One in five teachers back the return of corporal punishment
 

<TABLE class=storycontent cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR><TD colSpan=2>A 'fifth of teachers back caning'


</TD></TR><TR><TD class=storybody><!-- S BO --><!-- S IIMA --><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=226 align=right border=0><TBODY><TR><TD> Corporal punishment might be used to discipline fighting children

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><!-- E IIMA --><!-- S SF -->
One in five teachers would like to see the cane brought back in schools for "extreme cases", a survey suggests.
The deterioration of class behaviour was the main reason given for backing the return of corporal punishment.
The Times Educational Supplement poll of 6,162 UK teachers found more support for the cane in secondary schools.
The Department for Children, Schools and Families said violence against children was illegal and unacceptable.
<!-- E SF --><!-- S IBOX --><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=231 align=right border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width=5></TD><TD class=sibtbg> There is justification, or an argument, for bringing back corporal punishment, if only as a deterrent


Primary school teacher
Ravi Kasinathan

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><!-- E IBOX -->
The TES survey found that 22% of secondary school teachers would support the right to use corporal punishment in extreme cases.
However, those working in primary schools were less in favour at 16%.
Overall, 20.3% supported "the right to use corporal punishment in extreme cases".
The idea was less popular with heads and deputy and assistant heads, with just 12% favouring the idea, the TES reported.
Supply teacher Judith Cookson told the TES: "There are too many anger management people and their ilk who give children the idea that it is their right to flounce out of lessons for time out because they have problems with their temper.
"They should be caned instead."
And primary teacher Ravi Kasinathan said: "There is justification, or an argument, for bringing back corporal punishment, if only as a deterrent. I believe some children just don't respond to the current sanctions."
'Dark ages'
Corporal punishment was abolished in schools a decade ago.
National Union of Teachers said it could not support the views of those in favour of hitting children.
Acting general secretary Christine Blower said: "To put it another way, 80% of teachers are not in favour of a return to corporal punishment.
"The NUT could not support the views expressed by those in favour of hitting children."
Former Liberal Democrat education spokesman Phil Willis and former head teachers said bringing the cane back would be a return to the "dark ages".
But chairman of the Campaign for Real Education Nick Seaton said most people would agree with the teachers in favour of the cane. He said: "There's no doubt that behaviour and general discipline in schools have become much worse since corporal punishment was banned. "Schools can't function properly or raise standards unless they have good discipline, so - you know - adults have been encouraged to surrender their authority to children and young people basically, and I think that's not good for society or the young people themselves."<!-- E BO -->

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Do you think corporal punishment should be brought back?

I think often the threat of corporal punishment would be enough to deter pupils. I can't count the amount of times someone kicked off when I was at school, throwing tables or chairs only to screech at the teacher "You can't touch me or it's abuse" when the teacher tried to discipline them. I think actually if the teacher could touch them in some cases it would be useful, even if it is just dragging them by the ear to the headmasters office! I certainly don't think it should be used as an everyday punishment though.

Corporal punishment shouldn't be brought back. I don't see the difference between corporal punishment and child abuse; both involve violence against a child.

There can be better discipline involved in school without the need for violence; sometimes bad behaviour does have medical reasons behind it, which compounded by teachers uneducated in managing pupils with issues is inevitably going to lead to bad behaviour. Also, teachers are (understandably) frightened, to an extent, with the rise in chlidren carrying weapons.

Teachers need to regain their authority, but that doesn't require violence.

I agree with Shona.

BUT, I do think that there needs to be something in the law that means teachers can restrain pupils etc, if need be.

Frankly, if i were a teacher, I would back corporal punishment.

Dicky!

I think it should be brought back. Something needs to be done to discipline the children of today. From what I see, there is no deterrant for bad behaviour at all. A child can literally get away with murder, and nothing is ever done about it. I was abused as a child.... but there is a definite difference between abuse and discipline.

If children don't want to listen to something a teacher says, then they wont... because NOTHING can be done to them. How is that fair on the other children in the class? Yes you could send the child out, but a) they might not want to go, and you can't make them and b) they may have got their own way as they probably didn't want to be in the lesson anyway.

I understand that the cane can be used too harshly by some people, as it probably was in the past... but there's no way that teachers could get away with that now. And I also think it only needs to be used in extreme cases. But with the threat of receiving the cane, you'd probably find that children behaved.

When I was in year 4, my teacher used to keep a cane on the top of the blackboard. It was illegal to use it, but we knew she was angry whenever she took it down and hit it on the table.... strangely enough... the class would then behave.

