Skip to main content
NCBI home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Mar 1.
Published in final edited form as: Psychol Health Med. 2017 Jan 9;22(SUP1):224–239. doi: 10.1080/13548506.2016.1271955

School Corporal Punishment in Global Perspective: Prevalence, Outcomes, and Efforts at Intervention

Elizabeth T Gershoff 1
PMCID: PMC5560991  NIHMSID: NIHMS886822  PMID: 28064515

Abstract

School corporal punishment continues to be a legal means of disciplining children in a third of the world's countries. Although much is known about parents' use of corporal punishment, little is known about school corporal punishment. This article summarizes what is known about the legality and prevalence of school corporal punishment, about the outcomes linked to it, and about interventions to reduce and eliminate school corporal punishment around the world.

Corporal punishment of children has been the focus of increasing concern from researchers and policymakers around the world. The U.N. Committee on the Rights of the Child has defined corporal punishment as “any punishment in which physical force is used and intended to cause some degree of pain or discomfort, however light” (2007, ¶11) and has called it a form of violence against children. Much of the global concern about corporal punishment has focused on parents' use of it (Gershoff, 2013; Gershoff & Grogan-Kaylor, 2016), yet it is also the case that corporal punishment in schools remains widespread. This article summarizes what is known to date about school corporal punishment around the world.

Definition and Forms of School Corporal Punishment

Schoolchildren of all ages are subject to corporal punishment, although is it more often used in primary school (Clacherty, Donald, & Clacherty, 2005b; Human Rights Watch & ACLU, 2008; Youssef, Attia, & Kamel, 1998). In practice, school corporal punishment often involves the use of objects (Gershoff, Purtell, & Holas, 2015). Children around the world report that they are hit by their teachers with a variety of objects, including sticks (Egypt: Youssef et al., 1998), straps (Jamaica: Baker-Henningham, Meeks-Gardner, Chang, & Walker, 2009), and wooden boards (U.S.: Pickens County [Alabama] Board of Education, 2015). Children have reported being hit with hands or objects on virtually every part of their bodies, although the hands, arms, head, and buttocks are common targets (Ba-Saddik & Hattab, 2013; Beazley, Bessell, Ennew, & Waterson, 2006; Human Rights Watch & ACLU, 2008; Youssef et al., 1998). Other forms of assault administered as corporal punishment include pinching, pulling ears, pulling hair, slapping the face, and throwing objects (Ba-Saddik & Hattab, 2013; Beazley et al., 2006). Teachers and school personnel also punish children by forcing them to stand in painful positions, to stand in the sun for long periods, to sit in an “invisible chair” for long periods, to hold or carry heavy objects, to dig holes, to kneel on small objects such as stones or rice, to exercise excessively without rest or water, and to ingest noxious substances (e.g., cigarettes) (Ba-Saddik & Hattab, 2013; Beazley et al., 2006; Feinstein & Mwahombela, 2010; Hyman, 1995).

School administrators report that they reserve corporal punishment for serious student infractions, such as fighting with fellow students (Medway & Smircic, 1992), yet interviews with students make clear that corporal punishment is used more widely. Children in India, Republic of Korea, South Africa, Sudan, Swaziland, the United States, and Zambia have reported being subject to corporal punishment for a range of behaviors, including not doing their homework, coming late to class, bringing cell phones to school, running in the hallway, sleeping in class, answering questions incorrectly, having an unacceptable appearance, using bad language, writing in a text book, failing to pay school fees, making noise in class, and being absent (Beazley et al., 2006; Breen, Daniels, & Tomlinson, 2015; Clacherty, Donald, & Clacherty, 2005a; Clacherty et al., 2005b; Elbla, 2012; Human Rights Watch & ACLU, 2008; Mitchell, 2010; Morrow & Singh, 2014). Students also report that an entire class may be subject to corporal punishment for the misbehavior of a single student or because an entire class or school performs poorly on examinations (Beazley et al., 2006; Pinheiro, 2006).

Legal Status of School Corporal Punishment around the World

Corporal punishment is legally prohibited in schools in 128 countries and allowed in 69 (35%) (Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children [Global Initiative], 2016g). Table 1 lists each of the countries that allow school corporal punishment. It is banned in all of Europe and most of South America and East Asia. Three industrialized countries are outliers that continue to allow school corporal punishment: Australia, the Republic of South Korea, and the United States. In Australia, school corporal punishment is banned in 5 of its 8 states and territories, while in the United States it is banned from public schools in 31 of 50 states (Global Initiative, 2016g). A sampling of the laws that allow corporal punishment is presented in Table 2.

Table 1. The 69 Countries in Which School Corporal Punishment is Legally Permitted in 2016.

Angola Mozambique
Antigua and Barbuda Myanmar
Australia Nepal
Bahamas Niger
Barbados Nigeria
Bhutan Pakistan
Botswana Palau
Brunei Darussalam Panama
Burkina Faso Papua New Guinea
Central African Republic Qatar
Comoros Republic of Korea
Côte d'Ivoire Samoa
Dominica Saudi Arabia
DPR Korea Senegal
Egypt Seychelles
Equatorial Guinea Sierra Leone
Eritrea Singapore
Gambia Solomon Islands
Ghana Somalia
Grenada Sri Lanka
Guatemala St Kitts and Nevis
Guinea St Lucia
Guyana St Vincent and the Grenadines
India State of Palestine
Indonesia Sudan
Iran Suriname
Iraq Swaziland
Jamaica Syrian Arab Republic
Lebanon Timor-Leste
Lesotho Tuvalu
Liberia UR Tanzania
Malaysia United States of America
Maldives Western Sahara
Mauritania Zimbabwe
Morocco
Open in a new tab

Table 2. Examples of Laws Permitting School Corporal Punishment.

