator, clever
and experienced, to bring out essential information from the group discussion.
Students were asked indirectly and very friendly manner about the teachers and types of
punishment they got in the classroom. Many days I went to the classroom and sat with the
students to know about teachers activities. I behaved with them as a friend so that they
expressed their feelings very easily.
Ethical Consideration
The consideration of ethics in study is important because there is the possibility that
interaction with participants may inadvertently harm them in some unintended way. Ethical
guidelines are not limited to any discipline, as psychologists also have detailed guidelines
regulating research involving intervention (APA, 2003). Ethical principles and code of
conduct covers a diverse range of research issues, for example there is a whole section
dealing with privacy and confidentiality (Section 4 of the APA’s code). Many universities of
Australia developed guidelines for conducting ethical research (Polonsky, 1998). There are
two philosophical approaches deontological and teleological that closely relate to research
ethics. Deontological philosophies emphasize moral obligation or commitments that should
be binding or necessary for proper conduct (Ferrell &Dubinsky, 1998). To put it quite simply,
a deontological approach means that we should not harm participants in any way no matter
what the potential benefit. A theological approach is frequently used in medical research.
Corporal Punishment - 64
From above discussion I came to know that ethical consideration is very important for the
study. The finding which I got from the study may harm to school or teachers. I have not
mentioned the names of the observed schools and the participant teachers and students in
focus group discussion, interview and questionnaire.
Data collection method
Principal was contacted through formal letter (see appendix C) and personal relationship and
requested permission for their staffs’ participation. The questionnaire was distributed by the
principal without my presence. An open ended question on corporal punishment was also
used in questionnaire to obtain the view of teacher on corporal punishment. After collecting
the all distributed questionnaire, the principals of all five schools agreed to allow me to inter
the school premises according to my convenience time. Principals were requested not to tell
the purpose of my presence in the school premises for 30 days. After taking the permission
from the principal, close observation of the teachers and administrators action were observed
under the guideline of above mention research questions. The classes were observed from me
from the outside indirectly. I sat indirectly at the side of the school play ground such that I
collected much qualitative information. Qualitative information related to classroom practice
about the real situation of corporal punishment was taken from the school.
During this time I have collected the qualitative information of real situation of the school. It
would not be sufficient for taking school related information. Focus group discussion is the
other important task for gaining access to data/ information. So I have started to tell them my
purpose of being there. Principals of the schools also encourage their staffs’ participation in
the discussion.
Corporal Punishment - 65
Processing and Analysis of Data
All the data, information and opinions gathered from questionnaire, FGD, and observation
was processed, analyzed and interpreted to prepare the study report. The study is mixed type
so mainly percentile is used to analysis and interpretation the quantitative information.
Mostly descriptive method is used for analysis and interpretation of qualitative information.
In statistics, a percentile is the value of a variable below which certain percent of
observations fall. The term percentile and the related term percentile rank are often used in
the reporting of scores from norm-referenced tests. For example, if a score is in 46%, it is
higher than 85% of other scores. We may indicate the 25 % percentile as first quartile, 50% as
the median and 75% as the third quartile. So I thought percentile is the appropriate to analysis
the Likert scale.
The qualitative data analysis is as working with data, organizing it, breaking it into
manageable units, synthesizing it, searching for patterns, discovering what is important and
what is to be learned and deciding what to tell others (Bogdan & Bikeden, 1982: p.145 ). The
qualitative method consisted of three kind of data collection: a) In- depth, open ended
interviews: b) Direct observation and c) Written documents (Patton, 1990; p.12). And
quantitative methods mostly consisted questionnaire. So questionnaire was also taken as an
instrument of data collection. All kinds of data collection consisted various activities such as
direct quotations about the experiences of people, opinions, feelings, knowledge, people’s
behavior, actions, interpersonal interactions, organizational processes, expert’s quotation
from documents, programmed records, memoranda and correspondence and open ended
writer responses to questionnaire and survey.
The study has tried to explore the perceptions of private school teachers through interview,
questionnaire and observation and thus information is mostly based on human behavior,
Corporal Punishment - 66
feelings, expression, works and documents etc. collecting person’s feelings, expressions and
inner interest is not a simple job. The information that I obtained were flexible, contextual
and more subjective (IIEP, 2007).
The process of data analysis in this study sequentially moved from transcribing and
horizonalization, to categorizing and coding of the handwritten and audio-taped responses
from the interviews (Creswell, 2007). Experience of the phenomenon, categorizing them into
themes for the cluster of meaning and writing textual description is the description of what
the participants' experience. Structural description was the description of the context or
setting that influenced how the participants experienced the phenomenon was my approach to
data analysis (Creswell, 2007).
So data were kept categorizing into three terms like teachers belief, teachers attitudes and
parents support to the teachers about corporal punishment in school. Numerical analysis as
percentage was used to interpret the quantitative data. The analysis of qualitative data was
done using coding process. Codes were categorical and thematic. The interpretation of
analyzed data was done using different perspectives as explained in theoretical framework of
the study. The collected data were encoded, and similar information was kept in one baskets.
So there were different information baskets. Then data were linked to different theoretical
perspectives. The information obtained from both methods was critically analyzed by using
social learning theory, power theory, discipline theory and zero tolerance policy.
Corporal Punishment - 67
CHAPTER IV
Stakeholders' Belief on Corporal Punishment
Cultural Belief
Culture has guidelines in particular situation (Haralambus & Holborn, 1995). These
guidelines define culture as a way of life, collection of ideas and habit, which transmits from
one generation to another. They clarified that human actions and behaviors are based on the
guidelines that people learn. For them teachers and school leaders adopt certain perception
which has been guided by certain values, norms and routines. Culture is also the set values,
activities and experiences and traditions that individual and groups hold (2008, p.54). Tuohy
(1999) has further noted that in teaching learning process have certain beliefs, ideas, values,
activities, symbol, rituals and behaviors, which are known as the classroom culture.
As I found that school as well as classroom culture is traditional. Teachers, principals and
parents accepted and followed the traditional process of teaching and learning. Students were
also accepting it like natural phenomena. In such context I tried to tabulate the perception of
teachers, parents and students which I found during the discussion with them.
Table: 4
Stakeholders' Perception on Corporal Punishment
Teachers perception
Parents' perception
Students' perception
Most of the teachers
Most of the parents answered
Almost all students replied
answered that
that at least children’s fear of
they don’t prefer
Corporal punishment
corporal punishment helps to
authoritarian teachers who
is not a right way to
create an environment of
used the very strict measures
Corporal Punishment - 68
solve the problem or
doing homework and
of discipline are used.
to treat the children.
learning at home as well as
Students were beaten in the
They too said that
in school also. They also
class without any reasons but
but sometimes we
believed that when children
they didn’t have place or
can apply these
are afraid then only they
person to report it. Parents
methods when
learn. So they viewed that
and school principals support
children are out of
children should respect their
the teachers. So we have to
control.
teachers.
tolerate it.
Teaching learning process in classroom consists of different activities like delivering the
content, involving the student in the teaching learning process and evaluating them
(Alexander, 2000; Jackson, 1990). Teaching learning process in all the school which I have
taken as a sample found the similar activities. Most of the teachers whom I visited had
followed the same process, acts and activities. They directly entered into the classroom and
started to ask the homework, mathematical formula which was given to previous day in
maths, seventy five district name in social study and full form of difference device of
computer in computer, scientific name of different plants or animal in science etc. when
students could not answer the question either they had to offer their palm to the teacher for
the duster or stick or they were send outside the classroom for the punishment. It means they
had developed a certain classroom culture and followed them, which I found a traditional
way of teaching. Parents and teachers all came from similar school background so they had
strong faith that the teaching and learning means memorizing the points, formula and answers
of different questions. What I found in mathematics class is that when students asked the
process of derivation of formula? Teachers replied that "you don’t ask derivation in exam".
Corporal Punishment - 69
Hayes (2008) says that teacher has great opportunity to enter in students’ secret worlds and
discover children’s hidden treasures. On the other hand Alexander claims that classroom talk
can be expository, interrogatory, dialogic, or evaluative. In this process, teacher explains,
transmits ideas, ask questions, then tries to find out and establish the relationship among the
facts and lastly teachers delivers judgment (Alexander, 2000, p.515). The same process was
done through students’ side. It was also expected that successful teachers utilize every aspect
of their professional repertoire and capitalize them upon the ‘actor himself or herself to deal
with everyday school situation (Dixie, 2008). Students as I found were eager to learn
something new. They asked several questions and raised issues with regard to their problems
aiming to have their solution by the teachers. Here the teacher needs to understand the reason
and ways of solution (Hayes, 2008, P.147). But in my study schools teachers were not
responding to all children in the classroom.
So teaching learning process was focusing on exam. Teachers as well as parents only wanted
to see the good marks in examination. They did pay any attention for the usefulness of the
lesson which students were learning in their daily life. The exam orientation culture was
continuing in the private school.
Necessity of Corporal Punishment in the eye of Teacher
Most of the teachers replied that corporal punishment should be given to the students if all
method became fail to improve the condition of students. They also said that it should be
applied for some special condition. For some teachers the corporal punishment was not right
way to solve the problem or not an effective way to treat the children: these teachers were not
getting such environment which encouraged them to use the alternative means. Some
teachers replied that corporal punishment should be discouraged as it only demoralizes and
disturbs the mental aspect of a child as a learner. It can be used as last as weapon to maintain
Corporal Punishment - 70
discipline but should not be charged as first and easy weapon. Some teachers said that it
should be given to the children by seeing the condition of mistake but this is not compulsory.
Only one teacher expressed his opinion as corporal punishment is not good for children. His
argument was that children by nature are noisy and naughty and giving such punishment to
them means violating their rights. He further said, corporal punishment is good for the
criminals not for the students.
It clarified that the practicing the punishment system in classroom is very normal and most of
teachers agreed it is necessary. They felt that corporal punishment is necessary only for
maintaining the discipline rather than identifying their needs and solving their problem.
Almost all teachers were agreed that it should be applied if all alternatives became failed.
None of the teacher took classroom management, child centre teaching, and democratic
teaching as alternative sources. They only preferred counseling as an alternative source to
control the children or to maintain the discipline. They did not see their weakness and blamed
curriculum, educational policy and school environment.
When I asked the teachers about their favorable teacher When they were in school. Almost all
teachers took the name of teacher who was very strict and they even could not see the
teacher’s eye straightly. In this regard teachers were also impressed through environmental
and cognitive factors interact to influence human learning and behavior. Social learning
theory talks about how both environmental and cognitive factors interact to influence human
learning and behavior. It focuses on the learning that occurs within a social context. It
considers that people learn from one another, including such concepts as observational
learning, imitation, and modeling (Abbott, 2007). In case of my study I found that the
teachers were the victim of the social context: they were not thinking out of this context.
Corporal Punishment - 71
Their model teacher of school which they have taken as a powerful person motivated them to
follow the same model in school implying that teachers themselves were taken as powerful
person in the classroom. Hayes (2008) denied this powerful looking desire of the teachers. He
further prescribed classroom should be child centered to reduce the punishment system. The
role of teacher for him is a facilitator, supporter, and advisor and guide rather than
knowledgeable and powerful person.
Teacher’s opinion on Corporal Punishment
Some of the teachers mention that corporal punishment is necessary not to make students
learn like parrot but to keep them discipline because we don’t have different subjects, fields
or classes to teach students according to desire like in America or any other developed
countries. They asked the question that how can they maintain discipline in classroom who
don’t wish to read and violet\ the rules and regulation. Some teachers kept their view like
nobody is perfect at any stage of their life. So the students in their life, they commit mistakes
but all of them don’t deserve corporal punishment. They mentioned that punishment should
be given on the bases of the nature of the mistakes. Some required to be counseled whereas
some required to be forgiven after realizing their mistakes.
I found that in every school students were told how to behave, what to learn, when and how
to learn it, and then they were assessed. I also found that when students asked, “Why do we
have to learn this?” they were treated with a cold stare or told, “because it’s on the test”.
Then, if the students were unsuccessful in proving that they learned what has been demanded
of them in the way that the system has decided they must prove it, otherwise they were
punished with low grades. Here I realized that worse, the system labeled them “failures.”
