Research on and reactions to corporal punishment

“I missed assembly” “I didn’t finish physics notes, he is so harsh, he’s a male, does not like jokes, we were punished” “my heart goes fast, I am just afraid of sticks, I try not to make mistakes”, “last Monday we didn’t collect the specimen during biology, I got four strokes, it hurt me in my heart. It was in front of friends” “we didn’t pass our exams so most of the class was punished” (comments from Form Three and Form Four secondary students in Tanzania regarding corporal punishment).

The use of corporal punishment has been fodder for heated debates between parents, teachers and the general populace. Statements like “it didn’t do me any harm”, “spare the rod, spoil the child”, or “the classes are huge and nothing else works” support and even promote the idea of corporal punishment (Dobson 2007). In contrast, opponents argue that this type of consequence not only harms children physically, but psychologically; scars are created that haunt them for a lifetime (Alvy 2007). Representatives from both sides bring emotionally charged baggage to the table as personal experiences and religion are passionately brought into the discourse. This makes it particularly challenging to sift through the fervour and determine what is best for the learner.

A seminal meta-analysis by Elizabeth Thompson Gershoff, PhD. (2002), of the National Center for Children in Poverty at Columbia University shed significant light on the issue. She found that 11 behaviours and experiences were associated with corporal punishment. Interestingly, ten of them impacted students negatively while only one had a positive affect. It came as no surprise that the one clear advantage to corporal punishment was immediate compliance, something that is valued by teachers, administrators and parents alike. The student that is talking during class immediately refrains when hit with a stick and the student that comes with a torn uniform will have it sewn by the next class day after standing in the hot sun for hours.

Ironically, the ten negative behaviours and experiences that Gershoff identified were behaviours that educators are constantly trying to curb in students. She found there was an increase in aggression, as students learned physical abuse was a legitimate way to cope and to control others. In addition, anxiety, bed wetting, tension, depression, sleep problems and mental health issues were by-products of corporal punishment. Additionally, students exhibited lower levels of self control, as they learned to depend on others for control. They also had more problems with compliance and poorer relationships with their parents. Understandably, the more often or more harshly a child was hit the more likely they were to be aggressive or to have mental health problems.

Research done earlier by Murray Straus (1994), of the Family Research Laboratory, University of New Hampshire paralleled Gershoff’s findings. Straus found more delinquency, aggression, academic problems, lower IQ, inappropriate sexual behaviour and abuse of others in those that had experienced corporal punishment. Most disturbing was an increase in suicides when corporal punishment was frequently administered.

Straus reported that the effects of corporal punishment during the formative years lingered into adulthood. Adults who reported being slapped or spanked by their parents in childhood were found to experience elevated rates of anxiety disorder, alcohol abuse, and feel a lack of control over their lives.

In response to research findings many professional organisations have spoken out against corporal punishment, including the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and the British Medical Association. The concern over the ineffectiveness of corporal punishment was highlighted by the American Academy of Pediatrics (1998, 19) when they reported, “The only way to maintain the initial effect of spanking is to systematically increase the intensity with which it is delivered, which can quickly escalate into abuse”.

However, the single most significant action was taken by the United Nations with the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989). This document internationally recognised children as deserving rights and needing mental and physical protection. Tanzania was one of the many countries that ratified the proposal. Interestingly, the United States of America was one of only two countries that refused to ratify the document, the other country being Somalia.

Corporal punishment in Africa

Discussion and concern about corporal punishment in schools has not been limited to first world countries. After careful deliberation many countries in Africa have banned corporal punishment, including the countries of Kenya, South Africa and Swaziland (Clacherty et al. 2005). While much of the evidence in Africa is anecdotal, there are some compelling research studies that have emerged on its status and impact. Corporal punishment has been prohibited since 1996 in South Africa, but it is still routinely used in schools. In 2003 an extensive Social Attitude Survey showed a general acceptance of corporal punishment; with 57% of parents using it at home. Another study conducted in May 2006, by the National Youth Victimization Study by the Centre for Justice and Crime Prevention, found that over half (51.4%) of students experienced corporal punishment in school (Newell 2006). Both of these studies speak to the difficulty of changing personal attitudes and enforcing laws even though legislation is in place.

Studies in Kenya mirrored those found in South Africa, legislation forbidding corporal punishment was not enforced. Teachers regularly caned children for minor offences such as not answering a question correctly, tardiness, talking to a friend during class, or wearing a dirty uniform. Often the punishment was in excess; resulting in bruises, cuts, broken bones, teeth knocked out, and even death (Anbarasan 1999). A survey by Populations Communication Africa showed that 60% of children experienced corporal punishment in Kenyan schools (Johnson 2004).