Botswana, Children's Act 2009, article 61a
“

  1. No person shall subject a child to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

  2. No person shall subject a child to correction which is unreasonable in kind or in degree relative to the age, physical and mental condition of the child and which, if the child by reason of tender age or otherwise is incapable of understanding the purpose and fairness thereof.

  3. The provisions of this section shall not be construed as prohibiting the corporal punishment of children in such circumstances or manner as may be set out in this Act or any other law….

”
Dominica, Education Act 1997, article 49a
“

  1. In the enforcement of discipline in public schools, assisted private schools and private schools degrading or injurious punishment shall not be administered.

  2. Corporal punishment may be administered where no other punishment is considered suitable or effective, and only by the principal, deputy principal or any teacher appointed in writing by the principal for that purpose, in a manner which is in conformity with the guidelines issued in writing by the Chief Education Officer.

  3. Whenever corporal punishment is administered an entry shall be made in a punishment book that shall be kept in each school for such purpose with a statement of the nature and extent of the punishment and the reasons for administering it.

  4. A person other than those mentioned in subsection (2) who administers corporal punishment to a child on the school premises is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine of one thousand dollars.

”
Papua New Guinea, Criminal Code 1974, article 278a
“It is lawful for a parent or a person in the place of a parent, or for a schoolmaster, or master, to use, by way of correction, towards a child, pupil or apprentice under his care such force as is reasonable under the circumstances.”
Singapore, Education (School) Regulations 1958, article 88(2)a
“The corporal punishment of boy pupils shall be administered with a light cane on the palms of the hands or on the buttocks over the clothing. No other form of corporal punishment shall be administered to boy pupils.”
St Kitts and Nevis, Education Act 2005, article 49(2)a
“Corporal punishment may be administered where no other punishment is considered suitable or effective, and only by the principal, deputy principal or any teacher appointed by the principal for that purpose, in a manner which is in conformity with the guidelines issued, in writing, by the Chief Education Officer.”
United States, Mississippi, 37-11-57. (2)b
“Corporal punishment administered in a reasonable manner, or any reasonable action to maintain control and discipline of students taken by a teacher, assistant teacher, principal or assistant principal acting within the scope of his employment or function and in accordance with any state or federal laws or rules or regulations of the State Board of Education or the local school board, does not constitute negligence or child abuse.”
United States, Tennesseec
49-6-4103. Corporal punishment. Any teacher or school principal may use corporal punishment in a reasonable manner against any pupil for good cause in order to maintain discipline and order within the public schools.
49-6-4104. Rules and regulations. Each local board of education shall adopt rules and regulations it deems necessary to implement and control any form of corporal punishment in the schools in its district.”
Zimbabwe, Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act 2004, article 241(2)a
“… a school-teacher shall have authority to administer moderate corporal punishment for disciplinary purposes upon any minor male pupil or student; and, where moderate corporal punishment is administered upon a minor person by a parent, guardian or school-teacher within the scope of that authority, the authority shall be a complete defence to a criminal charge alleging the commission of a crime of which the administration of the punishment is an essential element.”
Open in a new tab

The United Nations has clearly stated that corporal punishment violates the Convention on the Rights of the Child (the CRC) (United Nations, Committee on the Rights of the Child, 2007), specifically Article 19's guarantee of protection from all physical and mental violence, Article 37's protection from cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment, and Article 28's provision that school discipline should be consistent with children's “human dignity” (United Nations, 1989).

It is worth noting that if an adult were to be hit with an object such as schoolchildren are, it would be considered assault in any of these countries. The 69 countries that legally permit school corporal punishment, to say nothing of the 149 countries that allow corporal punishment in homes, are not providing children with equal protection under the law, despite their more vulnerable status.

Global Prevalence of School Corporal Punishment

Corporal punishment continues to occur in schools throughout the world, both in countries where it is legal and countries where it is banned, leading to estimates that millions of children are subject to legalized assault at their schools (Covell & Becker, 2011). Table 3 provides estimates of the prevalence of school corporal punishment in 63 countries. Twenty-nine of these countries have legally banned corporal punishment from schools, yet they have rates of corporal punishment ranging from 13% of students in Kazakhstan to fully 97% of students in Cameroon. South Africa banned school corporal punishment when it transitioned to a new government and a new Constitution that valued the rights of children in 1996. However, students have reported that corporal punishment continues to be a regular part of education in South Africa (Payet & Franchi, 2008).

Table 3. Prevalence of School Corporal Punishment in Selected Countries, Regardless of Legality.