Teachers were powerful because students had to do whatever the teachers used to say them, if
Corporal Punishment - 72
they used to follow the different way that would be the mistakes. In this kind of system, I
found students as powerless beings.
I found that punishment system had made students powerless. The powerlessness of the
students had also yielded joy to the teachers. The power theory mentions that there are three
type of power (www. ascd.org/publications). First, there is power over, which is frequently
the first thing that comes to mind when we hear the word power. This is the urge to control
others, may be for personal satisfaction, and may be “for their own good”. Second there
power within. This might be called personal empowerment. Third is power with, which is the
power we achieve when we work cooperatively with others. Traveling to the moon and back
would be an example of the power that can be harnessed when people work together (www.
ascd.org/publications). Students who were penalized were losing all three types of power.
For example when we punishment the students, the feel the dominated and power less, this
type of humiliation make him/her very weak and discouraged to work together and do not
cooperate with others.
Teachers’ Strategies to use Corporal Punishment
Some teachers expressed their strategies to use corporal punishment by saying “think globally
and act locally”. Their understanding was that corporal punishment is not a full methodology
to keep the environment of school sound and discipline but it can be used as the last alternate
depending upon the case of observation. They also hold the knowledge that all the students
are not grown up in the same way: some were very much used to corporal punishment. It is
where they applied corporal punishment like making students to stand up for some time in the
ground by holding their ears, Kneel down, Making them stand up on the bench, Pinching
cheeks or arms, to keep them in discipline, to make them learning at home or to do their
home work. These teachers also inculcated the knowledge that depending upon the various
Corporal Punishment - 73
factors and level of violation we should make students afraid of sending outside for some
time, sending them to the principal or slap them on the face or hit them with stick or duster on
the palm. Very few teachers replied that “teacher must make his or her mind for No physical
violation and verbal humiliation” to his/her students.
I found that parents also thought the same way that of teachers. Some of the others were of
the opinion that students must be viewed from both emic and etic perspectives and they
should be treated psychologically. But one teacher said that Corporal punishment like kneel
down is very useful for the children. In his view it is most effective than physical punishment
because it helps to change the mind of students to go in right way.
From above view of the stakeholders of education I understood that very few teachers were
completely against the corporal punishment. Most to them were felt that it is necessary in
some case and we can’t ignore it. Many of them connected corporal punishment with
discipline. So I asked them the meaning of discipline. They replied as students who obey the
teachers, follow the rule and regulation of the school and keep quite in the classroom as
discipline. In their view while teachers are teaching in the classroom students should not talk
to either and look here and there. They should do their homework in time. Some teachers also
mentioned that it is not Europe or America so we need corporal punishment.
From the analysis of the above discussion I found that teachers were totally ignoring the child
right. The convention on the Rights of the Child is the first legally binding international
instruments to incorporate the full range of human rights-civil, cultural, economic, political
and social rights. The convention sets out these rights in 54 articles and two optional
protocols it voices the basic human rights that children everywhere have: the right to survival;
to develop to the fullest; to protection from harmful influences, abuse and exploitation; and to
Corporal Punishment - 74
participate fully in family, culture and social life. The four principal of convention are nondiscrimination; devotion to the best interests of the child (UNICEF, 2009).
Some Students oriented Classes
Teachers were using the corporal punishment to keep the class quite, or to make them to do
whatever the teachers say. It means that classroom teaching were totally teachers oriented. In
the classes where they needed students' participation they were not applying punishment.
Music class, sports and drama class were such examples. There students were learning
interestingly and carefully and they were taking part in various activities in a decent manner.
Coaches, music teachers, and drama teachers didn’t let the students tell them how to do their
work harder at these pursuits than they do in academic classes, and generally achieve better
results. It is widely believed that discipline is required for students in order for them to be
successful in education, especially during the compulsory education period. Rosen (1997)
defines discipline as either a branch of knowledge-training that develops self-control,
character, efficiency and strict control to enforce obedience- or as a treatment that controls
and punishes as a system of rules. Eagleton (2001) defines it as a training which corrects
molds or perfects the mental faculties, or moral characters, obedience to authority or rules,
punishment to correct poor behaviors. However, discipline does not necessarily have to
involve corporal punishment. Corporal punishment is usually related to school discipline with
the term discipline itself which is problematic and has several ramifications for all actors in
education (Slee, 1995, Rosen 1997). Generally school discipline is defined as school policies
and actions taken by school personnel to prevent students from unwanted behaviors,
primarily focusing on school conduct codes and security methods, suspension from school,
corporal punishment, and teachers’ methods of managing students’ action in class (Cameron,
2006).
Corporal Punishment - 75
Students believed that all the coordinators, in-charge and teachers in school were using
corporal punishment as disciplinary measure and therefore they considered it “natural” to
receive such treatment. They didn’t have the courage to raise the voice because they could be
suppressed by school, teachers and even by family also.
I found that most of the teachers applying the corporal punishment to controlled the class. In
their view controlling the class means keeping the class quite whether it is acceptable by
students or not. The control of the class was excessive and teachers were discouraging the
students to make them quite by saying that this class is worst among all class and all the
students of this class were not decent as they could be. Teachers were forcefully making the
students to keep their head down to the desk for a long time to control the class. Below is the
response of the teachers in favor and against of corporal punishment.
Teachers’ Response against the use of Corporal Punishment
Figure 1: Teachers responses on punishment
only results the learners studying well
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1
Note:
1- Strongly agree
2
3
4
5
Corporal Punishment - 76
2- Agree
3- Undecided
4- Disagree
5- Strongly disagree
Only 27% of the teachers felt that punishment results the learner studying well. That means
73% of teachers opposed to this belief (see table1). So teachers from primary level to
secondary level did not believe that only the corporal punishment can results the learning
well because they believed on other alternative factor which are essential to make learning
environment better so there were no one who strongly agreed with giving punishment only
results learner studying well.
Figure 2: Teachers responses on when
children are afraid they don't learn
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
PERCENTAGE
10
5
0
1
RESPONSE
2
3
4
5
Corporal Punishment - 77
Out of the total sample 71% of teachers believed that when children are afraid they don’t
learn.
A total of 2o% teachers also believed it is true (see Table 2). 9% of the teachers of the
sample did not answer. Whereas 28% of teachers were strongly agreeing with this statement.
They believed on learning without fear. And 43% of teachers from the sample were agreed
with this statement because somewhere they felt fear is necessary. A small percentage only
2% of school level teacher felt fear is must to make the children learned whereas 4% of the
teachers agreed with this statement because somewhere they felt it is necessary.
Figure 3: Teachers responses on the
learner's fear of corporal punishment helps
to create an envirommet of learning
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
PERCENTAGE
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
RESPONSE
A small percentage of teacher’s favored corporal punishment helps to create an environment
of learning. Only 17% agreed with this statement and a large percent of sample 70%
disagreed with this statement (see Table). 0% agreed that learners fears of corporal
Corporal Punishment - 78
punishment helps to create the better environment of learning. Many teachers from primary
level to secondary level had the strong felling that only the learners fear is not good to create
the better environment.
They have completely rejected it but 17% of the school level
teachers agreed that the learners’ fears of corporal punishment help to create the better
environment of learning. They did not see it is the only one way to make the better
environment but they felt it is necessary to create the better environment.
Figure 4:Teachers responses on corporal
punishment is the best form of punishment
due to its short duration.
60
50
40
30
20
PERCENTAGE
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
RESPONSE
A large percentage (84%) of teachers from the sample were disagree with the statements that
corporal punishment is the best form of punishment because it is over quickly. 10% teachers
agreed with the statements. 6% of the teachers from the sample did not answer. Only 1% of
Corporal Punishment - 79
school teachers from the sample agree with the statements that it is the best form of
punishment because it is over quickly. They did not see the other option which could be
better than other so they were strongly agreed with this whereas 9% school teachers were
agreed with these statements because they thought it could be better but there may be the
other form which could be better than this. Little bit large 33% of teacher strongly disagreed
with this statements because there perception on corporal punishment is negative. Where a
large population 51 %( majority of teacher) were disagreed with this statement because they
thought it is not the best form of punishment, and they felt there are other alternative form of
punishment.
Figure 5: Teachers responses on corporal
punishment increases aggression in learners.
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
A large percentage of sample 67% agree with the statement that corporal punishment increase
aggression in learners. Similarly 23% of the sample did not agree with it. 10% teachers of the
sample were undecided. A few i.e. 12% school teachers were strongly agreed with this
statement because they believed that corporal punishment increase aggression in school
students whereas a large number of teachers from primary level to secondary level agreed
with this statements and voted for 2 because not strongly but they agree with the statements.
Corporal Punishment - 80
Not very small number 19% teachers were disagreed with the statement because they did not
believed that corporal punishment increase the aggression in the learners whereas 4% of
school teachers completely disagree with this statement because they believed corporal
punishment do not increase aggression in students.
Figure 6:Teachers responses on corporal
Punishment is necessary in order to
maintain the discipline at school
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
Corporal Punishment - 81
A large percentage of samples (57%) did not agree that corporal punishment is
necessary in order to maintain the discipline at school. Similarly 26% of the sample felt that it
is necessary to maintain the discipline at school (see table 4). 17% teachers of the sample
were undecided. As I explained that the perception of teacher on discipline but here only 10%
of them (private school teachers) strongly agree with the statement that corporal punishment
is must to maintain the discipline at school whereas a little bit large number(21%) agreed
with this because they believed that corporal punishment is not must but it is necessary to
maintain the discipline at school. 14% school teachers from primary level to secondary level
were disagreed with this statement because they thought there are other alternative methods
also to maintain the discipline at school. but 14% of the private school teachers from the
sample strongly disagreed with this statement because they believed that it is not good and
not necessary to maintain the discipline at the school.
Figure 7:Teachers responses on a good
teacher is one who use the punishmetn
and keep the class quite
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
Corporal Punishment - 82
A large percentage of sample 85% did not agree that a good teacher is one who use the
punishment and keep the class quite. Only 11% of the sample agreed with the statement that a
good teacher I use the punishment and keep the class quite (See table 3). 4% teachers of the
sample were undecided. A half of the private schools teachers from the sample disagreed
with the statements that a good teacher is one who use the punishment and keep the class
quite because they felt some times the punishment is needed to be a good teacher but it is not
a component to make the teacher good whereas a not a small number about 35% of the
private school teachers from the sample were strongly disagreed with the statements because
they didn’t believed that corporal punishment is necessary to become a good teacher. But 3%
of them were strongly agreed with the statement because they believed on corporal
punishment and 8% of teachers from the sample were agreed with the statements as they felt
necessity of corporal punishment to be a good teacher. a few number of teachers (4%) didn’t
answer because they were not interested about it.
Corporal Punishment - 83
Figure 8:Teachers responses on corporal
punishment teaches learners to respect the
teachers.
70
60
50
40
30
20
PERCENTAGE
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
RESPONSE
Very few percentage of private schools teachers were strongly agreed with the statements that
corporal punishment teaches learners to respect the teachers because they believed on force
or power which can be apply to respect the teacher and few 7% teachers from the sample
were agreed with this statements because they felt that somewhere corporal punishment is
necessary to make them to respect the teachers. 10% private school teachers are undecided
with this because either they didn’t have idea about it or they didn’t interest about the subject
matter about corporal punishment and teaching. A large number of private school teachers
(65%) were disagreed with this statements because they didn’t believed that corporal
punishment is effective way to develop their feeling of respect to the teachers. But 15 %
teachers from the sample totally disagreed with the statements because they felt it is useless
to give the lesson to the learners or it doesn’t teach learners to respect the teacher.
Corporal Punishment - 84
PERCENTAGE
Figure 9:Teachers responses on learners prefer
authoritarian teachers (where very strict measures of
discipline are used).
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
RESPONSE
A Small percentage of private school teacher’s from the sample favored corporal punishment teaches
learners to respect the teacher. Only 10% agree with this statement because they believed forcefully
teachers can make students to respect or they like the teachers who used very strict discipline of
measured. And large percentage 80% did not agree with this statement that strict teachers are like by
students while 10% of the private school teachers from the sample were undecided because either they
don’t have knowledge about or they were not interested about it. Among them 6% teachers believe
that learners preferred the authoritarian teachers so they are strongly agreed with these statements
where 24% of the private school teachers had the faith that they liked the teachers who use the strict
measure of discipline. Not least little more teachers (21%) of them either did not have idea or they
were not interested on it.