Research (2005) done in Swaziland examined the impact of corporal punishment on the student. Eighty-one percent (81%) of participants between the ages of 6 and 18 years old reported feeling humiliated and shamed. The majority of students were opposed to the use of corporal punishment in the schools (Clacherty et al. 2005).

A study by Kuleana (1999) investigated reasons why educators used corporal punishment. Not surprisingly, corporal punishment was found to be the easiest form of disciplining students. It was also considered the norm in many African countries; and as such was a method of discipline expected by educators and parents. Parents and teachers believed that good performance at school required a stick and beating. In addition, some educators felt that the use of a stick increased their status and respect in the eye of the learner. It was also viewed as a means to ensure advancement, some principals and educators who were aspiring for promotion in the education system believed they had to maintain discipline through corporal punishment.

Kuhn in McKendrick and Hoffman (1990) added to the argument that corporal punishment was essential for maintaining discipline in schools. They found that students were not regarded as having the potential for self-discipline and so looked to the teacher for control. Additionally, educators lacked skills in guidance and counselling, very few used a positive approach to discipline; instead they resorted to corporal punishment. This research was in line with Vally and Ruth (2006) who argued that because neither alternative nor in-depth training were provided to educators, many came to believe that there were no effective alternatives. They believed that corporal punishment was the only strategy to affectively maintain discipline in the classroom.

The Republic of Tanzania allows, but limits corporal punishment in their schools. Hitting with a stick was found to be the most common form of corporal punishment, but other physically unpleasant methods were also employed. Contorted body positions, frog jumps, push-ups, kneeling down, standing in bright sun, lying on sand and lifting stones were frequently used to punish. Unfortunately, a number of students have died due to school beatings that went out of control. Even so, there is a high rate of support for the practice in both urban and rural schools. Sixty-five percent (65%) of students and 85% of parents approved corporal punishment, although 100% of students voiced dislike of the practice (Kuleana Study 1997).

In response to concerns of excessive use of corporal punishment, the Tanzanian Government added further restrictions to corporal punishment in the schools; strokes (hits) were reduced from six to four. An additional requirement was that only the head official of the school could administer it, thereby preventing teachers from engaging in the act when they were overly angry or stressed (Ministry of Education 2008).

Methodology

The purpose of this study was to acquire descriptive information regarding the frequency and types of punishment administered, attitudes toward corporal punishment and alternatives to corporal punishment in Tanzania’s O level secondary schools. This research study surveyed 194 Form Three and Form Four secondary students in government and private schools in the Iringa Region of Tanzania and 254 O level secondary teachers. Questionnaires were in English for teachers and Kiswahili for students to create a comfortable venue and enhance communication. Student questionnaires consisted of nine multiple choice, three likert scale and two open ended questions, teacher questionnaires had nine multiple choice, two likert scale and two open ended question. Often in surveys respondents are able to select multiple answers for one question, but because respondents were unfamiliar with surveys the process was simplified and they were only allowed one answer per question. Teachers and students required extensive explanation and directions in order to complete the surveys. Questions focused on corporal punishment in the context of attitudes, frequency, methods used, reasons for, and behavioural change. The surveys were distributed during class time in January and February, 2008. Following the surveys, 14 teachers and 14 students were interviewed on their perceptions of corporal punishment in order to clarify and elaborate on responses.

Findings

The study indicated that the majority of teachers condoned corporal punishment on a limited, “sometimes” basis (56%). Although, 25% said it should never be used and there was no support for using it often (see Table 1). Forty percent (40%) of students agreed with teachers that it should be used sometimes; however, a significant number (50%) believed it should never be used. Interestingly, when students were asked how they felt about receiving corporal punishment for their own wrong doings 51% said they definitely deserved it; they perceived this as taking responsibility for their actions. The other 49% disagreed, with the most common comment being, “it was unfair”.

Table 1 Attitudes towards corporal punishment in school
Full size table

The profile of high support given to corporal punishment by teachers and students reflects its underpinnings in the culture. It seems reasonable to assume that since beatings are common in Tanzania, it would be accepted as the norm in school. As one man said, “it’s how children and women learn” another said “most students understand they must be beaten”.

Despite the substantial support for corporal punishment, it was confirmed that it should be done in moderation. This led some teachers to articulate their frustration with the current system. They believed time, limited resources and large class size contributed to resorting to a swift means of managing students. One teacher remarked,

Sometimes I use it because there is not sufficient time to use the other. Teachers have no accommodations near school, so if students make mistakes it’s quick to use corporal punishment and go on with teaching. For instance, they are suppose to clean their environment, if a student doesn’t clean the toilet they get three, four or five strokes. If they are noise makers or misbehave, then maybe they walk on their knees half, an hour and it’s hot, that is hard on knees. The emotion of the teacher leads to corporal punishment.