Country Legal status Year Prevalence
% of students reporting they were subject to corporal punishment % of students or teachers reporting others were subject to corporal punishment
AFRICAa
Benin Banned 2009 88% of girls beaten in schools
Botswana Legal 2007 92% of students
Cameroon b Banned 2000 97% of students
Central African Republic Legal 2013 51% of males and 45% of females
Djibouti Banned 2006 28% hit with object, 14% had been pinched or had hair or ears pulled
Egypt c Legal 1998 80% of boys, 62% of girls
Equatorial Guinea Legal 2011 54%
Ethiopia d Banned 2009 38% of 8 year olds in past week; 12% of 15 year olds in past week 76% of 8 year olds observed in past week;
49% of 15 year olds observed in past week
Ghana Legal 2010 71% of students
Kenya e Banned 2010 41% of females, 46% of males were punched, kicked, whipped, or beaten with an object in previous 12 months
Malawi Banned 2007 48% of students
Mali Banned 2009 83% of students report that it occurs
Morocco f Legal 2005 87% of students
Mozambique Legal 2009 40% hit with an object in past two weeks
Nigeria Legal 2011 80% of respondents had seen students hit with a cane, 46% with a horsewhip, 30% with hand
South Africa Banned 2013 50% of students
Swaziland g Legal 2005 59% of students beat with object in previous 2 weeks;
20% of students hit with hand in previous 2 weeks
Togo Banned 2005 88% of girls and 87% of boys
Uganda h Banned 2015 90% of students in primary school (88% reported caning)
United Republic of Tanzania i Legal 2014 98% of boys, 91% of girls 98% of boys, 99% of girls
Zambia j Legal 2005 32% of students in previous 2 weeks
Zimbabwe Legal 2009 67% of students report teachers use corporal punishment
EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIAk
Albania Banned 2006 39% of students had hair pulled, 37% pinched, 52% hti with an object, 34% hit with an open hand
Belgium Banned 2011 23% of students had ear pulled, 18% had hair pulled, 20% were hit with a hand on their hand or fingers, 14% forced to stand or kneel in painful position
Czech Republic Banned 2011 30% of teachers had slapped a student
Kazakhstan Banned 2013 13% in past year
Serbia Banned 2006 43% in past three months
TFYR Macedonia Banned 2009 57% knew a child who had been beaten by a teacher
MIDDLE EAST AND SOUTH ASIAl
Afghanistan Banned 2008 Observed in 100% of boys' schools and 20% of girls' schools
Bangladesh Banned 2015 53% of students
India d Legal 2009 78% of 8 year olds in past week; 34% of 15 year olds in past week 93% of 8 year olds observed in past week;
68% of 15 year olds observed in past week
Iraq Legal 2008 48% of teachers used
Jordan Banned 2007 57% of students had been subject to severe violence (hitting with object, biting burning); 50% had been subject to mild violence (slapping, pulling hair, pinching, pushing, twisting arms or legs)
Lebanon f Legal 2005 46% of students in previous month
Pakistan Legal 2014 44% of students in previous 6 months
State of Palestine Legal 2010 80% of students
Yemen f Banned 2010 90% of students
EAST ASIA AND THE PACIFICm
Cambodia Banned 2013 15% of boys and 9% of girls in previous 6 months
China Banned 2004 58% of students (10% beat with an object)
Fiji Banned 2008 31% in past month
Hong Kong n Banned 2006 54% of discipline involves physical punishment
Indonesia Legal 2014 27% of boys and 9% of girls in previous 6 months
Myanmar Legal 2012 82% of students beaten
Philippines Banned 2009 18% of students pinched, 16% spanked with hand or object
Republic of Korea n Legal 2011 98% of students 94% of discipline involves physical punishment
Samoa Legal 2013 41% in past year
Taiwan Banned 2012 95% of students have seen school corporal punishment
Vietnam d,n Banned 2009 20% of 8 year olds in past week; 1% of 15 year olds in past week 59% of 8 year olds in past week; 13% of 15 year olds in past week;
69% of discipline involves physical punishment
NORTH, CENTRAL, AND SOUTH AMERICAo
Barbados Legal 2009 56% of students flogged at school
Dominica Legal 2009 86% of students
Grenada p Legal 2014 85% of students 86% of teachers report using
Jamaica q Legal 2009 96% of boys and 89% of girls
Peru d Banned 2009 30% of 8 year olds in past week; 7% of 15 year olds in past week 51% of 8 year olds observed in past week
19% of 15 year olds observed in past week
St. Kitts & Nevis p Legal 2014 92% of students 88% of teachers report using
St. Lucia Legal 2011 86% of students report corporal punishment at their school
St. Vincent & the Grenadines p Legal 2014 82% of students 83% of teachers report using
Trinidad & Tobago p Banned 2014 92% of students 71% of teachers report using
United States of America r Legal 2012 1% of all public school students nationally (7% in Mississippi, 4% in Alabama, 4% in Arkansas, 2% in Oklahoma; all other states 1% or less)
Open in a new tab

Note: Dates refer to year of survey if available or to year of report if not. Source for prevalence data is report cited in section heading, unless otherwise indicated.

f

Save the Children Sweden (2011).

Nine countries in this table have been found to have corporal punishment rates of over 90% of students (Botswana, Cameroon, Jamaica, St. Kitts & Nevis, Republic of Korea, Trinidad & Tobago, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, and Yemen) and 11 have rates of between 70 and 89% (Benin, Dominica, Egypt, Ghana, Grenada, India, Morocco, Myanmar, St. Vincent & the Grenadines, State of Palestine, and Togo). It is extremely troubling that virtually all children in these 20 countries are subject to corporal punishment in schools.

In light of the fact that children are likely to under-report corporal punishment because they are afraid of the repercussions (Morrow & Singh, 2014; Parkes & Heslop, 2013), the corporal punishment rates in Table 1 may be an underestimate of the actual rate in any of these countries. There is also considerable within-country variation that is masked by these statistics. For example, in the United States, corporal punishment is only allowed in 19 states, and thus when the rate for the entire country is calculated it is quite small at 1% of all schoolchildren, although the size of the child population in that country means that this represents a total of 163,333 children subject to corporal punishment in the 2011-2012 school year alone (Gershoff & Font, 2016). However, in the state of Mississippi, 7% of all public school children, or one in every 14, were subject to corporal punishment in that single year (Gershoff & Font, 2016).

Concerns about School Corporal Punishment

Although the majority of research to date on corporal punishment has been focused on parents' use of it Gershoff & Grogan-Kaylor, 2016), there is sufficient data on several potential outcomes of corporal punishment to engender concern about its continued use around the world. Given the conclusion stated above that school corporal punishment is a form of violence that violates children's human rights (Committee on the Rights of the Child, 2007), arguments about its effects on children are, or at least should be, moot. After all, we have not needed research to decide that violence against women should be unlawful. That said, because some policymakers and citizens are more convinced by data on outcomes then by human rights arguments, this brief summary is provided.

School Corporal Punishment Can Interfere with Learning

No children in any country behave well all of the time, and any child's misbehavior can be a detriment to their own learning and a distraction to the learning of his or her peers. It is thus necessary the world over for school personnel to institute some form of guidance and discipline. If it was effective at maintaining appropriate student behavior, school corporal punishment would be expected to predict better learning and achievement among students.