Corporal Punishment - 85
Figure 10:Teachers responses on it is morally correct
that a person who has done wrong be punished for it.
60
50
40
30
20
PERCENTAGE
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
RESPONSE
Teachers’ Responses favoring the use of Corporal Punishment
The majority of teachers 55% from the sample support the statements that it is morally
correct that a person who has done wrong be punished for it. While only 30% teachers from
the sample were against it. The world only punishment is included here so a large number of
private school teachers (59%) agree with the statements that it is morally correct that a person
who has done wrong be punished for it because they believed on any type of punishment that
will help to correct the students behavior or punishment may be the very effective way to
correct them where as small number of teachers (6%) were strongly agreed with his because
they
didn’t see any alternative to correct the students who has done wrong except
punishment. Majority of private school teachers were seems in the favors of punishment or
they prefer punishment to correct the student’s behavior. Very few number of private school
teachers from the sample strongly disagree with the statements because they felt there are so
many alternative approaches to correct students if they have done wrong. A little bit more
Corporal Punishment - 86
(20%) private school teachers agreed with this because they felt that somewhere punishment
is necessary to correct the students who have done wrong. At least (15) % percent of private
school teachers didn’t answer with the statements.
Figure 11:Teachers responses on detention is an effective
way of preventing pupils from misbehaving.
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
A large percentage of teachers (43%) believe that detention is an effective way of preventing
pupil from misbehaving and 4% less percentage of teachers from the sample disagreed with
the statements and 16% were undecided. a large number of private school teachers who were
against the corporal punishment (see table no 1to 5) her agreed with the statements detention
is an effective way of preventing pupils from misbehaving. Three percents of the private
school teachers were strongly agreed with the statements because they strongly recommended
the detention best form of punishment whereas 40% of them were also agreed with this. A
very small percentage of the teachers (12%) were strongly disagreed with this because they
didn’t believe that detention is an effective way o preventing pupils from misbehaving. 29%
of private school teachers from the sample were agreed with this statements because they
thought it could be the effective in many cases not in all cases. A little bit more (16%) of
teachers were undecided with the statements because either they didn’t have any idea about it
or not interested to this field.
Corporal Punishment - 87
Percentage
Figure 12:Teachers responses on corporal punishment
should be used as a last resort when other methods of
discipline have failed.
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
Response
Majority of teachers (51%) agreed with the statement that we should use the corporal
punishment as a last resort. Among them 13% were strongly agreed with the statement
because they felt it is the strong measure to correct the students behavior whereas a large
number of private school teachers from the sample from primary level to lower secondary
level (48%) agreed with this statements that corporal punishment should be used as a last
resort when all other methods of discipline have failed. Because they felt it is not good but
strong weapon to change the student’s behavior. Very small number only i.e. 6% private
school teachers from the sample strongly disagreed with the statements because either they
didn’t have faith on corporal punishment or they felt it is not good for learners. A little bit
more numbers of teachers (19%) disagreed with the statements because they didn’t think it is
the best method which can be used as a last resort. Altogether 14% private school teachers
from the sample didn’t answer because either they didn’t have any idea about or not
interested on it.
Corporal Punishment - 88
Responses of Teachers on Zero Tolerance
Figure 13:Teachers responses on every school has set the
tight rule and regulation for the children.
70
60
Percentage
50
40
30
20
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
Response
A very large percentage of private school teachers from the sample (65) % agreed with the
statement that every school has set the tight rule and regulation for the children where 12% of
the school teachers also strongly agreed with this statement. So percentage of teachers who
were agreed with this statement became 77%. So majority of the teachers were in the favor of
tight rule and regulation because they believed on tight rule and regulation the rules and
regulations are set in the school to maintained the discipline. Only the 13% of the private
school teachers disagreed with the statement teacher from the sample were disagreed with the
statement where only 3% of the school teacher from the sample were strongly disagreed with
the statements. It means three percentages of them didn’t believe on strong rules and
regulation to maintain the discipline. Ten percentages of them didn’t favor tight rule and
regulation to maintain the discipline because they felt it is not good for the learners and we
should be little bit flexible about it. But ten percentages of private school teachers didn’t
answer because either they didn’t have any idea or they were not interested.
Corporal Punishment - 89
Figure 14:Teachers responses on we should not tolerate the
violating the school rules and regulation.
60
50
40
Percentage
30
20
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
Response
Here the very large number of (58%) private school teachers from the sample who were
against the corporal punishment (see section: teachers response against corporal punishment)
agreed with the statements that we should not tolerate of violating the school rule and
regulation by the children to maintain the discipline. A little bit more 15% were also strongly
agreed with the statements that’s why 73% of teachers favored the statements. They believed
on zero tolerance. We should not tolerate is strongly link to punishment. Fifteen percent
teachers didn’t see any option expect punishment to maintain the discipline whereas majority
of the teachers felt it is zero tolerance is necessary to maintain the discipline. No one (0%)
from the sample strongly disagreed with the statements because all the teachers believed it is
necessary where few percentages (16%) were disagreed with the statements but not strongly.
Corporal Punishment - 90
Response of Teachers on Parents Support on Corporal Punishment
Figure 15:Teachers responses on corporal punishment is
being supported by parents.
45
40
35
Percentage
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
Response
Among all categories (42%) of private school teachers from the sample disagreed with the
statements that corporal punishment is being supported by parents because they had faith that
it is not supported by the parents where ten percentage of the private school teachers strongly
disagreed with the statements because they strongly believed that corporal punishment is not
supported by the parents. But 5% percentages of teachers strongly agreed with the statements
because in their experience they found corporal punishment is supported by the parents. 23%
percentage of private school teachers from the sample agreed with the statement because they
had the experiences that many cases parents were supported the corporal punishment.
However 20% of the teachers from the sample didn’t answer because either they had not such
experience or any idea about it.
Corporal Punishment - 91
Figure 16:Teachers responses on some times parents forced
you to punish the children.
80
70
60
Percentage
50
40
30
20
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
Response
When little bit same question was asked to the private school teachers from primary level to
secondary level, a huge percentage (72%) of them were agreed with the statements that
sometimes parents also forced to punish the children because either they have the such type
of experience or they do believed on the statements where 9% of teachers were also strongly
agreed with the statement. So there are many teachers who had the experienced that
sometimes parents were forcing to punish their children. However 8% of school teachers
disagreed with statements because either they didn’t have any experience or they didn’t
believed the statements that parents also forced to punish their child whereas 6% of the
private school teachers were strongly disagreed with the statements because they didn’t
believed it. 5% of teachers were undecided with the statements because either they didn’t
have any experience or no idea about it.
Corporal Punishment - 92
Teachers’ responses on alternative discipline approach
Figure 17:Teachers responses on approaching the scholl
counsellor/ other is an effective way of solving behaviour
problem.
Percentage
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
Response
As an alternative approach, private school teachers had the faith on counseling that’s why
very large numbers of teachers (70%) agreed with the statements that approaching the school
counselor/ other is an effective way of solving behavior problems. Among them 23% strongly
agreed with it. I found they prefer the alternative approach as counseling is the best way.
Very few numbers of teachers (4%) were strongly disagreed with the statement because they
didn’t see any alternative approaches like counseling except punishments as effective way of
solving the behavior problems. A little bit more 17% teachers were undecided because either
they didn’t have any idea about it or they were not interested about it.
Corporal Punishment - 93
Figure 18:Teachers responses on appointing a class
monitor to report to the teacher about misbehavior is
effective.
70
Percentage
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1
2
3
4
5
Response
Teacher’s response on appointing a classroom monitor to report to the teacher about
misbehavior is effective is positive because majority of the teacher 72% of private school
teachers from the sample from primary level to secondary level agreed with the statement
among them 9% were strongly agreed. Only 2% of teachers strongly disagreed with this
statements because they didn’t think that it could be the effective way to correct the learning
to well behaving. 14% of teachers from the sample were also disagreed with the statement
because they also felt it couldn’t be the best way to report to the teacher about misbehavior is
effective. Only few 12% teachers were undecided didn’t have idea or not interested about it.
So what I found here from the results from questionnaire is that teachers were against the
corporal punishment but supporting the punishment. When we talk about corporal
punishment, they were against it and when we talk about only punishment, they felt
Corporal Punishment - 94
necessary. Above results clearly shows that they are in favor of tight rule and regulation and
supported the zero tolerance means we should not tolerate any type of mistakes done by
students. Most of the private school teachers were agree that corporal punishments should use
as last resort when all other method of discipline have failed. Most of the teachers agreed
with the statements that every school has set the tight rule and regulation for the children
which directly refer tight discipline. So result is quite controversial. I thought observation and
focused group discussion could be helpful for the findings so I went for that.
From above I categorized the teacher’s attitudes on corporal punishments as
a) Private school Teachers believe that punishment is necessary to change student’s
behavior rather than corporal punishment because a large percentage of teachers
agreed with the statement which we should not tolerate the students who violet the
school rules. Same way a large percentage were against the corporal punishment.
b) Private school Teachers believed on zero tolerance and tight discipline.
c) Private schools teachers have a faith that sometimes parents support the corporal
punishment not every time.
d) Private school teachers themselves are taking the corporal punishment like detention
as a proper way of maintained the discipline.
e) The dictionary meaning of corporal punishment and private schools teachers’
perception is different.
This is why their understanding of corporal punishment and international understanding is
different. Herein below is the list of different understanding about corporal punishment in
the field and the literature.
Because of these attitudes, teachers had given the following punishment to their students.
Corporal Punishment - 95
Table 5:
Common punishment
Physical punishment:
Emotional punishments:
Beating with a stick and Scolding,
duster
abusing
Negative reinforcement:
and Sending
humiliating.
Making them to stand up for Giving
children
to
the
principal.
animal
names: Asking the children to bring
some time in the ground by donkey, monkey.
explanatory letters from the
holding their ears.
Calling parents to the school.
parents.
Kneel down
Suspending
them
for
a Sending them home.
Do the work outside and couple of days.
Giving oral warning and
then enter the class room.
letters in the diary.
Making them stand up on
Making them stand till the
the bench.
teacher comes.
Pinching cheeks or arms.
Teachers’ beliefs on the necessity of Corporal Punishment
Teachers’ perception on corporal punishment greatly affects the classroom teaching and
learning situation and students’ motivation during the school time and outside the school.
Teachers’ perception towards the corporal punishment is related to the school discipline and
school violence. This section focuses on the fresh thinking of 25 teachers on corporal
punishment. 6-10 teachers were available at staff in one school at every time. During that
time I discussed with them on corporal punishment and recorded their opinion in notebook. I
had asked the question like how and in what situation teacher use the corporal punishment
Corporal Punishment - 96
inside and outside the classroom; whether the school environment is supportive to them for
corporal punishments or using the alternative strategies of discipline and what had been the
social relation of the students with their teachers.
Teachers used punishment like slapping at home for their children also. A science teacher of
class ten said that “yesterday I have given the written work of 14 pages to my son who is
studying in class two but he didn’t start it, so I gave a big slap to him". When I asked, how
could the small children write the 14 pages? It is not faire for him; does your child know the
important of writing? Again he replied without learning formula, without knowing the
scientific terms how can students get good marks in the examination? He was a secondary
level science teacher. His way of doing was the result of "modeling" modeling that the
teachers knew from other (Bandura, 1997).
Bandura’s Social Learning Theory posits that people learn from one another, vial
observation, imitation, and modeling. The theory has often been called a bridge between
behaviorist and cognitive learning theories because it encompasses attention, memory, and
motivation. In my study as well the science teacher came from culturally modeled schooling
system, got the same environment when he was students, so he learnt it either from teacher or
by others. He showed his schooling in giving home work to his son. He learnt that homework
is the important for the students. So he ignored his son's mental and physical tension. It also
showed the same behavior to his students.
Teachers want strong concentration to their work from the students. A Nepali language
teacher of lower secondary school said "when I was writing on the board students look
outside through the window and that is not tolerable". He raised the question to me; can you
stay without taking action to him? He was confirmed that without slap or punishment
teachers can’t control students.
Corporal Punishment - 97
Knowing the attitude of these teachers I gave a book Diwaswapna to a social study teacher
of class ten to read it. He took 4 days to read it. The book was against the corporal
punishment of the children.
