CORPORAL PUNISHMENT SCHOOLS.

Evening Star, Issue 23326, 24 July 1939, Page 10

CORPORAL PUNISHMENT SCHOOLS.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—The infliction of bodily, pain, while it does not increase either the capacity or the desire for learning, may be a useful aid to discipline in the case of " tough " children who are not amenable to other means of control. Among young children these must be rare, and among girls rarer still. When corporal punishment for a _ girl is necessary it snould not be administered by a male teacher. Personal dignity and self-respect are things of which a child of school age is conscious. In the case of the little girls punished by the student teacher, the method of administering the punishment (surely one almost unknown in our schools?), would be an added injury to the self-respect of girls of seven years, particularly when inflicted by a man teacher. ' The injustice, pain, shock, and fear caused by the punishment would all have a bad effect on the children's minds, but the loss of personal dignity outweighs all else in its harmful effect. There is one thing to be said in favour of this teacher's method of administering punishment, and that is that it was not done in view of the class. Apart from the feelings of the child receiving punishment, it is not a pleasant thing for sensitive children to watch others punished, and may foster sadistic impulses. If teachers themselves have such impulses they can do great harm, so it seems a wise thing to allow few the power of using corporal punishment. It may be all right to keep big boys in order, but is hardly suitable for little girls, and in mv opinion no little child should require sufficiently severe punishment to cause bruising. This matter of corporal punishment needs carefully looking into, as many children would be ashamed or afraid to tell their parents of punishment received. The harm to the body may be little, but the harm to the young mind may be great.—l am, etc., Interested. July 24.