There is in fact no evidence that school corporal punishment enhances or promotes children's learning in the classroom. In a cross-sectional study in Jamaica, school children who received one or two types of school corporal punishment scored lower on mathematics, and children who received 3 more types of corporal punishment at school scored lower on spelling, reading, and mathematics (Baker-Henningham et al., 2009). In a study in Nigeria, children who attended a school that allowed corporal punishment (slapping, pinching, hitting with a stick) had lower receptive vocabulary, lower executive functioning, and lower intrinsic motivation than children who attended a school that did not allow corporal punishment (Talwar, Carlson, & Lee, 2011).

The strongest demonstration of the links between school corporal punishment and children's learning to date has come from UNICEF's Young Lives study of children in four developing countries, namely Ethiopia, India, Peru, and Vietnam (Ogando et al., 2015). The study followed children over time and linked corporal punishment at age 8 to school performance at age 12, thus eliminating the possibility that children's later school performance could predict their corporal punishment earlier in time. The study also controlled for a range of factors that might predict both whether a child receives corporal punishment and their school performance, namely: age of the child, gender of the child, height-for-age, birth order, caregiver's education level, household expenditures, household size, and whether the child lived in an urban locale. Children from each country reported high rates of school corporal punishment (from 20% to 80% of children) when they were 8 years of age, and the more corporal punishment they received at age 8, the lower their math scores were in two samples (Peru and Vietnam) and the lower their vocabulary scores in Peru (Ogando et al., 2015). Importantly, in none of the countries did school corporal punishment at age 8 predict better school performance at age 12.

One reason that corporal punishment may interfere with children's learning is that children avoid or dislike school because it is a place where they are in constant fear of being physically harmed by their teachers. In the Young Lives study, 5% of students in Peru, 7% in Vietnam, 9% in Ethiopia, and 25% in India who reported being beaten by teachers as their most important reason for not liking school (Ogando et al., 2015). Interviews with students in Barbados, Egypt, India, Pakistan, Sudan, Tanzania, and Zimbabwe have revealed that school corporal punishment was painful, that it made the adolescents hate their teachers, have difficulty concentrating and learning, perform less well in school, and avoid or even drop out of school for fear of being beaten (Anderson & Payne, 1995; Elbla, 2012; Feinstein & Mwamombele, 2010; Gwirayi, 2011; Morrow & Singh, 2014; Naz, Khan, Daraz, Hussain, & Khan, 2011; Youssef et al., 1998).

School Corporal Punishment Poses a Significant Risk for Physical Injury

Studies in a range of countries have documented high rates of injury related to school corporal punishment. School children in Zambia reported pain, physical discomfort, nausea, and embarrassment as well as feeling vengeful (Clacherty et al., 2005a). In Egypt, 26% of boys and 18% of girls reported that they had been injured by school corporal punishment, including bumps, contusions, wounds, and fractures (Youssef et al., 1998). A remarkably similar rate of injury was found in the United Republic of Tanzania, where nearly a quarter of the 408 primary school children surveyed said they experienced corporal punishment so severe that they were injured (Heckler, Hermenau, Isele, & Elbert, 2014). In the United States, schoolchildren have suffered a range of physical injuries that often require medical treatment, including bruises, hematomas, nerve and muscle damage, cuts, and broken bones (e.g., Block, 2013; C. A. ex rel G.A. v. Morgan Co. Bd. of Educ., 2008; Garcia ex rel. Garcia v. Miera, 1987; Hardy, 2013; Ingraham v. Wright, 1977). Over ten years ago, the Society for Adolescent Medicine (2003) estimated that between 10,000 and 20,000 students required medical attention as a result of school corporal punishment each year in the U.S. alone.

Although rare, the U.N. has identified numerous cases of children who have died as a result of corporal punishment at school, including a 7-year old boy in Malaysia, a 9-year old boy in South Africa, an 11-year old girl in India, a 13-year-old girl in Sri Lanka, and a 14-year-old boy in the Philippines (Covell & Becker, 2011). Additional cases of children dying as a result of school corporal punishment have been documented in India (Morrow & Singh, 2014) and Nigeria (Chianu, 2000). Any injury to a child from corporal punishment is regrettable and a death at the hands of teachers is particularly tragic, especially given that it was preventable.

School Corporal Punishment is Linked with Mental Health and Behavioral Problems

In addition to being physically painful and potentially injurious, school corporal punishment is also often emotionally humiliating for children (Feinstein & Mwahombele, (2010). Feelings of humiliation can be heightened when children are punished in front of the class or when the child's reaction to the punishment is broadcast over the school's public address system in administrators' attempts to “teach a lesson” to all of the children in the school (Human Rights Watch & ACLU, 2008; Feinstein & Mwahombele, 2010).

It is thus not surprising that school corporal punishment has been linked with mental and behavioral problems in children. School corporal punishment was the strongest predictor of depression among school children in a study in Hungary, more so than corporal punishment by parents (Csorba, Rózsa, Vetro, Gadoros, Makra, Somogyi, Kaczvyinsky, & Kapornay, 2001). Among a sample of Tanzanian children, school corporal punishment was linked with decreased empathic behavior (Heckler et al., 2014). In Pakistan, school corporal punishment was linked with greater hostility, pessimism, and depression (Naz et al., 2011). In a cross-sectional study in Egypt, children who were corporally punished reported that they were also more disobedient, stubborn, verbally aggressive, and likely to lie than children not corporally punished (Youssef et al., 1998). The Young Lives study found that more frequent school corporal punishment at age 8 predicted less self-efficacy 4 years later in Ethiopia and Peru and lower self-esteem 4 years later in Ethiopia and Vietnam (Ogando et al., 2015). These findings support the conclusion that corporal punishment may cause children to experience mental health and behavioral problems.