The teacher applied nonviolent approach to teaching as
suggested by the book. But his experience was that the class became "noisy" for him, his
colleagues and the principal. This made me clear that teachers want silence inside the
classroom while they are teaching. If students make noise they blame them as naughty
students. From this discussion and observation I understood that teachers see only one
method to control the classroom forcefully i.e. corporal punishment. I also realized that
teachers understood corporal punishment "necessary to children’s upbringing, to facilitate
learning and to instill discipline” (Unicef: Asian Report, 2001). It also shows that teachers
want to maintain hierarchical and unequal power relations, which emphasize lack of power
and low socio- economic status. They also hold the belief that unpunished children will
develop unruly and uncontrollable behavior (Ibid).
I took the permission from principal to discuss with the children of class 10. I took nine high
achiever and 9 low achiever students separately in ECA hall. I discussed with them about the
use and misuse of corporal punishment. According to them it is a normal feature of their
education and they have accepted it as taken for granted. This means students have been
habituated of such traditional practice (UNICEF ROSA, 2000). All them didn’t like the
teacher who use more punishment.
Literature also showed that classroom discipline and classroom techniques to make students
disciplined
have
been
changed
dramatically
during
the
1970’s
and
1980’s
(http://waldenpdk.org/newsletters). These techniques have changed even more in the 1990’s
and it appears that changes will continue in the new millennium. And yet the teachers of my
study were opting to exercise the power over students to accomplish the desired result
(Leriche, 1992). These desires involve three central concepts that are norm, power, and
Corporal Punishment - 98
awareness (Leriche, 1992, p.350). As a norm teachers can develop consensual idea of the
students; as power they can delegate it to the students themselves; and as awareness they can
be self reflective of what they did. But I found another scenario which is given in the box
below:
Powerless teachers on Corporal Punishment
One account teacher said that in an examination time we should keep the children in the class
for more than one and half hour. If children makes noise the principal of the school sought to
them saying why there is noise, I can hear you children. His query insulted me to be the
teacher. So I always give the hard slap to the one or two children then only the rest of the
students keep their mouths shut and body at straight position.
Here teachers were found looking for temporary solutions to stop children’s problematic
behaviors, but it may not change their behavior in the long term (NCTSN, 2008).
A well known former leader of students union was a principal of one school. He said to me
We don’t allow corporal punishment till class 9. We allow it in class 10 because parents need
distinction in S.L.C examination. Our education system is exam oriented. So the examination
system and parents desire leads to the corporal punishment.
Teachers’ experience
Some teachers were very much positive to corporal punishment. One teacher said “I was
caned, never felt bitter and got educated in a quiet, order and respectful environment”.
Another teacher replied, when we do not use the punishment inside the class, they
immediately take the advantage (taukoma tekchhan). It was also felt that corporal punishment
is a much quicker method as one teacher responded “punishment is done quickly i.e. is the
only way to maintaining good behavior.”
Corporal Punishment - 99
Parents are sending children to the school with high ambition of “becoming a thulo manchhe”
(great personality) such as doctor, engineers etc as told by their parents. They have the desire
to make their children to be a privileged citizen with power. But the irony of the private
school is that the teachers are not prepared for nonviolent teaching. They were rather
encouraged to be strict with the students. From above discussion, I categorized the teachers
believe as
a) Teachers believed that corporal punishment was necessary to change student’s
behavior.
b) Teachers believed that without punishment students don’t respect (taukoma tekchhan)
the teachers.
c) There was a supportive environment in private school for corporal punishment.
d) Teachers themselves were taking the corporal punishment as a quick, easiest and
simple method of maintained the discipline.
e) International meaning of discipline and their perception on discipline was different.
So they set of culture that students should obey the teachers, maintain unequal power
relation with students, and be the persuader of corporal punishment.
Teachers responses on corporal punishment in questionnaire was against it but their activities
in school were in the favors of corporal punishment is due to their understanding different.
Corporal Punishment - 100
Table 6:
Different Understanding on Corporal Punishment
International understanding
Nepalese private school teachers understanding
“Any punishment in which physical force is used Any hard punishment in which physical force is used
and intended to cause some degree of pain or and intended to case large degree of pain or injuries.
discomfort, however light” (UN committee on the According to them only Beating with a stick, cane, belt,
Rights of Childs, 2001). From the above pipe, duster etc are corporal punishment and pulling ears
statement it is clear that all the following forms
and the hair of the temples
are the forms of corporal punishment.
Kneel down and do the work and them enter the class.
Beating with a stick, cane, belt, pipe, duster etc Making them to stand up for the whole day in the sun.
pulling ears and the hair of the temples.
Making them to raise hands for long time
Kneel down and do the work and they enter the
Making them stand up on the bench for long time.
class.
Pressing a pencil between two fingers.
Making them to stand up for the whole day in the
Holding their ears with hands passed under the legs.
sun.
Tying their hands.
Making them to raise hands for long time.
Caning and pinching cheeks or arms are not corporal
Making them stand up on the bench for long
punishment.
time.
Pressing a pencil between two fingers.
Holding their ears with hands passed under the
legs.
Tying their hands.
Caning and pinching cheeks or arms.
Corporal Punishment - 101
Table 7:
Different understanding about discipline
International understanding of discipline
Nepalese
teachers
understanding
about
discipline
Discipline means following the rules and
School discipline is the system of rules,
regulation sets by the school, respecting the
punishments
and
behavioral
strategies
teachers, obeying the teachers, doing the
appropriate to the regulation of children and
home work regularly, listening to the
the maintenance of order in schools. It aims
teachers, keeping silence inside or outside the
is to create a safe and conductive learning
classroom. School discipline has two main
environment in the classrooms (Dr. Sears,
goals: 1) to ensure the success in the
2011).
examination. 2) Creating the environment of
School discipline has two main goals: 1) to
silence in the school premises.
ensure the safety of staff and students, and 2)
create an environment conductive to learning.
Corporal Punishment - 102
Teachers’ attitudes towards Corporal Punishments
Teachers play key role in maintaining discipline in school because they spend most of their
day with the students. They enforce discipline in various ways including reward and
punishment. This settled way of thinking or feeling i.e. attitude is the problem in it. This
section focuses on attitudes of teachers which were obtained through focus group discussion
and observation.
Respect seeking mindset
Teachers were seeking the respect from the children. In staff room, teachers were found
blaming the students saying that they are manner less and they don’t study. They are useless
also. They don’t respect the teachers. When we were students, we used to obey and respect
the teachers. When we were in front of the teachers, we used to be speech less in front of the
teachers.
I found that teachers wanted respect from children. So by imposing physical force like
corporal punishment, they would like to change their behavior. Every time I found teachers
were giving orders for everything using loud tone of voice and with anger on their face. So
students also found reacting the same way to their junior. I understood it was the reflection of
teachers’ behavior over children. Simply, if children were around respectful adults, they’re
more likely to show respect, however, when they were around disrespectful adults, they were
more likely to show disrespectful behavior. Respect comes from heart not from force.
Low achiever students of class ten got bad slap on his face by social study teacher. After
finishing the class I asked the teacher about the reason. He said “he didn’t pay the attention in
class while teaching, he was very irritating”. When I went to the students and asked him why
he gave you slap, tell me the truth I don’t report it anywhere, students replied, "my hand was
broken and the plaster took out just one day before, teacher caught my hand and I felt pain so
Corporal Punishment - 103
I took out my hand fast from his hand, he felt insulting him and gave me the full palm slap on
my face. He was taking that easily.
I understood that he felt insulting mean he wanted respect from the students. When he felt
insulting, he gave slap. So teacher was using the punishment when students were not
respecting them.
A set of culture
I found many children sending to the office, standing on the ground and knee down outside
the classroom. Being sent out of the classroom to sit in the hall or principal’s office may be
punishing if the student finds exclusion from others aversive. Technically, the teacher has
been negatively reinforced.
From above I understood that our country is a society with strong hierarchy and unequal
power relations. A type of culture is set in which oppression of students is allowed and
accepted by the society. The violence deriving from home or family that reinforces
inequalities between husband and wife at home and teachers and students at school. Unequal
and fixed power relations between teachers and students, between school leader and teachers
are also perpetuated by lack of knowledge of education and trained persons in educational
field. Our cultural concept of “respect for the elders” is commendable in its own right but the
society’s hierarchical set up- whether family, community, caste hierarchies or religious
institutions- gives power to those in authority, the “elders”, then men; and in schools, to the
teachers. This cultural set of corporal punishment clearly reflects and manifests children’s
lack of power and their low social status within society, the family and in the classroom
(UNISEF AND SCF, 2000). On the assumption that adults know best and that decisions
about children’s lives must be made by adults, children are often considered as ‘immature’.
Corporal Punishment - 104
No idea for alternative approach
Co-coordinators who were supposed to be the example to the teachers also found applying
the corporal punishment as only one method to change the students’ behavior. I was sitting on
the side of assembly ground. Suddenly a coordinator started to bit the about 10-11 years
children. Children were crying by saying "no sir, no sir". The was a terrible situation. After a
few minute two children of class 5 were coming from the water tape with wet cloth. Cocoordinator beat them with stick, they were also crying.
I found that managing children’s behavior was one of the biggest challenges that teachers and
coordinator face. To control such type of behavior, most teachers and co-coordinators used
some form of physical punishment, such as spanking, hitting or another kind of physical
force. Here they had perceived the physical punishment was the best solution for managing a
child’s most challenging or upsetting behaviors. They had not seen any alternative approach
to manage the child behavior.
Students were getting punishment without making the mistakes One Nepali subject teaching
teacher in class ten sent a female student outside the class and a female student had
completed her exercise book. When she submit the completed exercise book to the school
stationary she may get it from there because every students of the school had paid the cost of
exercise book in the beginning of the session. She sent her to the office for the punishment
saying it was her fault because when the exercise book finished then it was her duty to bring
from stationary. It was not student fault because there was none in the stationary when she
went there to take the exercise book.
The case above made me confirm that teachers were applying the zero tolerance police. They
did not tolerate the minor mistakes and didn’t try to find the problem. They only thought the
Corporal Punishment - 105
solution for every action is punishment. They didn’t see any alternative approach to convince
students except punishment.
A social study teacher of class ten gave the home work to the students to remember the 75
district of the Nepal. But student tried to study and remember it, some students could not
remember till more than seven days also and teacher regularly send them outside and make
them kneel down.
The case above was enough to understand that it was because of traditional teaching style or
untrained teacher. He was completely following traditional system of teaching. He got the
education from same system and he did not find any alternatives method of teaching. Due to
the untrained teachers and traditional system of teaching in private school, the problem of
corporal punishment was frequently occurred.
One teacher sent one student outside and made kneel down for whole period, I went to the
student and asked her the reason to be outside; she replied without any reason I was outside,
but when I asked to her friends, they said she was sleeping inside classroom.
Here I understood that teacher thought that sleeping inside the class was student fault.
Teacher was found that they didn’t want see his/her own mistakes because the class was not
interesting so the students felt sleepy. Only teacher centered method of teaching made
students inactive and many times students were found sleeping inside the class while teacher
was teaching.
An account teacher of class nine said to his friends that I just said to the trouble maker (who
got beating from all subject teacher) stop to make noise in the class and start to study. I don’t
want to bit him because many teachers beat you very badly.
Corporal Punishment - 106
When I asked the students who beat you? He reply there was no one who did not beat me?
There it was clear that teachers as well as parents ignored the technology for proactively and
positively managing students’ behaviors which is existed since Skinner’s (1953). They never
tried to use alternative approach to manage the behavior of such children.
Counseling was needed to some of the cases. It was human nature and the characteristic of
teen ages. But school administration was also positive to punishment to control their
behavior. A love letter written by the one girl of class ten was caught by the teacher but it was
the hand of another girls students. The name of lover (to whom it was written) was not
written to the letter. The girl having the letter got the two slap and parents were called. When
I asked to the children who had written it? They replied that it was written by another girl of
the same class.
Here I understood it was the miss use of power by the teachers. At least teachers could try to
find the reality. Innocent students were getting unnecessary punishment and touchier.