Teachers had less support of verbal abuse than corporal punishment, 89% believed it should never be used. Not surprisingly, there was a general consensus among students that verbal abuse was unacceptable, a few said they would rather have strokes than have teachers say things like, “you are stupid” or “you will never pass this class”. During the follow-up interviews many students voiced concern that verbal abuse was used too frequently. It could be hypothesised that adults and students were aware of the psychological damage of words, but this knowledge did not always translate into action.

By investigating the frequency in which corporal punishment was administered it was determined that 40% of teachers said that it was used over ten times a week in their school. Only 9% of teachers said it was never used within a week’s time. Students reported that 46% of them had been punished in the last week. The high degree of use is worrisome in light of the American Academy of Pediatrics warning that for physical punishment to remain viable it must increase in frequency and harshness. It would appear this is a reality. One student eloquently said, “To beat with a stick is not the way to educate children. If it is done everyday students will think it is normal and continue their mistakes”.

Having discovered a very high incidence of corporal punishment by participants the attention of the research was directed to specific forms of punishment. The most prevalent forms of punishment according to teachers were physical labour (41%) and strokes with a stick on the buttocks for boys and on the hand for girls (39%). There was considerable difference in the students’ responses when compared to teacher responses. Alarmingly, students reported a high incidence of strokes (69%), with physical labour being a distant second (18%) as seen in Table 2. Interviews with teachers and students corroborated the fact that strokes where the chosen form of punishment.

Table 2 Forms of school punishment
Full size table

An open ended question on the survey brought forth the following comments concerning the purpose of strokes. A number of students believed that using strokes was fair, as one girl said, “it motivates me”. A teacher agreed that “for some students it can be a motivation. For instance, after doing a certain test of math and then marking them, those that have below 50 come forward and get 1 sticky so they don’t want it to happen again”. These findings contrast sharply with research findings that corporal punishment achieves the goal of immediate compliance, but has never been established as an effective motivator.

In contrast, some teachers reported seeing the negative impact of corporal punishment. A teacher relayed the following story, “One day most students came late to school, the Teacher on Duty gathered them and caned them—three sticks each, then sent them to collect firewood. Then students were very angry and started writing things about him, complaints. Students lost attention in his class and so failed the national exam”. Students also believed it was ineffective “it doesn’t help me change, I just figure they will punish me and it will be over” and “it makes me lose focus on my studies”. One boy put an interesting slant on the issue, “if I am punished with strokes I will show him I’m not afraid. I will try to make him mad. He wants me to become a coward”.

From comments on the surveys and interviews it was evident that many teachers and students did not realise that the Tanzanian Government had put additional restrictions on corporal punishment. The number of strokes was reduced from six to four and could only be administered by the Headmaster. In spite of these changes, teachers reported that 63% of the time the Headmaster or Headmistress dispensed the corporal punishment while the other 33% of the time it was the classroom teacher or the Teacher on Duty. Students said that 86% of the time the punishment was given by the Headmaster or Headmistress, as the law warrants, only rarely did the teacher (6%) or teacher assistant (5%) punish them.

Student and teacher interviews divulged that teachers were regularly responsible for delivering strokes and it was not unusual for more than four strokes to be given. In regards to the number of strokes one precocious student said, “all the teachers give up to five strokes, I know the law says four is the limit. Students don’t know their rights; not knowing your rights is mental slavery”. Another warned that teachers circumvent the four stroke rule by having ten teachers each give one student two strokes, in this way the student received twenty strokes. Clearly, awareness of changes in the law and enforcement is necessary.

Corporal punishment was used for a wide range of infractions, including academic performance and disobedience. According to teachers, misbehaviour (56%) was the primary reason for corporal punishment, followed by being late for class (19%), academics (15%) and dirty or messy appearance (10%). Students stated that the biggest reason for corporal punishment was being late for class (38%), followed by school work (25%) and then misbehaviour (12%) as shown in Table 3.

Table 3 Reasons for punishment
Full size table

Little compassion was given to students who attended school dirty or without homework completed. A student’s poverty or home life, both frequently an issue in Tanzania, was not taken into consideration when it came to compliance.