Although the research on school corporal punishment and children's mental health and behavior is limited, it should be noted that these findings are consistent with those from research on parents' use of corporal punishment, namely that it is linked with more mental health problems and more problematic behavior (Gershoff & Grogan-Kaylor, 2016). These links have been confirmed across race and ethnic groups in the United States (Gershoff, Lansford, Sexton, Davis-Kean, & Sameroff, 2012) and across six different countries (China, India, Italy, Kenya, Philippines, and Thailand: Gershoff, Grogan-Kaylor, Lansford, Chang, Zelli, Deater-Deckard, & Dodge, 2010).

Disparities in School Corporal Punishment by Race, Gender, Ethnic Group, or Disability Status

Another source for concern is that certain groups are targeted for more corporal punishment than other groups. Boys, children from ethnic minorities, and children with disabilities are more likely to experience corporal punishment than their peers (Alyahri & Goodman, 2008; Covell & Becker, 2011; Dunne, Humphreys, & Leach, 2006; Lee, 2015). In the Young lives study, boys were more likely than girls to experience school corporal punishment in each country: Ethiopia: 44% (boys) vs. 31% (girls); India: 83% vs. 73%; Peru: 35% vs. 26%; Vietnam: 28% vs. 11% (Ogando et al., 2015). In both Singapore and Zimbabwe, gender discrimination is written into law—only boys can be subject to school corporal punishment in these countries (see Table 2; Makwanya et al., 2012).

Disparities in school corporal punishment by gender, race, and disability status have been documented in the United States. Using data from all 95,088 public schools in the U.S., Gershoff and Font (2016) found that boys, racially Black children, and children with disabilities were more likely to be corporally punished in school than their peers (Gershoff & Font, 2016). These disparities are in contravention of several U.S. federal laws that protect schoolchildren from discrimination on the basis of race, gender, and disability status (United States Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, 2015). Disparities in the use of school corporal punishment are concerning because students who perceive they are being treated in a discriminatory fashion are more likely to engage in negative school behaviors, to have low academic achievement, and to have mental health problems (Schmitt, Branscombe, Postmes, & Garcia, 2014; Smalls, White, Chavous, & Sellers, 2007).

Costs to Society

If countries are not motivated to eliminate school corporal punishment out of respect for children's human rights or concern for their welfare, they may be motivated by potential benefits to their bottom line. Researchers with Plan International estimated the economic costs to society from the continued use of school corporal punishment in India, focusing on costs that accrue from lower achievement, lower earnings, higher physical and mental health needs, and higher reliance on social services (Pereznieto et al., 2010). They calculated that the costs to society of children dropping out of school as a result of school corporal punishment were between $1.5 billion and $7.4 billion in lost benefits to society _each year_, which is the equivalent to between .13% and .64% of GDP in India alone (Pereznieto et al., 2010). Multiplied by the 69 countries that still allow school corporal punishment, and the large number of countries that turn a blind eye to the continued use of corporal punishment despite legal bans, the costs of school corporal punishment to global society is staggering.

They Way Forward: Ending School Corporal Punishment

The data summarized above makes clear that school corporal punishment is consistently linked with harm to children's learning, physical safety, and mental health, and that it is not effective at maintaining discipline and facilitating academic achievement. Ending school corporal punishment will require educating the public about harms of corporal punishment, instituting appropriate sanctions for continued use of corporal punishment by school personnel, monitoring compliance with bans, creating procedures for students, parents, or staff to report use of corporal punishment, and instructing teachers in alternative methods of discipline (Global Initiative, 2016b). Advocacy and public education campaigns that combine the efforts of governmental and non-governmental agencies are needed to raise awareness about the harms of corporal punishment among teachers, parents, and children (Save the Children Sweden, 2011).

The United Nations has called on countries to ban corporal punishment in all settings, including schools, in order to ensure the safety of children and to be in compliance with the CRC (United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, 2008; Pinheiro, 2006). According to the Global Initiative (2016a), 30 states were advised to end all corporal punishment by United Nations treaty bodies, and 26 countries were so advised during their Universal Periodic Reviews (Global Initiative, 2016a). Legal bans on school corporal punishment, and ideally on all corporal punishment of children in any setting, would be welcome steps toward ensuring children's safety and well-being in school settings. Yet as demonstrated above and in Table 3, legal bans are not sufficient to completely eliminate school corporal punishment. True behavior change by teachers and school administrators will require education about the harms of corporal punishment and about alternative, positive forms of discipline (Pinheiro, 2006).

There are a limited number of school- and community-level interventions to reduce school corporal punishment, but their results to date are very promising. The most rigorous test of a corporal punishment reduction intervention was the randomized controlled trial evaluation of the Good Schools Toolkit in Uganda (DeVries et al., 2015). The intervention, developed by a Ugandan non-profit organization called Raising Voices, involved extensive staff training on non-violent disciplinary methods as well as staff coaching from program staff. The Toolkit also involves classroom activities linked to a sequence of 6 steps aimed at reducing teachers' use of corporal punishment and increasing their use of positive disciplinary methods (see: raisingvoices.org/good-school). Schools that implemented the Good Schools Toolkit saw a 42% reduction in the number of students who reported they had been victims of violence from school staff. There were no effects of the intervention on students' behavior problems or on their educational performance (DeVries et al., 2015), which importantly refutes arguments that removing corporal punishment will lead to an increase in students' problem behaviors and decrease their learning at school.