Teachers were found they were very much positive to corporal punishment. They did not see
any alternative to corporal punishment. During the time of my observation I didn't find that a
single teacher counseling the students.
The most common punishment
The common weapon to make students afraid from teachers was stick. Two teachers to class
10, one social study teacher and one computer teacher were discussing about each other.
Computer teacher took the stick of social study teacher in time and didn’t return the stick to
the social study teacher and he was saying from today onwards I can’t give you my stick.
Computer teacher was saying without stick they don’t study. Many days I am asking the same
questions to them. Whatever questions I asked them yesterday I asked the same questions
today also still they didn’t reply.
Corporal Punishment - 107
I found teachers were promoting the learning with fear in place of learning without fear.
Teachers were promoting the rote learning. Only remembering the points was learning for
them. Trained teachers could not do this type of activities. When I went to them to ask their
educational background, they were untrained but they felt that they are trained because of
their teaching experience of several years. They were proud of themselves having several
years; experience.
In my observation I found that one teacher was regularly giving the corporal punishments to
the students. When some students were kneeling downing outside, I guessed that this might
be his period. It was true. After 5 months of beginning of the new session he got the price
from the school being best teacher. After that I observed his action continuously. What I
found that when principal of school was not there, he stayed silence and when principal come
to assembly square, he always started too sought to the children by dominating them and
some time started beating saying you could not make your line straight or you could not do
this, you could not do that etc?
From this type of teachers' reaction I understood that principal was a motivational factor for
corporal punishment against students.
Faith on punishment for best results
School, parents, and teachers wanted best score in the examination. They wanted to make
every one pass in the examination. I found that teachers were talking about the low achieving
students as "trouble makers". Among these "trouble makers" one student went Kasmir (India)
for medical checkup and again came back to the school for study in class 10. But the teachers
always talked about the "trouble maker" and said “our principal enrolled trouble making
students then how can we make him pass in S.L.C. examination”. From today I will start to
beat him that’s why he will study at home as well as in class. Then next day a co-coordinator
Corporal Punishment - 108
of school came to the teachers and said, “Our tension is relieved because the "trouble maker"
is not going to write examination in this year. He is repeating the class”.
The above case made me understood that there was a presser to the teacher to give the best
result or to make pass to all the students (even students is not at that level). Teachers have to
give best result in S.L.C. to save their prestige and job. Anyhow they have to bring the even
weak children to the same level of others. So teachers were found using corporal punishment
to force them for study and homework because they belief that punishment brings
improvement in study. In one discussion, principal of one reputed private school also
expressed the same view that up to class nine we can stop the corporal punishment but due to
the S.L.C. board examination so in class ten we cannot stop it.
Feeling of superiority
Teacher wanted to show superiority in front of students. That was the policy to control the
children. One teacher went one class to another class and asked for the stick from student
saying their friends have not done my homework.
One Nepali subject teaching female teacher was standing in front of the class having most of
low achiever students. I asked the question to her that madam how is the students of this
class? She replied in front of them that if I correct their answer sheet no one will pass in
examination, the students of this class are very terrible.
I understood that it was the feeling of superiority and inferiority. Teachers wanted to show
that they are superior in front of their fellow teachers and students. It clearly shows that
teachers wanted to dominate the students. This culture, it was seen, nurtures the practice of
dominating the children and continued, like any other ritual, from generation to generation.
Corporal Punishment - 109
In discussion with the teacher I found there was a belief that when teacher act as a friends
with the students, students start to misbehave with the teacher and violet the school rule. So
teachers should not smile to the students.
Intent to control the mass
Sometimes it was difficult to control the large number of children for the teachers. They
thought controlling means to keep them attention position. In one school of my sample
school, I found that after Tiffin time the discipline in –charge (DI) had to arrange the line of
the students every day to send them to the classroom. But I noticed that every day he beat one
or two students with or without reason to keep other children quite. Others children’s were
found keeping quite after beating one or two children by DI. So it is clear that DI was using
corporal punishment to one or two students to control the mass. Teachers were also permitted
by the school principal to give punishment to the children without any questions.
When I asked to one discipline in-charge about whether or not there was need to protect
children’s rights when disciplining them in schools, he indicated that when we inform about
their right, they will start to misbehave with the teachers and it will be very difficult to
maintain the discipline. To ensure that they were disciplined so as to create conducive
teaching and learning environment, we are doing this.
Follow the chain of command
The order in which authority and power in an organization is wielded and delegated from top
management to every employee at every level of organization is chain of command.
Instruction flow downwards along the chain of command and accountability flows upwards.
The clearer cut the chain of command, the more effective the decision making process and
greater the efficiency (Henri Fayol, 1841-1925). Military forces are an example of straight
chain of command that extends in unbroken line from the top brass to ranks which is also
called line of command. In one private school, I found the same condition. When I was sitting
Corporal Punishment - 110
in assembly square of one school, principal announced that I request all teachers to send those
children to the ground who have long hair and misbehave with teachers. Many teachers found
sending children outside the class.
So I understood that in private school teachers has to do or to follow whatever school leader
or principal of the school says. Principal of school were found very strict to the children. So
teachers were also trying to be strict. It was the imitating factor to the other teachers and they
could learn how to behave with them and act like that. So school leader can change the
environment of school. He/ she can play great role to stop or continue the corporal
punishment.
The teaching style and behavior of teachers to the students was totally authoritarian. Teachers
were acting as commander to every action and students were seen powerless. They perceived
that discipline is obeying the teachers whatever they said to the students. Students have to
face with many form of punishment. This means the studied private schools were not child
friendly.
Apart from corporal punishment, I found that students were forced to stand outside the class
for forty five minutes. It was a case of a girl child. I asked her why you were outside. She
replied, “One student was laughing in the class and the teacher thought that it was me". Why
did not you say the reality to the teacher? I inquired but she replied “he did not listen, so I
came out to save me from his slap.
These two incidences show the unequal power relation between teacher and students. Since
the teachers were considering as figure of authority and students have to be obeyed whatever
the teacher say. Students should tolerate corporal punishment. This also indicates that
Corporal Punishment - 111
private schools were not democratic. The teachers working there were ignoring the negative
effects of punishment.
Aggravated corporal punishment during tiredness
Tiredness of the teachers was affecting their mobility. I found that high rate of given
punishment in the weak after the report card distribution day on last Thursday and Friday of
July 12 and 13. The reason was that the teachers came to school 14 days regularly including
that of Saturday because in Saturday there was report card distribution day. Due to that all
teachers seem tired and it was reflected in classroom teaching also. Students were also seems
restless. And the teachers were found reacting aggressively with the students in a class even
for minor case.
Contrary to the above case I got another experience in August 2012, on that day I could not
see the any punishment to the children. I saw the children and teacher all were happy and
fresh. I asked the teachers why all of you are so fresh today, they replied that the school is
reopen after seven days.
The two cases above made me understood that time factor of school was also the causes of
several violence in the school. In the valley all the private schools from the sample were
running about 11 hours and six days in a week for class ten students. Class 10 students even
not allowed playing the game because they had to study every time for the preparation for the
SLC examination. Due to the monotonous setting, students lost their concentration to study
which reflected different behavior in the classroom like lack of concentration to the study, not
listening to the teachers in the classroom, irritating behavior while doing class work, home
work or other task given by the teacher. And yet teachers felt that students should do
whatever they want. It was also leading the many form of corporal punishment in the school.
In my observation, class ten students were found getting more corporal punishment.
Corporal Punishment - 112
Teachers were in pressure that they should complete the curriculum before Dashain
(Important festival of Hindu/ September or October) and after that teachers have to start
revision work with the students.
Students’ response on corporal punishment
I found that when high achiever students felt shier they stand outside as a punishment and
low achiever students enjoy punishment when teachers were not there around them. Students
who were getting punishment from class four and five were taking as a natural thing that’s
why I was unable to find any serious effect on them. They were enjoying outside. When
teachers come near to them, immediately they started to be serious.
(http://studentlifeisnothingbutfun.blogspot.com).
So I found no serious effect of punishment to the students. Students started to feel that they
were doing it for teachers.
Parents’ response to the Corporal Punishment
Parents usually want the best of their children. When parents have the knowledge, skill and
confidence to provide the kind of relationships and experiences that children need to learn
Corporal Punishment - 113
and develop, it makes a real difference to children’s future. In this section I am trying to
explore the parents' response to the corporal punishment on the basis of observation report in
private schools of Nepal. Here I present some cases which were obtained from indirect and
direct observation.
Table 8:
Parents on their responses to Corporal Punishment
Case one
Case two
Case three
I was sitting with a class teacher A math teacher of class nine heated In progress report (results) card
of one class in report card one of the children in a class very distribution
day,
mother
and
distribution day. The class was badly with hand and legs. Next day father of class 10 came to collect
the
class
of
low
achiever parents came to the account office of the marks sheet of their son to the
students. So among thirty three the school which was in the main class teacher of same class and
students of class all of them gate of the school and he requested saw the result. Marks were not
were failed (Red marks in report the authorized person to call the good so mother become angry and
card). While giving the report mathematics teachers. Teacher was said to the teacher please bit him
card, I requested to the class about 55 years old, I was also there, in the class and make him study
teacher to give the positive parent gave one slap on teacher face, well at home. But father didn’t
comment to the parents about and the teacher felt pain and said say anything. When I replied “can
the students and parents were aiya when I stand he was about to we correct him by beating”,
requested not to scold to home
give another slap. I stopped him and I mothers replied not that type of
to their children but encourage sent parents inside the account beating which he got in class two
them. Next day when I asked to section, other teachers came and start of this school”. Finally I came to
the children about their parent’s to beat him also, we kept him safe know that he was beaten when he
reaction, they said “their parents and police came to the school but was in class two very badly, that
scold them and some of the could not take him safely outside the time his legs was swollen and he
parents of children were not school and finally they took him
Corporal Punishment - 114
talking to them at home also”.
from the back gate of the school.
became ill.
From first case I understood that parents wanted only good percentage from exam. They also
judged the study of their children only in progress report. Many parents said in report card
distribution that give slap to the children, beat them, you are allowed to do so for our
children. This means parents wanted corporal punishment to make their students study well
which will be helpful for better result.
From the cases above I found that teachers punished their students for any misbehavior.
Sometimes teachers were found giving very hard punishment to the children which was
ineffective, dangerous and unacceptable method of discipline for parents. I found parents
were not tolerating the hard punishment for the children.
I also realized that parents wanted punishment from the schoolteacher to their children so that
they always obey them do their home work regularly at home without any pressure from
parents. At the same time I found them that they would not tolerate the hard punishment like
bad slap, kicking to their children. Another message given by case three was that parents
were supporting the punishment. They also believed that punishment can make their children
learn at home. So No single factor can account for the various forms of corporal punishment
in school. Although hitting children was common practice and became natural in the school.
At home fathers and mothers are using the punishment and at school teacher and children are
accepting it naturally. The degree of acceptable violence due to societal norms and values
appears to be very high.
One of the most important aspects of teaching is building positive relationships with parents.
I did not find good relation between parents and teachers. Parents used to come to the school
in report card distribution day. I felt effective parent and teacher communication is essential
for a teacher to be successful. A good relationship between parents and teacher can help to
Corporal Punishment - 115
reduce the punishment system in school. Because some teachers said me when they gave the
hard physical punishment to the children, many times some parents gave threatening to the
teacher using the phone also.
My experience as teacher also shows that students who knew that teacher communicated on a
regular basis with their parents and who knew that their parents trusted the teacher would
likely put more effort into study. Likewise, a student who knew that the teacher rarely or
never communicated with their parents and/or their parents did not trust the teacher would pit
the two against each other. That was counterproductive and was creating the problems for the
teacher.
To the sum from above discussion
a) Teachers were very much positive to corporal punishment.
b) They were found applying the punishment only one alternatives to maintain
discipline.
c) Curriculum, long staying time in school, parents’ teachers’ relation and teachers fear
about S.L.C. result were other factor to set the attitudes of teachers towards corporal
punishment.
d) Parents themselves wanted to use the simple type of punishment to their children to
make them study well.
Corporal Punishment - 116
CHAPTER V
Findings and discussions
In this chapter, I have triangulated the findings of the literature, theory and field as a product
to this study. In this process I have derived some findings from chapters III and IV. My
personal reflection is also one of the sources of my findings.