I definitely think it should be brought back... or considered at the very least.

Bringing back corporal punishment will only give pupils a reason the kick the crap out of the person who does it to them.

That just shows what a sad state of affairs we're in at the moment. Kids need to understand that if they do something bad, that they get punished. That's the way the workd works. If they think they can get away with anything, then what's to stop them committing crimes? And learning starts at school. One of the uses of school is to teach the children to function in society... which means the learning of right from wrong.

But it also teachs them that if someone does something wrong they should use violence against them,also these days childrens parents would be so quick to sue schools for emotionally/physically damaging their children.
I see why some teachers want to bring it back though, i have those days lol.

I'm unsure. in some ways its ridiculous at the moment. teachers cant do anything and have no control unless there one of those lucky teachers thats has the students respect but honestly most don't. but I'm just not sure about the whole hitting with the cane thing it goes against the non violence message that they teach at schools to stop bullying and stuff like that.

basically i think that teachers should be allowed to remove kids that are acting up. not hitting them but if needed forcible remove them if there playing up.

I kinda think that the cane is better than forcibly removing the children though. A cane on the hand doesn't involve touching a kids body.... but restraining them does. I think (although physical and sexual abuse are as bad as each other) that hitting a child's hand with a cane is more acceptable than touching their bodies to remove them from a room. At least one hit with a cane is over quickly. Children know their rights, and if they get man handled by a teacher, they'll only have to say that the teacher touched them in place "x" and the teacher will get struck off.

I'm training to be a teacher, and I'd like to think that I could manage a class without needing any serious discipline.... but if I needed something extra as a deterrant, I'd definitely choose the cane over grabbing a child and dragging them out of a room. But that's just my opinion.

I definitely wouldn't agree with using corporal punishment with primary school children. These kids are still learning how to behave and are still developing a moral conscience. I know this still technically develops throughout life but generally speaking a child should KNOW how to behave well by the time they get to secondary school.

Obviously there are cases where a medical reason is behind bad behaviour...but some kids are just shits.

I rememeber being at secondary school and seeing kids throw chairs at teachers and use abusive language. I've even seen one girl accuse a male teacher of "asking for her phone number." These teachers couldn't do anything about it because the little shits would just stand defiantly and say "you can't touch me...my word against yours"

In this day and age teachers are powerless. Kids have more rights than anyone else in the school system and whilst this isn't necessarily a bad thing, I think it takes away the power a teacher should have.
Corporal punishment is not the answer in all cases, but I think that giving a teacher the choice to use it may make students think before they act.

i think the issue is how any form of corporal punishment would be monitered. What's to say a teacher won't go too far? Students shouldn't be terrified of their teachers or their education, but teachers shouldn't be scared of their students either.

thats why i dont want to work in a secondary school!Id get eaten alive.

I dont think it would ever be brought back, there was even talk of banning smacking a while ago (can't remember if they actually did or not).

But, whilst the odd tap on a hand from a cane might help, there will always be power happy teachers who will abuse their position and go too far in disciplining children.

I just think it boils down to violence against children as a punishment, all that is doing is teaching kids that it's okay to hurt other people if they've done something wrong.

What everyone is forgetting is that, twenty or thirty years ago, it WAS ok to use that sort of punishment... and we didn't end up with a nation of violent people.

The people who are violent now are the people who weren't disciplined at school, who think they can do what they want and get away with it.

^ good point

I don't see how that's an arguement to condone violence. Twenty or thirty years ago it may have been "OK" but so was a man beating his wife. There always has been and always will be violence, but difference between now and thirty years ago and hinging on how pupils are disciplined. It's about authority, within a classroom and within parenting too; both can achieve good results without resorting to violence. Thirty years ago, plenty of parents managed that too. Just as now, there are still parents that smack and by no means that guarantee a child who wont misbehave.

People who are violent now are likely not have been shown authority as children or disciplined correctly. More so than schools, why not take a shot at the judicial system and how they deal with criminals, that is setting a far worse example that discipline within schools; along with a greater number of younger people drinking (and drinking "harder" alcohol) and being exposed to dangerous substances more.

^ I don't think this is so much a case of 'condoning violence'. It's not even suggesting that voilence is the answer...more using appropriate force as a last resort.

30 or 40 years ago, children were beaten for not doing their homework and other trivial matters. I think in this day and age, it would be more for unruly children who are absuive to teachers and other students, who do not respond to any other form of discipline or negotiation.
It's an option not a necessity.

if a teacher laid a FINGER on me.

I would hit them straight in the face and walk out.
If they tried to restrain me, I would definately fight back.