Another promising intervention is ActionAid's Stop Violence Against Girls in School multilevel intervention designed to reduce violence across multiple settings, including schools, through a combination of advocacy and education about topics such as the importance of gender equity and about the harms of corporal punishment (Parkes & Heslop, 2013). The program was implemented simultaneously in Ghana, Kenya, and Mozambique from 2007 to 2013 and yielded significant results. In all three countries, the percentage of students and teachers who thought teachers should not whip students increased, and the percent of girls who reported experiencing corporal punishment in schools also decreased. For example, in Mozambique, the percentage of girls saying they had been caned in the previous year dropped from 52% to 29%. Additional impacts were found in school participation and achievement. The intervention schools saw increases in girls' enrollment increase by 14% in Ghana, 17% in Kenya, and 10% in Mozambique over the five years of the evaluation and an accompanying decrease in dropouts among both boys and girls in Ghana and Kenya (Parkes & Heslop, 2013). In qualitative interviews, teachers reported that caning had reduced drastically, but also reported that they had not been instructed in alternative forms of discipline and so were left not clear how to manage students' behavior (Parkes & Heslop, 2013). Clearly, interventions to reduce corporal punishment will only be effective if they provide teachers instruction in alternative, effective methods.

Similar interventions have been tried elsewhere in the world, although many have yet to be rigorously evaluated. For example, the organization Plan International initiated its Learn Without Fear campaign in 2008 to promote legal bans on corporal punishment in schools and protect children from all forms of violence in school. It trained over 50,000 teachers in non-violent disciplinary methods and worked with teachers' unions in 20 countries; it also engaged in awareness raising activities through a variety of media that reached over 110 million people (Global Advocacy Team, Plan International, 2012). The organization touts as success the fact that several countries they worked with passed legislation or regulations banning school corporal punishment (Global Advocacy Team, Plan International, 2012), but the impacts on individual children were not assessed.

Conclusion

School corporal punishment is a fact of life for millions of children around the world, despite no evidence that it promotes learning and substantial evidence that it instead is linked with physical harm, mental and behavioral health problems, and impaired achievement. It is encouraging that 128 countries have banned corporal punishment, but there is still much work to be done to educate teachers about alternatives to corporal punishment so that they completely abandon its use in schools. Legislative reform, advocacy, and education are each needed to ensure that school corporal punishment is abandoned once and for all and that children can attend school without fear of violence at the hands of school personnel.