Major Findings
The first finding is that the teachers’ of private school perceived corporal punishment as
unacceptable method of discipline was surprising. They didn’t accept applying the
punishment as an appropriate method but found applying it frequently in school. This is
because of their understanding difference on corporal punishment and discipline. Private
school teachers punish their students and pupils for misbehavior or other reasons like talking
inside the classroom while teachers is teaching, not doing homework regularly, not answering
the questions which teachers ask to them inside the classroom, sleeping in the class etc.
The classes like dance, music, drawing and drama were non punished class. Students were
participated actively in these classes. Other most of the classes were teachers’ oriented class
were punished class due to the traditional way of teaching. Students had to sit in the class
silence and inactively. Teachers were not providing any opportunity to the students to do
their work freely. For each and every work even for handwriting also they were providing the
format. I found that exercise books of those students who have not following the school
handwriting format (complexly cursive) were tore and thrown to the dustbin.
Teachers were found using corporal punishment to give the best result of the students, to
follow the principal command, to show the superiority, to control the mass, to make them
study at home, to make them doing homework at home regularly, to make quiet in the class
room teaching.
Corporal Punishment - 117
Teachers generally felt disempowered in their ability to the classroom or school premises
when students did not keep quiet or did not stay at silence and attention in their presents.
They revealed that learners did not fear or respect teachers because they knew that nothing
will happen to them.
Teachers believed on both corporal punishment and alternative discipline strategies tend to
bring about changes in pupil behavior, but they used corporal punishment. Several
assumptions were responsible for this phenomenon. They thought school discipline is very
important matter for the school, so most of the punishments were given to maintain the
discipline. Most teachers supported the tight rule and regulation for the children to maintain
the discipline. So they supported the idea that corporal punishment is easiest way to maintain
the discipline. They felt the corporal punishments should occur after “repeated offences and
warnings and attempts to remedy problem.
Teachers were positive to “zero tolerance in students' talk” polices. I found that even school
leader (principal) was announcing from loud speaker by saying “I request all the teachers that
please do not tolerate any type of misbehavior inside the classroom; if they are not listening
to you please send them outside”.
Discussion
Straus (1994), Hyman (1990) and Cohen (1984) provide several definitions of “corporal
punishment”. According to them corporal punishment is the use of physical force against and
individual. Corporal punishment against the child “is the use of physical force with the
intention of causing a child to experience pain but not injury for the purposes of correction or
control of the child’s behavior”. The most frequent forms of corporal punishments are
spanking, slapping, grabbing or shoving a child roughly (with more force than is needed to
move the child) (Straus, 1995:5). Cohen (1984) endorses this definition by indentifying
specific forms of corporal punishment such as paddling and beatings. According to Hyman
Corporal Punishment - 118
(1990:10) punishment in the school is the infliction of pain or confinement as a penalty for an
offence committed by a student.
Not all researchers are of the opinion that corporal punishment is harmful and destructive act
that cause emotional, physical and psychological damage to a child. Researchers such as
Straus (1994), Hyman (1990) and Gershoff (2002) explore the harmful and less desirable
effects of corporal punishment such as somatic complaints, increase anxiety, and change in
personality and depression. They view corporal punishment as the maltreatment and
psychological abuse of the child. Straus (1994) and Hyman (1990) remain primarily co
relational and as a result the effects of corporal punishment are viewed on a continuum
ranging from “not harmful” to “abusive”.
From the above discussed it will be clear that even psychological maltreatment also consider
as a corporal punishment. All type of physical forces is considered as a corporal punishment
and act of all type of physical forces are viewed on a continuum ranging mild to severe. So
all the act mentioned on the table are viewed as corporal punishment.
Discipline
The commonest discipline problems involve noncriminal student’s behavior (Moles, 1989).
For twenty of the last twenty-five years, discipline has been viewed as a major problem for
the schools (Elam, Rose, & Gallup, 1993). It comes as no surprise that students cause most
of the behavioral problems; however, the teachers themselves cause most discipline problem.
Based on research by many notable authors, poor classroom management results in discipline
not being appropriately maintained in the classroom. It is a concern due to most teachers
never been charged with establishing and enforcing guideline and behavior (Ibid).
Discomfort of the Teacher
Although teachers are aware of alternative disciplinary measures, they view them as
ineffective and time consuming. Culture of corporal punishment in schools is generally
Corporal Punishment - 119
appreciated by the school leader because I found many times the school principal requested to
the teachers to send the school children who misbehave inside the classroom. In the name of
class control I found students were beaten without any reasons inside the classroom. There
are arguments for the use of corporal punishment but with the thrust on protection of
children’s rights and the documented negative effects of corporal punishment (zaibert, 2006).
Zero Tolerance on Students' talk at Classroom
The goal of “zero tolerance” polices is to curtail discipline problems by establishing severe
consequences for student misconduct. These consequences frequently involve penalties such
as suspension and expulsion (Gregory, 1995). School without zero tolerance policies are
actually less likely to report “serious incidents of crime” than schools with such polices. This,
of course, could simply be because zero tolerance policies are only initiated in schools with
existing discipline problems. Nevertheless, this knowledge raise concerns regarding the
ability of zero tolerance policies to effectively prevent criminal behavior in school (Skiba &
Peterson, 1999).
Non participatory Teaching Learning Process
I found students in almost all class except dance, music and drama class were inactive.
Classes like Nepali, English Even science, teachers were found using only lecture method
and students were only listening to the teachers. The teaching style is non participatory.
Teaching learning process was completely teacher center. Students were found powerless.
Students were learning interestingly and carefully in these class and they were taking part in
various activities in decent manner. Coaches, music teachers, and drama teachers didn’t let
the students tell them how to do their work harder at these pursuits than they do in academic
classes, and generally achieve higher- quality results. Schools have set the many rules and
Corporal Punishment - 120
students are getting the punishment for violating the rules of the school. Students are forced
to follow the rules set by the teachers and school. So to reduce the corporal punishment
teachers can apply a number of strategies that help students gain power in school.
When teachers provide a number of opportunities for students to gain power, these students
will work harder on their assignments, and behavioral problems will be reduced significantly,
if not completely eliminated.
Corporal punishment as best alternative to teachers
I found that teachers were applying corporal punishment as the best alternative to make
students follow them unquestioningly though teachers themselves theoretically agree it has
adverse effects. So there is complete contradiction in theoretical understanding and practical
application about corporal punishment between and among teachers. However they are not
found abiding the understanding in practice. I found they did not feel any hesitation to
punishment the children. They preferred the corporal punishment in every wrong behavior
and mistakes of the children. Teachers were found the punishing the school for the following
reasons.
a) Not coming to school in time.
b) Not coming to school in dress coded by the school.
c) Not doing their homework.
d) Not memorizing as assigned lesson.
e) Misbehaving with the teachers, fighting or quarrelling in class.
f) Not respecting the teachers.
g) Falling asleep in class.
h) Failing in an examination
i) Forgetting to bring stationeries in classroom.
Corporal Punishment - 121
j) Cheating in an examination.
I also found that teachers enjoyed hitting, scolding, and insulting students as a disciplinary
tool. They also considered it as “natural” treatment. I also observed that violence was more
widely resorted to at the schools in boys when compare with that in girls. Teachers who
applied more corporal punishment were taken as bad example by the children. I also found
that teachers who were applying less punishment has been highly respected and taken as an
example of good teacher by the children.
Changing views of parents on corporal punishment
Parents are slowly changing their view from punishment to no punishment. I also found that
parents overreact when the severe injuries occurred to their children. But they were not
reacting to the minor cases. It was so at the international arena as well. In the 1950s and 60s
following the publication by pediatrician Benjamin Spock of Baby and Child Care in 1946,
which advice parents to treat children as individuals, whereas the previous conventional
wisdom had been that child rearing should focus on building discipline (Wikipedia.com).
Culturally, many people in region believe a certain amount of corporal punishment for their
own children is appropriate and necessary, and thus such practice is accepted by society as a
whole.
Corporal Punishment - 122
CHAPTER VI
Reflection on findings
Teacher’s perception is shaped by social forces. Teachers can act as agent of social change,
shaping the world in ways that they may not realized. Theories are constructed to give an
explanation of phenomena (Stam, 2000). Permitting organization of descriptions, leading to
explanation, and furnishing the basis for prediction of future are the three function of a
theory. Here I tried to link my findings with the following theories.
Social learning theory and my findings
( Bandura, A, 2007).
Many factors shaped teachers perception and attitudes towards corporal punishment. First
factor is their personal experience obtained from lived society. The second factor is their
learning in school environment. Third factor comes from their innate person as well as family
environment. The knowledge which they have acquired from their study is also important to
shape their mind. Even the trained teacher did not learn alternative to corporal punishment.
This shows that teachers behavior require integrated feedback rather than the immediate
effects (Baum, 1973). This view shows that organisms integrate data on how often their
response are reinforced over a substantial period of time and regulate their behavior
according to the aggregate consequences.
Corporal Punishment - 123
From social learning perspectives human nature is characterized as vast potentiality that can
be fashioned by direct and vicarious experience in variety of forms within biological limits.
The level of psychological and physiological development of course restricts what can be
acquired at any given time. In other hand within the context of the school and classroom,
teachers are “social variables” that influence and model behavior for learners.
In the connection of my findings I got supportive view that social learning theory emphasizes
the importance of observing and modeling the behaviors, attitudes, and emotional reaction of
others. Teachers were also found taking the role model as their school teachers who was very
strict to the children and used the corporal punishment to make them to study. Some teachers
were found imitating the strategies to teachers who used the many form of punishment to
control the mass in the same school. Principals were also encouraging such type of teacher.
Power theory and my findings
There is obvious supremacy over children by teachers clearly reflecting low social status of
children within the school and of course in the classroom.
And yet they were found
accepting the fact “Guru Debo Vawa”. This shows that there was unequal power relation
between teacher and students. Teachers were considering figure of authority and found
misusing power by dominating and humiliating the students. They were also encouraging the
students unhealthy competition for getting high score in exam.
According to French and Raven, power must be distinguished from influence in the following
way: A-B Such that A use power for A’s desired changed in B more likely. So power is
fundamentally relative. It depends on the specific understanding and A and B each apply to
their relationship and interestingly, requires B’s recognition of a quality in A which would
Corporal Punishment - 124
influence B to change according to desire of A. following the wrong power exercise can have
negative effects, including a reduction in A’s own power.
Discipline Theory and my finding
All theories of student discipline stress the need for clear communication and consistency
(Liz MC, 2010). But I found that teachers were imposing the rule and regulation to the
students, giving command like army in the classroom activities. I also found the major
emphasis was given to classroom control in the name of discipline. This means students were
dominated by the theory of “mental discipline,” physical punishment, order, and obedience.
Principal was also found thinking teachers responsible for the classroom control and teachers
were found frequently using the punishment in the name of classroom control. This theory
also assumes that students can help create valid rules for the classroom while consequences
provide a better way to improve the class room behavior of children that punishment.
Discipline with dignity is undergirded by the philosophy of humanism. It is an approach,
according to the creators Curwin and Mendler (1988) that values the self-esteem of students.
It is the belief of the pioneers that students will protect their self-esteem or dignity at all costs.
This theory also asserts that students have needs in educational and it is the teachers’
responsibility to adequately address these needs, by implementing effective classroom
instruction. It also requires motivating students to acquire the maximum result from the
teacher without behavioral distraction and interruption.
Zero Tolerance Police and my findings
Zero tolerance policy directly tends to punishment. Teachers whom I consulted were also in
the favor of zero tolerance policy. These policy holders do not prefer any alternative method
like advice, counseling or any other democratic reasoning but wants to punish undesirable
acts. It is where they found difficult to cope with the problem of discipline. So teacher’s
Corporal Punishment - 125
attitudes was positive to zero tolerance policy means they perceived punishment (minor or
major) as an effective method of maintaining discipline in schools. Contrary to my teachers
condartrady shows that zero tolerance policy used in school for maintaining the discipline
have not yielded desired result rather momentary, short-lived and artificial discipline is
maintained with excessive rules and punishments (Abiri, 1976). Following display the
accepted and negated aspect of the theories.