Students’ most common emotional reactions to corporal punishment according to teachers were feeling sad (41%) or humiliated (51%) as seen in Table 4. Furthermore, teachers felt their peers observing the corporal punishment felt sad (39%) and embarrassed (37%) for them. Peers periodically are expected to witness the punishment of others. Unfortunately, a number of teachers advocate public humiliation. This can be seen in the following statement, “students must report to Headmaster, they must do it. It may be in public for others to learn”.

Table 4 Perceptions of feelings towards corporal punishment
Full size table

Students agreed that the primary emotion they felt was sad (66%), with the next most common emotion being okay (18%), followed by humiliated (14%). One boy expressing his cavalier feelings said, “I never cry, I’m a man”.

Only two teacher respondents commented on the emotional cost to students, “It is not very good to use corporal punishment because you embarrass students, they lose confidence” another said, “Sometimes they boycott after corporal punishment, they react. Sometimes taken to hospital and there are lot of conflicts”. Regardless of the fact that research shows there is an emotional price to pay when inflicting corporal punishment, this concern appeared to be disregarded by the majority.

Finally, 71% of teachers believed corporal punishment immediately changed the students’ behaviour, but only half believed that the effects were long term. It was further found that 82% of teachers believed they could use a different method to correct student’s behaviour. The two most common suggestions to replace corporal punishment were to counsel the student or assign physical labour. Comments such as, “I could counsel them about their misbehaviour. Students should be told the effects of behaving in a particular situation in order to make them understand what is good or bad” and “I could guide him or her in the right direction of doings things” show a commitment to counselling students.

None of the physical activities suggested by teachers were designed to cause bodily pain. Instead, unpleasant, but physically harmless activities such as slashing grass, washing lab apparatus, fetching water, and planting and watering trees were suggested. Involving parents, detention and rewarding good behaviour were also mentioned, but to a lesser degree.

Students believed that strokes should be replaced with, “words to warn, and then tell what we did wrong and then advise us on how to improve behaviour”. A boy said “don’t punish me, advise me, forgive me”. A smaller, but still significant group felt that physical labour, such as gardening, digging, fetching, or cleaning the environment should replace strokes. However, when making these suggestions students were adamant that the chores be made reasonable.

Recommendations

To change the academic climate concerning corporal punishment in Tanzania’s schools a variety of stakeholders must join forces. These include the public in general, the media, the Ministry of Education, universities and educators.

Many well-meaning and dedicated teachers believe that corporal punishment is required in the classroom. As long as this perspective persists it is impossible to eliminate corporal punishment. The first step in reducing or eliminating corporal punishment is to change the belief that removing corporal punishment equates to removing all discipline from the classroom. Once the old paradigm is discarded teachers are positioned to adopt a new vision of classroom management.

The next step toward change is to provide teachers with alternative classroom management strategies. Two formats are needed, one for those preparing to become teachers and another for veteran teachers. Pre-service teachers at university would profit from direct instruction in classroom management. Education Departments in universities should require classroom management as an area of study either embedded in a course or as a stand alone course. The power of education cannot be denied, as one teacher said, “I did strokes, even myself, but came to college and decided it was wrong”. Teachers already in the field would benefit from in-services and workshops on the topic.

Counselling and guidance services need to become an integral part of school systems. Today’s students face a great deal of stress and pressure. Issues dealing with HIV/AIDS, poverty, and drugs and alcohol permeate their lives. Supporting emotional and behavioural needs as well as academic needs is necessary in order for them to achieve academically. Hypothetically a by-produce of counselling individual students would be better behaviours in the classroom. As students learn how to exhibit self control bad behaviours would be reduced.

The Ministry of Education actively discourages the practice of corporal punishment; in fact a few teachers commented that they felt pressure from the agency. Laws are in place, but enforcement is lagging. Further effort enforcing legal restrictions are necessary, which includes a viable recourse for Headmasters, teachers and parents to take if violations occur.

In addition, class size is a secondary issue in reducing corporal punishment. Many teachers in Tanzania face large classes of 50–90 students, management becomes a daily battle. The government’s commitment to enrol more students in secondary school is admirable and important in moving Tanzania forward in the future, but it is not without challenges. Potentially it could mean larger classes and therefore more discipline problems. To counter this projection there is a need to produce more teachers so that class size is not cumbersome. This is a monumental undertaking requiring close supervision and high expectations from the government and the public.

Lastly, public awareness and education about corporal punishment is rudimentary. An informed public has the potential to be a participating public. The media has a dual role to play; providing information to the public on the subject and informing them of injustices.

Violence does not need to be part of the school experience. By inviting all stockholders to be change agents and take responsibility, corporal punishment can be reduced, or even eliminated in Tanzania’s school system.