References

  1. Alyahri A, Goodman R. Harsh corporal punishment of Yemeni children: Occurrence, type and associations. Child Abuse & Neglect. 2008;32:766–773. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2008.01.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Anderson S, Payne MA. Corporal punishment in elementary education: Views of Barbadian schoolchildren. Child Abuse & Neglect. 1994;18:377–386. doi: 10.1016/0145-2134(94)90040-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bailey C, Robinson T, Coore-Desai C. Corporal punishment in the Caribbean: Attitudes and practices. Social and Economic Studies. 2014;63:207–233. [Google Scholar]
  4. Baker-Henningham H, Meeks-Gardner J, Chang S, Walker S. Experiences of violence and deficits in academic achievement among urban primary school children in Jamaica. Child Abuse & Neglect. 2009;33:296–306. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2008.05.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Ba-Saddik AS, Hattab AS. Physical abuse in basic-education schools in Aden governorate, Yemen: a cross-sectional study. Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal. 2013;19(4):333–339. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Beazley H, Bessell S, Ennew J, Waterson R. What children say: Results of comparative research on the physical and emotional punishment of children in Southeast Asia and the Pacific, 2005. Save the Children Sweden Southeast Asia and the Pacific; 2006. [Google Scholar]
  7. Bezinque A, Meldrum J, Darling-Churchill K, Stuart-Cassel V. Compendium of School Discipline Laws and Regulations for the 50 States, Washington, D.C. and the U.S. Territories. National Center on Safe Supportive Learning Environments. 2015 Available at: http://safesupportivelearning.ed.gov/school-discipline-compendium.
  8. Block N. Breaking the Paddle: Ending School Corporal Punishment. Columbus, OH: Center for Effective Discipline; 2013. [Google Scholar]
  9. Breen A, Daniels K, Tomlinson M. Children's experiences of corporal punishment: A qualitative study in an urban township of South Africa. Child Abuse & Neglect. 2015;48:131–139. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.04.022. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Burton P, Leoschut L. School Violence in South Africa: Results of the 2012 National School Violence Study. Cape Town: The Centre for Justice and Crime Prevention; 2013. [Google Scholar]
  11. C. A. ex rel G.A. v. Morgan Co. Bd. of Educ., 577 F. Supp. 2d 886, 888 (E.D. Ky. 2008).
  12. Chianu E. Two deaths, one blind eye, one imprisonment: Child abuse in the guise of corporal punishment in Nigerian schools. Child Abuse & Neglect. 2000;24:1005–1009. doi: 10.1016/S0145-2134(00)00154-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Clacherty G, Donald D, Clacherty A. Zambian children's experience of corporal and humiliating punishment: A quantitative and qualitative survey. Save the Children Sweden 2005a [Google Scholar]
  14. Clacherty G, Donald D, Clacherty A. Children's experience of corporal and humiliating punishment in Swaziland. Save the Children Sweden 2005b [Google Scholar]
  15. Covell K, Becker J. Five Years on: A Global Update on Violence against Children, Report for the NGO Advisory Council for follow-up to the UN Secretary-General's Study on Violence against Children. New York: United Nations; 2011. [Google Scholar]
  16. Csorba J, Rózsa S, Vetro A, Gadoros J, Makra J, Somogyi E, Kaczvyinsky E, Kapornay K. Family- and school-related stresses in depressed Hungarian children. European Psychiatry. 2001;16:18–26. doi: 10.1016/s0924-9338(00)00531-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. DeVries KM, Knight L, Child JC, Mirembe A, Nakuti J, Jones R, et al. Naker D. The Good School Toolkit for reducing physical violence from school staff to primary school students: A cluster-randomised controlled trial in Uganda. Lancet Global Health. 2015;385:e378–e386. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(15)00060-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Dunne M, Humphreys S, Leach F. Gender violence in schools in the developing world. Gender and Education. 2006;18:75–98. doi: 10.1080/09540250500195143. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  19. Elbla AIF. Is punishment (corporal or verbal) an effective means of discipline in schools? Case study of two basic schools in Greater Khartoum/Sudan. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2012;69:1656–1663. doi: 10.1016/j.spspro.2012.12.112. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  20. Feinstein S, Mwahombela L. Corporal punishment in Tanzania's schools. International Review of Education. 2010;56:399–410. doi:10/1007/11159-010-9169-5. [Google Scholar]
  21. Garcia ex rel. Garcia v. Miera, 817 F.2d 650, 652–53 (10th Cir. 1987).
  22. Gershoff ET. Spanking and child development: We know enough now to stop hitting our children. Child Development Perspectives. 2013;7:133–137. doi: 10.1111/cdep.12038. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Gershoff ET, Font SA. Corporal punishment in U.S. public schools: Prevalence, disparities in use, and status in state and federal policy. SRCD Social Policy Report. 2016;30(1):1–25. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Gershoff ET, Grogan-Kaylor A. Spanking and child outcomes: New meta-analyses and old controversies. Journal of Family Psychology. 2016;30:453–469. doi: 10.1037/fam0000191. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Gershoff ET, Grogan-Kaylor A, Lansford JE, Chang L, Zelli A, Deater-Deckard K, Dodge KA. Parent discipline practices in an international sample: Associations with child behaviors and moderation by perceived normativeness. Child Development. 2010;81:487–502. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01409.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Gershoff ET, Lansford JE, Sexton HR, Davis-Kean PE, Sameroff AJ. Longitudinal links between spanking and children's externalizing behaviors in a national sample of White, Black, Hispanic, and Asian American Families. Child Development. 2012;83:838–843. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01732.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Gershoff ET, Purtell KM, Holas I. Corporal punishment in U.S. public schools: Legal precedents, current practices, and future policy. Springer Briefs in Psychology Series, Advances in Child and Family Policy and Practice Subseries. 2015;1:1–105. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-14818-2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  28. Global Advocacy Team, Plan Internationa. Plan's Learn Without Fear campaign: Third progress report. 2012 Retrieved from: https://plan-international.org/learn-without-fear-third-progress-report.
  29. Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children. Corporal punishment of children: Summarizes of prevalence and attitudinal research in the last 10 years -- Africa. 2016a Retrieved from: http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org/research/prevalence-research/
  30. Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children. Corporal punishment of children: Summarizes of prevalence and attitudinal research in the last 10 years – Caribbean. 2016b Retrieved from: http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org/research/prevalence-research/
  31. Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children. Corporal punishment of children: Summarizes of prevalence and attitudinal research in the last 10 years – East Asia and the Pacific. 2016c Retrieved from: http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org/research/prevalence-research/
  32. Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children. Corporal punishment of children: Summarizes of prevalence and attitudinal research in the last 10 years – Europe and Central Asia. 2016d Retrieved from: http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org/research/prevalence-research/
  33. Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children. Corporal punishment of children: Summarizes of prevalence and attitudinal research in the last 10 years – Middle East and North Africa. 2016e Retrieved from: http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org/research/prevalence-research/
  34. Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children. Corporal punishment of children: Summarizes of prevalence and attitudinal research in the last 10 years – South Asia. 2016f Retrieved from: http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org/research/prevalence-research/
  35. Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children. Global progress towards prohibiting all corporal punishment. 2016g Retrieved from: http://endcorporalpunishment.org/assets/pdfs/legality-tables/Global%20progress%20table%20with%20terrs%20%28alphabetical%29.pdf.
  36. Global Initiative to End All Corporal punishment of Children. Ending legalized violence against children: Global progress to December 2015. 2015a Retrieved from: http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org/resources/global-reports/global-report-2015.html.