Table 9:
Social Learning Theories
Accepted concept
Negated concept
Students as well as teachers learn from modeling. Modeling means
Only external reinforces play
doing what others do. They may have different types of model like live
a
model (actual person demonstrating the behavior), symbolic model
individual performs because
(television, videotape, computer programs or book) and imitation (An
the internal aspects such as
individual uses another person’s behavior).
attitudes,
role
in
action
beliefs
thoughts
also
and
and
determined
Teachers and parents must model appropriate behaviors and take care
their action.
that they don’t model inappropriate ones.
The central idea behind this
Describing the consequences of behavior to teachers as well as students
theory is that only model and
increases appropriate behavior and decreased inappropriate ones.
observation
worthy.
learning
There
are
are
other
Students must believe that they are capable of accomplishing school
several factors which are
tasks.
helpful to shape the behavior
Teachers should expose students to a variety of other models.
of children.
Corporal Punishment - 126
My findings accept that individual such as teacher learnt how to behave with students from
their teachers at school level. Teachers were taking the strict teacher (who used to beat them)
when they were in school as a role model. They were found dominating the students. So my
finding support students must empower so that they must believe they are capable to do the
school task. My findings do not accept that only external reinforces play a role in action and
individual performance because knowledge which person received from education can play
the strong role to shape the action and response of person. In my experience also I used to
beat the students some years ago but when I came to know that it is the wrong way to treat
them, now I have totally left the punishment system in classroom teaching.
Table 10:
Power Theory
Accepted concept
Negated
Concept
Teachers felt that they have power and students do not. Sharing power (authority) sets the Study of
power is
ground for a bilateral learning process in which students and teacher negotiate the class referred to as
politics.
procedures, structure, content, grading criteria as well as their own roles in relation each
The term
other. In school teachers have the power (human ability) to influence and change the authority in
school is not
environments individuals have constructed through their discursive practice. Teachers may only power.
deny the power of students through resistance (Selfe, 1996: p.275).
If students do not have opportunity to meet their need for power in these healthy,
productive, and responsible ways, they will most likely chose power over. Seeking power
over might manifest itself in behaviors like cheating, bullying other students, disrupting a
classroom, or engaging in vandalism or violence. Power is frequently defined by political
scientists as the ability to influence the behavior of others with or without resistance.
Power can be seen as evil or unjust, but the exercise of power is accepted as endemic to
humans as social beings.
Corporal Punishment - 127
Reflection of my findings over power theory is that culturally teachers have power. But they
did not have idea to share the power with the students. So the way of power they were using
saw evil or unjust. Students were found seeking power through reacting as cheating,
disturbing the classroom etc. My findings do not accept that the term authority is not only
power because teachers should take it as a responsibility also.
Table11:
Discipline Theories
Accepted concept
Students will misbehave
Negated concept
Discipline involves a high level of teacher control
Rules and consequences are determined by an in the class.
authority figure. There are many reasons for
Students must be forced to comply with
misbehavior.
rules.
Discipline should be focused to create safe Students are told they can choose to obey or
environment rather than to control the not.
students.
Programs related to discipline is a common
sense, easy- to-learn approach to help
teachers become the captains of their
classrooms and positively influence their
students’ behavior.
Students were found misbehaving in private school. Many incident of misbehaving were shown
above. So this concept supports my findings. So many reason of misbehaving were also presented
above. The rules and regulation were found determining by principal only for the teachers and
students in private school. The discipline was found focused to control the students rather than to
Corporal Punishment - 128
create safe environment. Teachers were also found to imposing the rule for their convenience. My
findings accept that students should tell they can choose to obey or not. My findings do not
support that discipline involves high level control because teachers were found misusing the
power in the name of high level control. My findings negated the concept of discipline theory
that Students are told they can choose to obey or not because students were forced to follow
rules and regulation in school.
Table 12:
Zero Tolerance Policy
Accepted concept
Negated concept
The zero tolerance policy is unjust and unfair for talk in classroom.
It is necessary for
Zero tolerance policy increases the violence in school.
certain behavior.
Zero tolerance policy does not prefer any alternative method like advice,
counseling or any other democratic reasoning.
I found the zero tolerance policy at classroom talk is unjust and unfair. More cases of
violence were found in that school where the tight rules and regulation were imposed to the
students. No alternative method like advice, counseling or any other democratic reasoning
were using in school by the teachers. I did not found the any unexpected misbehaving by
students so my findings negated necessary for certain behavior in the context of Nepal.
Corporal Punishment - 129
Table 13
Some Theoretical Understandings and Findings
Theories
Theoretical Understanding
Study’s findings
Social
Learning occurs through live
Students learn faster from symbolic
Learning
model, symbolic model and
model like television, video tape and
Theories
imitation.
computer
Power
Power can be seen as evil or unjust,
The way which teachers used their
theories
if it is not used by democratic way.
power in school was unjust and evil.
Discipline
Discipline theories stress the need
The communication to maintain the
theories
for clear communication and
discipline was one way and
consistency.
commanding only.
Students can have their own
No choices were given to the
positive choices or become more
students.
responsible in behavioral sense.
Zero tolerance
Enforcement of zero tolerance
Zero tolerance policy creates
policy
policy improves academic
frustration to the children.
discipline
Corporal Punishment - 130
CHAPTER VII
Conclusion and Implication
Conclusion
The study focused on teacher’s perception towards corporal punishment in private schools. It
also tried to find out strategies to use corporal punishment and parents supports to them. On
the basis of this understanding I have drawn the conclusion that traditional teaching style and
methods were practicing in the private schools. Students were not motivated for learning. The
environment of learning was not conductive for them. The teaching learning environment
was non participant for students (teachers oriented). There were few (music, dance, game)
students participatory class which were none punishing class. In other class, to control
children, teachers used hard punishment instead of looking means to motivate them for
learning. Teachers, school administration as well as school leader (principal) found apply and
continue corporal punishment. School management was found ignoring the non-violent
classroom management and behavior control methods. The study schools did not have
guidance and counseling units to assist in the reformation and rehabilitation of students with
cognitive and behavioral problems, where treatment and cognitive restructuring therapy can
be applied. The more surprising results were that teachers have understanding different one
corporal punishment. Teachers were frequently applying the corporal punishment in school.
Parents were also in the favor of corporal punishment but they were also slowly changing
their view on corporal punishment. Zero tolerance policy of school was helpful to create the
violence.
Though the corporal punishment system in school is not raising but it is a common problem
at least in my study schools. The punishment system is very sensitive but social concern
about it is very limited. The environment of childhood determines the shape of their future
Corporal Punishment - 131
personality and future of our society as well as country. So an integrated effort from all
sectors of the society, institution and concerned authority as well as country such as ministry
of education must provide a conductive environment where the children can develop
themselves at their best.
Implication
There is increasing need for teachers to be aware of effective alternative measures and
embrace those (Blvele & Jordan, 2002). Educators could make use of co-operative
disciplinary measures as compared to punitive and harsh disciplinary measures. Punitive
measures may not always achieve the intended objectives. Co-operative discipline is a theory
of discipline that seems to work for children today because it offers corrective, supportive,
and most important, preventive strategies (Canter & Canter, 2001). Preventing measures to
dealing with learner’s indiscipline are more proactive and useful than reactive ones that may
not repair the damage caused (Scharle & Szabo, 2000). With the changing needs of society,
new techniques and strategies should work for children in order to achieve order and control
in today’s classrooms. These new techniques and strategies are clear expectations, positive
incentives, and predictable consequences they are to learn to regulate their behavior. The new
strategies to empower the children in place of to control can be follow. Exercise, relaxation
techniques healthy eating can be the helpful for good behavior.
The ultimate goal of co-operative discipline is to inspire children to make smart choices and
develop positive behavior (Canter, 2007). It is a collaborative effort on the part of the student,
teacher, administration, and parent (Mtsweni, 2008). Child development research indicates
that self-esteem is critical for successful growth and emotional development (Gwirayi &
Shumba, 2007). Learners with positive self-esteem feel valued and independent in school and
this helps to foster co-operation and responsibility. Positive discipline such as complimenting
a good effort, removing a privilege in response to poor behavior creates a climate that
Corporal Punishment - 132
promotes self- discipline because the child has a positive self-esteem and is therefore better
able to maintain self-control (Hue & Wai-Shing, 2008). This implies that children should
realize that they are solely responsible for appropriate behavior. Discipline solely from a
position of power teachers learners that they only have to behave when someone is around to
punish them.
On the basis of above conclusion I have drawn the implication that is given below:
a) Including corporal punishment in the curriculum of higher education
My findings clearly show that the teachers as well as school leader did not have the
knowledge about the negative effective of corporal punishment. They were positive to the
corporal punishment system. Education is conceived as a powerful agency, which is
instrumental in bringing about the desired change to the person. The whole process of
education is shaped and molded by the human personality called the teacher who play vital
role in any system of education. The preparation of such an important functionary must
conceivably get the highest priority. Only those teachers can maintain the good teaching
learning environment that has sound professional attitudes towards the corporal punishment.
To make the favorable attitudes towards it, to promote the positive professional attitude in
them, brief introduction and explanation of corporal punishment should include in the B. Ed,
M. Ed level curriculum.
b) Training for private school teachers and principals
My finding concluded that the teachers and principals of private schools saw the corporal
punishment is the best alternative strategies to change the students’ behavior. It suggests that
to control the corporal punishment system, private school teachers are expected to use the
best practices and strategies to meet challenge demands of their career. If the teachers are
well trained and highly motivated, problem can be solved and learning will be enhanced.
Corporal Punishment - 133
Trained teachers not learn teaching skills but also try to promote the positive professional
attitude in them. The competent, professionally trained and enthusiastic teachers are required
to teach private school such that we can eliminate the punishment system and respects the
children in every aspect. The training can be helpful for school administrators and teacher
and educators to improve their habit and attitudes about teaching learning process.
c) Awareness program through mass media
According to my findings that parents were also supported the simple type of corporal
punishment and students were taking it naturally suggests that awareness program through
media can play the vital role to change their view. Media are broadcasting the very limited
program on corporal punishment and it situation. We should use the mass media programs
especially that of private school. This shows that we can use mass media as a tool to advocate
for children’s right and more specially, to promote awareness of, and to prevent, child abuse.
“Prevention of abuse involves changing those individual and community attitudes, beliefs and
circumstances which allow the abuse to occur” (cited in Hawkins, 1994). Media campaigns
usually are helpful to broaden community knowledge of child abuse and neglect, to influence
teacher’s and parent’s attitudes towards punishment system at school and home respectively.
It has the capacity to reach ‘simultaneously’ many thousands of people who are not related to
the sender. It depends on ‘technical devices’ or ‘machines’ to quickly distribute the messages
to diverse audiences often unknown to each other.
(a) Using external forces such as legality
Article 7 of the Children Act (1992) states: “No child shall be subjected to torture or cruel
treatment.” About the legal defense, Article 4 of Chapter 9 of the Muluki Ains states that
guardians and teachers shall not be held responsible for grievously hurting a child in the
course of education or defense, and article 7 of the Children’s Act exempts “the act of
Corporal Punishment - 134
scolding and minor beating to the child by his father, mother, member of the family, guardian
or teacher for the interests of the child” from the prohibition of cruel treatment. In 2005
Supreme Court ruled that the restrictive clause in article 7 was unconstitutional and declared
the clause “give him/her minor beating” (Supreme Court decision 6 January 2005).
From here it is clear that minor beating cases are lawful which is also helpful to follow the
corporal punishment in school to maintain the discipline. Article 7 of the children’s Act and
the relevant provision in the Muluki Ain should be repealed to reflect the Supreme Court
ruling and the law should explicitly prohibit all corporal punishment and other cruel form of
punishment (UNICEF, 2008). Criminal law (the Muluki Ain and other laws) does not provide
for judicial corporal punishment. To control the punishment in school, strict law is necessary
to prohibit all corporal punishment.
d) Establishing the monitoring unit of child rights from government level
As my findings that majority of the private school teachers still perceive the adoption of
corporal punishment as an effective disciplinary measure. So it is recommended as well that
there is the need for retaining and reorientation of private school teachers on the proper
application and administration of corporal punishment in order to inculcate and achieve
proper learning and discipline among students. Children should not lose their child rights by
virtue of palling through the school gates. Education must be provided in a way that respects
the inherent dignity of the child, enables the child to express his or her views freely in
teaching learning process. The school environment must insure that respects the children and
promotes non-violence in school. The use of corporal punishment does not respect inherent
dignity of the child not the strict limits on school discipline. Show to control the violence in
school, monitoring unit is necessary for every district of Nepal. Such monitoring unit can
Corporal Punishment - 135
help to make the school child friendly. Such unit should be helpful to promote school
communities and students’ councils, peer education and peer counseling, and involvement of
children in school disciplinary proceedings as part of the process of learning and
experiencing the realization of rights.
e) Restructuring the school curriculum
Participatory learning classes were non punishment class suggests that vocational training
research with other core subjects helps to create non violence teaching. School can focus on
vocational training and research with other core subjects. For example we can teach the
students of Himalayan region about animal husbandry and its milk product. We can engage
them to make and sell the goods which help them to get the practical knowledge. We also can
engage them in many research plans like which group like milk and cheese. What type of
predicting work will engage students such that they can take part actively in learning
activates?
The following chart displays my approach to implication.
Including corporal
punishment in the
curriculum of
higher education
Training for
private school
teachers and
principals
Changing
stakeholders’
perception
Awareness
program through
mass media
Restructuring the
school curriculum
Using external
forces such legality
Corporal Punishment - 136
References
Abrifor, C. A. (2011). Teacher perception on effectiveness of physical punishment as a
disciplinary measure. Nigeria: Obafemi Awolowo University.
Anthony J. and Burke J. (2OO6). The validity issue in Mixed Research. Mid-South
Educational Research Association, Vol. 13, No. 1, 48-63
Aryal, P. K. (2011). Phenomenology of school corporal punishment in Nepal. Kathmandu:
Plan Nepal
Alison, M. (2010). South Korean EFL teachers’ perceptions of corporal punishments in
school. Cultural vs. educational system factors. South Korea: Research on youth and
language.
Amnesty International. (1998). Children in South Asia: Securing their rights. South Asia:
Amnesty International.
Aziza, A. (2001). Expulsion of learners from secondary schools in the Western Cape: trends
and reasons. Unpublished MED dissertation, Department of Further Teacher
Education, University of South Africa.
Belves, P. S. & Jordan, M. M. (2009). Rethinking classroom management strategies for
prevention and intervention. Corwin, Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.
Bernadette, J. (2002). The role of mass media in facilitating community education and child
abuse prevention strategies. Child Abuse Prevention Issues. Retrieved from
http//www.aifs.gov.au/nch/pubs/issues/issues16/issues16.html
Bhanu, P. (7 October 2005). Training teachers to teach without the stick. Kathmandu Post.
Business Dictionary. Com. Retrieved from
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/chain-of-command.html#ixzz2LraMpOa7
Charles, H. (2010). Application of parental acceptance-rejection theory and evidence.
Forensic Psychology:U.S.A.
Corporal Punishment - 137
Chaturvedi, B. K, (2010). Chanakya Niti.
New Delhi-110002: Dimond Pocket Books
Pvt.Ltd.
Convention on the Rights of the child (2001). Corporal punishment in schools in south Asia.
London: CRC Press.
CharlesJ.Smith,S.(2005). School Discipline and classroom management.
Retrievedfromhttp://waldenpdk.org/newsletters/Smith_SchoolDiscipline.html
Charlies, R. (2011). How Parents Involvements affect Children. Retrieved from
http://www.centerforpubliceducation.org/Main-Menu/Public-education/ParentInvolvement/Parent-Involvement.html
Dhakal, G. P. (2009). Classroom against the child, a seminar paper. [Unpublished seminar
paper class presentation] Tribhuvan University. Kathmandu.
Dierangelo, R. & Guiliani, G. (2008). Classroom management techniques for students with
Dixie, G. (2008). Managing your classroom (2nd Ed.). New York & London:
Continuum.
Dr. Sears (2011). A Trusted Resource for Parents. Retrieved from:
http://www.askdrsears.com/topics/discipline-behavior/what-discipline
Elizabeth, K. (1992). Physical punishment and development of aggressive and violent
behavior. Durham, University of New Hampshire: Family Research Laboratory.
Enrique, G. (2008). Child abuse & neglect. Spain: University of Valencia, Department of
Sociology.
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of prison. New York: Pantheon
Gershoff, E. (2002). Corporal punishment by parents and associated child behaviors and
experiences: A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 128,
539–579.
Corporal Punishment - 138
Hawkins, G. Richard A.(2011). Encyclopedia of Crime and Justice.
Human Rights Web Archive (2012). Important issue affecting children’s access to
high- quality education and a safe and supportive learning atmosphere. USA: ACLU.
Hussain, K. (2012). Acceptance rejection in childhood and psychological adjustment in
adulthood. Pakisthan: University of Karachi
International Publishing Group.
Jennifer, E. (2010). The special problem of cultural differences in effects of corporal
punishment. Duke University: Center for child and Family Policy.
John,
M. (2001). Rewarded by punishment: Reflection on the disuse of positive
reinforcement in schools. Council for Exceptional children: University of Lincoln.
Katty’s remarks (2011). Corporal-Punishment-in-Chinas-Schools. Retrieved from
http://chinadailymail.com/2013/01/04/corporal-punishment-in-chinas-schools/
http://www.academia.edu/358076/Policy_in_practice_teacherstudent_conflict_in_South_African_schools
Leriche, L. (1992). The Sociology of Classroom Discipline." The High School Journal 75, no.
2 : 77-89.
Marc, T. (2010). South-Korea-System-and-School-Organization. Retrieved from
http://www.ncee.org/programs-affiliates/center-on-international-educationbenchmarking/top-performing-countries/south-korea-overview/south-korea-systemand-school-organization/
Michaell, D. & Murray, A. (2005). Corporal punishment of children in theoretical
perspective. London: Yale University Press New Haven.
Mishra, N., Thakur, K. Koirala, R., Shrestha, D., & Poudel, R. (2010). Corporal punishment
in Nepalese school children: Facts, legalities and implications. Patan: Nepal.
Corporal Punishment - 139
Nakar, D. (2007). What is a good school? Imagining beyond the limits of today to create
better tomorrow. Kampala Uganda: Kampala, Raising Voices.
Nathan, S. (2010). Parents, teachers disagree on corporal punishment ban. South Korea: The
Korean Federation of Teachers’ Associations.
NCTSN. (2009). Physical punishment: What parents should know. Los Angeles
Ohene, S., Ireland, M., McNeely, C., & Borowsky, I. W. (2006). Parental expectations,
physical punishment and violence among adolescents who score positive on a
psychosocial screening test in primary care. Pediatrics, 117,441-447.
Peter G. (2011). Freedom to learn: Psychology Today.
Ronald, P. (2005). Glossary of significant concepts in parental acceptance-rejection theory.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Sogul, K. (2009). Teachers perceptions on corporal punishment as a method of discipline in
elementary schools. Sweden: Uppsala University.
Schultz, S. (2005, December 28). Calls made to strengthen state energy policies. The Country
Today, pp. 1A, 2A.
The Teacher Guide (2011). Retrieved from http://www.teachermatters.com/classroommanagement/roles-of-the-teacher/controlling.html
UNICEF. (2000). Interviews with teachers and children in Kathamandu. Kathmandu: Author
UNICEF. (2009). Nepal country report. Kathmandu: Author.
Encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://www. Encyclopedia .com
Victorian Minister for Health (2012). Retrieved from http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au
Victoria
Wikipedia. Retrieved from http://www. Wikipedia .com
Corporal Punishment - 140
Appendix A
Biographical Data
Independent variable
percentage
Gender
Male
59
Female
41
Age
Below 25
18
25-29
31
30-34
18
35-39
12
40 and above 40
10
Not Answered
11
Level of Teaching
Primary
30
Lower secondary
40
Secondary
30
Subject taught
Corporal Punishment - 141
English
26
Math's
21
Science
21
Nepali
18
Others
14
Length of Teaching Experience
Less than 4 years
34
4-8 years
32
9-12years
16
13 -16 years
5
More than 16 years
13
Corporal Punishment - 142
Appendix B
QUESTIONNAIRE
Section 1: Biographical Information
If you are:
Principal
(Please tick)
V. Principal
Coordinator
5.
Marital Status:
More
than 16
years
Only 2
Only 3
Only 4
More than 4
Between 2 to 5 years
Between 5 to 8 tears
Between 8to 11 years
More than 11 years
School Type:
Only 1
If married, number of child:
1 year
Married
6.
Above 40
Unmarried
Government
Private
Have you been class teacher? If
yes, how many years?
(Specify)
Level of teaching:
Others
35 Up to
16 years
Between
to 40
4.
Nepali
Subject Taught:
---------------
3.
Secondary
Others
---------------
30 Up to
12 years
Between
to 35
Age
Primary
Female
Science
4years
Up to 8
years
Between
25to 30
Male
Mathemat
ics
Gender :
Lower Secondary
2.
25 Less
than
Teaching Experience:
Below
years
1.
English
Please mark the appropriate box with √
Corporal Punishment - 143
7.
Type of Teacher
Full Time
Part Time
Controversial Statements
Here are selections of controversial statements on corporal punishment in classroom teaching.
Shoe your agreement or disagreement by circling the appropriate number.
1-Strongly agree
2-Agree
3-Undecided
4-Disagree
5. Strongly disagree
STATEMENT
Strongly
agree
1. Giving punishment only results the learner 1
studying well.
2. The corporal punishment is being supported by
parents.
3. Corporal punishment is necessary in order to
maintain the discipline at school.
4. Detention is an effective way of preventing
pupils from misbehaving.
5. A good teacher is one who uses the punishment
and keeps the class quite.
6.The learner’s fear of corporal
Punishment helps to create an environment of
learning.
7. Corporal punishment increases aggression in
learners.
8. Approaching the school counselor/ other is an
effective way of solving behavior problems.
9. It is morally correct that a person who has done
wrong be punished for it.
10. If a teacher is liked, learners tend to behave
better in class.
11.Corporal punishment teaches to fear eth
teachers
12. Corporal punishment teaches learners to
respect the teacher.
Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly
disagree
2
3
4
5
Corporal Punishment - 144
13.when children are afraid they don’t
Learn.
14. Appointing a classroom monitor to report to
the teacher about misbehavior is effective.
15. Learners prefer authoritarian teachers (where
very strict measures of discipline are used.
16.Corporal Punishment should be used as a last
resort, when all other methods of discipline have
failed.
17. Corporal punishment is the best form of
punishment because it is over quickly.
18. Every school has set the tight rule and
regulation for the children.
19. We should not tolerate of violating the school
rule and regulation by the children to maintain the
discipline.
20. Sometimes parents also forced to punish the
children.
Your Personal View on Corporal Punishment
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………..................................
Corporal Punishment - 145
Appendix C
Dear Principal
I am currently completing my Master in philosophy in education. In order to complete this
degree I am conducting research on perception of teachers in Corporal Punishment in
Nepalese Private Schools: Perception of Teachers. The aim of the study is to explore
teacher’s perception on corporal punishment in the classroom. Specific focus are teachers
perception on abolition of corporal punishment and method of discipline they have adopted to
replace corporal punishment. The co-operation of your staff will assist me in reaching my
aims. Furthermore, the information gained will help make recommendation towards what
support needed with regards to classroom discipline. In completing this questionnaire, the
confidentiality of your staff and the school is assured, as the respondents remain anonymous.
Your cooperation will be greatly appreciated!
Yours sincerely
Jeevan Khanal
M.Phill Promgramme, Intern
Tribhuwan University Kathmandu
Appendix D
Dear Teacher,
I am currently completing my Master in philosophy in education. In order to complete this
degree I am conducting research on perception of teachers in Corporal Punishment in
Nepalese Private Schools: Perception of Teachers. The aim of the study is to explore
teacher’s perception on corporal punishment in the classroom. Specific focus are teachers
perception on abolition of corporal punishment and method of discipline they have adopted to
replace corporal punishment.
The questionnaire is anonymous-your name must not be give. Please answer the questions
frankly and honestly and do not discuss the questionnaire with anyone whilst completing it.
Your opinion is greatly valued.
Thank you for your time and co-operation
Yours sincerely
Jeevan Khanal
M.Phill Promgramme Intern
Tribhuwan University Kathmandu