  37. Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children. Towards non-violence schools: Prohibiting all corporal punishment. Global report 2015. 2015b Retrieved from: http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org/resources/thematic-reports/schools-report-2015.html.
  38. Gwirayi P. Functions served by corporal punishment: Adolescent perspectives. Journal of Psychology in Africa. 2011;21:121–124. doi: 10.1080/14330237.2011.10820437. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  39. Hardy K. Spare the rod, spoil the student? 19 states still allow paddling at school, Tennessee is among them. Chattanooga Times Free Press. 2013 Oct 20; Retrieved from: http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2013/oct/20/spare-the-rod-spoil-the-student19-states-still/
  40. Heckler T, Hermenau K, Isele D, Elbert T. Corporal punishment and children's externalizing problems: A cross-sectional study of Tanzanian primary school aged children. Child Abuse and Neglect. 2014;38:884–892. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.11.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Human Rights Watch and the ACLU. A Violent Education: Corporal Punishment in US Public Schools. 2008 Retrieved from: http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/us0808_1.pdf.
  42. Hyman IA. Corporal punishment, psychological maltreatment, violence, and punitiveness in America: Research, advocacy, and public policy. Applied and Preventive Psychology. 1995;4:113–130. doi: 10.1016/S0962-1849(05)80084-8. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  43. Hyman IA, Zelikoff W, Clarke J. Psychological and physical abuse in the schools: A paradigm for understanding post-traumatic stress disorder in children and youth. Journal of Traumatic Stress. 1988;1:243–267. doi: 10.1002/jts.2490010210. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  44. Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651 (1977).
  45. Lacey M. Spare the rod and spoil the country, a Kenyan warns. The New York Times. 2006 Jun 4; Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/04/world/africa/04kenya.html?pagewanted=print.
  46. Lee JH. Prevalence and predictors of self-reported student maltreatment by teachers in South Korea. Child Abuse and Neglect. 2015;46:113–120. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.03.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Makwanya P, Moyo W, Nyenya T. Perceptions of the stakeholders towards the use of corporal punishment in Zimbabwean schools: A case study of Bulawayo. International Journal of Asian Social Science. 2012;2:1231–1239. [Google Scholar]
  48. Medway FJ, Smircic JM. Willingness to use corporal punishment among school administrators in South Carolina. Psychological Reports. 1992;71:63–66. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1992.71.1.65. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Mississippi Code § 37-11-57(2) (2013).
  50. Mitchell C. Corporal punishment in the public schools: An analysis of federal constitutional claims. Law and Contemporary Problems. 2010;73:321–341. [Google Scholar]
  51. Mweru M. Why are Kenyan teachers still using corporal punishment eight years after a ban on corporal punishment? Child Abuse Review. 2010;19:248–258. doi: 10.1002/car.1121. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  52. Morrow V, Singh R. Corporal punishment in schools in Andhra Pradesh, India: Children's and Parents' views. Oxford; Young Lives: 2014. [Google Scholar]
  53. Naz A, Khan W, Daraz U, Hussain M, Khan Q. The impacts of corporal punishment on students' academic performance/career and personality development up-to secondary level education in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pakistan. International Journal of Business and Social Science. 2011;2:130–140. [Google Scholar]
  54. North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. State Board of Education, Public Schools of North Carolina; 2013. Consolidated Data Report, 2011-2012. Retrieved from: http://www.ncpublicschools.org/docs/research/discipline/reports/consolidated/2011-12/consolidated-report.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  55. Ogando Portela MJ, Pells K. Innocenti Discussion Paper No 2015-02. Florence: UNICEF Office of Research; 2015. Corporal punishment in schools: Longitudinal evidence from Ethiopia, India, Peru, and Viet Nam. Available at: https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/series/22/ [Google Scholar]
  56. Parkes J, Heslop J. Washington, DC: ActionAid International; 2013. Stop violence against girls in school: A cross-country analysis of change in Ghana, Kenya, and Mozambique. Available at: http://www.actionaidusa.org/sites/files/actionaid/svags_review_final.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  57. Payet J, Franchi V. The rights of the child and ‘the good of the learners’: A comparative ethnographical survey on the abolition of corporal punishment in South African schools. Childhood. 2008;15:157–176. doi: 10.1177/0907568207088420. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  58. Pereznieto P, Harper C, Clench B, Coarasa J. London: Plan International & Overseas Development Institute; 2010. The Economic Impact of School Violence. Available at: plan-international.org/learnwithoutfear. [Google Scholar]
  59. Pickens County Board of Education. The Pickens County Board of Education Board Policy Manual. 2015 Retrieved from: http://www.pickenscountyschools.net/?DivisionID=11923&DepartmentID=12384.
  60. Pinheiro PS. Geneva: United Nations; 2006. World Report on Violence against Children. Retrieved from: http://www.unviolencestudy.org/ [Google Scholar]
  61. Save the Children. Capturing Children's Views on the Children's Bill 2010: The National Child Consultation Programme in Zanzibar. 2010 Retrieved from: http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/sites/default/files/docs/310810_NCCP_report_Final1_1.pdf.
  62. Schmitt MT, Branscombe NR, Postmes T, Garcia A. The consequences of perceived discrimination for psychological well-being: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin. 2014;140:921–948. doi: 10.1037/a0035754. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Shaw SR, Braden JP. Race and gender bias in the administration of corporal punishment. School Psychology Review. 1990;19:378–383. [Google Scholar]
  64. Smalls C, White R, Chavous T, Sellers R. Racial ideological beliefs and racial discrimination experiences as predictors of academic engagement among African American adolescents. Journal of Black Psychology. 2007;33:299–330. doi: 10.1177/0095798407302541. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  65. Society for Adolescent Medicine. Corporal punishment in schools: Position paper of the Society for Adolescent Medicine. Journal of Adolescent Health. 2003;32(03):385–393. 00042–9. doi: 10.1016/S1054-139X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. SurveyUSA. Disciplining a Child (#082405) 2005 August. Retrieved from http://www.surveyusa.com/50StateDisciplineChild0805Alphabetized.htm.
  67. Talwar V, Carlson SM, Lee K. Effects of a punitive environment on children's executive functioning: A natural experiment. Social Development. 2011;20:805–824. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9507.2011.00617.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  68. Tennessee Statutes and Codes, 49-6-4103-4103 – Corporal punishment. [Acts 1979, ch. 131, § 1; T.C.A., §§ 49-903, 49-9-103 (2016).
  69. United Nations. Convention on the rights of the child, G.A. Res. 44/25, U.N. GAOR, 44th Sess., at 3 (U.N. Doc. A/RES/44/25) 1989 Nov 20; Retrieved from http://www.unicef.org/crc/
  70. United Nations. UN lauds Somalia as country ratifies landmark children's rights treaty. 2015 Jan 20; Retrieved from: http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=49845#.VjNrarerQsP.
  71. United Nations Children's Fund. Hidden in plain sight: A statistical analysis of violence against children. New York: UNICEF; 2014. [Google Scholar]
  72. United Nations Children's Fund Kenya County Office, Division of Violence Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics. Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations Children's Fund Kenya Country Office; 2012. Violence against Children in Kenya: Findings from a 2010 National Survey. Summary Report on the Prevalence of Sexual, Physical and Emotional Violence, Context of Sexual Violence, and Health and Behavioral Consequences of Violence Experienced in Childhood. Retrieved from: http://resourcecentre.savethechildren.se/sites/default/files/documents/vac_in_kenya.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  73. United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) CRC General Comment No. 8 (2006): The Right of the Child to Protection from Corporal Punishment and Other Cruel or Degrading forms of Punishment (U.N. CRC/C/GC/8) 2007 Mar 2; Retrieved from http://www.refworld.org/docid/460bc7772.html.
  74. United States Department of Education Office for Civil Rights. Regulations enforced by the Office for Civil Rights. 2015 Retrieved from: http://www2.ed.gov/policy/rights/reg/ocr/index.html.
  75. Youssef RM, Attia MS, Kamel MI. Children experiencing violence II: Prevalence and determinants of corporal punishment in schools. Child Abuse & Neglect. 1998;22:975–985. doi: 10.1016/S0145-2134(98)00084-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES