asked the Minister for Education if he has concluded his consideration of the question of the total abolition of corporal punishment in schools.
25.
Written Answers. - Corporal Punishment in Schools.
24.
asked the Minister for Education if he has now heard from teaching and managerial associations in response to his request for their views on corporal punishment in schools; the associations which have replied to date; the associations from which he is awaiting a reply; when he expects to be in a position to make a policy statement on the matter; and if he will accord the Dáil an opportunity of discussing such a statement.
26.
asked the Minister for Education if he will make a statement on his intentions concerning the abolition of corporal punishment in schools.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 24, 25 and 26 together.
I have received replies from all those organisations of management authorities and teachers from whom I invited views on the use of corporal punishment in schools. Their views were as follows:
Irish National Teachers' Organisation (INTO)
The Central Executive Committee of the Irish National Teachers' Organisation has considered your request for observations on school discipline, and they have instructed me to say that the membership of the Organisation is quite happy with the terms of Rule 130, Rules for National Schools, on the matter of school discipline. They consider that the Rule is very wisely structured, and contains adequate safeguards for pupils, and at the same time it upholds the reasonable authority of teachers.
Association of Secondary Teachers (ASTI)
That the ASTI condemns the use of any form of corporal punishment in post-primary schools.
The question of corporal punishment and possible alternatives is being investigated by the Association and our views on this matter will be conveyed to you as soon as possible.
Teachers' Union of Ireland
With reference to your letter concerning corporal punishment in schools. I am to state that this Union is opposed to its use.
However, the Union does recognise the real disciplinary problems which can arise and the Executive Committee will draw up a document on school discipline for your consideration.
Association of Principals of Community/Comprehensive Schools
I must apologise for the delay in answering your query re corporal punishment. I have been waiting for a reply from all the Community and Comprehensive Schools on current practice in each school.
The general picture from the replies I have received, is that, as a policy, corporal punishment is not an acceptable form of discipline and is not used in our schools. In two schools Principals stated that on a very rare occasion it was used with boys for offences of vandalism, bullying or gross insubordination. It was administered by the Principal, in the presence of a second teacher and to a maximum of four slaps.
In practically all the schools contacted no corporal punishment is permitted.
Various other sanctions are employed, withdrawal of privileges, restriction from participation in games, report cards which students get signed at the end of each class for a period of a week. If these are ineffective, parents are called in and suspension by the Principals may be imposed if this is thought to be the most effective way of dealing with serious cases of indiscipline.
My apologies again for the delay.
Catholic Primary Managers' Association
Regarding your letter of 31 January, 1978, I asked the Diocesan Secretaries of our Association to ascertain the views of boards of management on the use of corporal punishment in our schools. Of the replies I have received the majority are in favour of having some form of corporal punishment for mis-demeanour on the part of pupils. Other comments the Association wish to make are:—
The Rule on Discipline—No. 130—is fair and reasonable and if acted upon in the spirit and in the letter there should be no serious demand for its abolition.
A Clause might be introduced into the Rule stating that the Boards of Management have authority to decide whether or not corporal punishment should be administered for mis-behaviour in schools under their charge.
Consideration might be given to the question of omitting the word "corporal" from the Rule.
A high standard of discipline and good behaviour is absolutely necessary in schools if they are to fulfill their educational purpose. How this is to be achieved is a matter for each individual school and each school must develop its own policy, taking into account the general directives of the Department of Education as well as the circumstances obtaining in different areas and even in individual classes.
The school policy on discipline should be the result of discussion not only between the teachers and the Board of Management but it should also take into account the attitude of the parents.
Conference of Convent Primary Schools
Our Association strongly adhered to Rule 130, (1), (2), (3), (4), page 74 Rules for National Schools.
The terminology Corporal Punishment is unfortunate since it has overtones of physical brutality and we feel that these words should be deleted from Rule 130 of Rules for National Schools and Disciplinary Correction inserted.
Rule 130 should read: Disciplinary correction should be administered by the principal teacher and other members of the school staff authorised to do so by the Board of Management.
We consider it uncomplimentary to the image of the Principal teacher in the school if he is given the sole responsibility of administering correction.
Necessity for Disciplinary Correction: It is a deterrent when pupils cause deliberate injury to other children or damage property.
It may be needed to instil in children a sense of responsibility for their misdemeanours and in some cases to counteract anti-social behaviour.
Education is a preparation for life in an orderly, organised community where there are rules written and unwritten, the infringement of which call for disciplinary correction.
In a home where self-discipline, obedience and respect for authority are encouraged, children will generally follow this pattern in the classroom; the converse is also true.
National School Boards of Management—Chairmen's Association
General: Reports from the Dioceses indicate that the present Rules are satisfactory and are observed in all our schools: Corporal Punishment being administered only by Principals as and when permitted. There have been discussions at some Meetings of Parents on this subject and parents in general seem satisfied with the present position.
Causes of Indiscipline: The home attitude is of vital importance; if discipline be non-existent there how can the school impart it? Conversely if excessive physical punishment is common in the home, Corporal Punishment in schools is ineffective in enforcing discipline.
Overcrowded homes can also cause unruly behaviour at school. Some children may have health problems, mental or physical and we value the work of the Medical and Welfare Authorities in this connection. Some teachers may have difficulties in keeping order in class and may need advice from Inspectors.
Observations: We approve of the traditional Irish position that Teachers, along with Parents, feel responsible for general training for life; we would deplore the continental view of the teacher as purely an Instructor in specific subjects. We would welcome further reductions in class numbers. We believe the role of the parish clergy to be very important especially when there are problems in the home. We believe regular visits of the Chairman to the schools have a valued part in retaining discipline. The work of Attendance Officers and Garda Junior Liaison Officers is noted and appreciated.
Sanctions: Withdrawal of Privileges can sometimes be effective. Detention during school hours works well for minor infringements. In some few cases of extreme and persistent indiscipline, following consultations with Parents, Inspectors and other school authorities, a recognised system of Suspension or Referral to remedial classes or Special Schools would be desirable. It is believed that the very existence of such a system would in itself be salutary.
Aontas na mBraithre Teagaisc— Bunscoileanna
Discipline and good order are an integral part of a child's formation. No child can develop socially, academically or morally without the support of sound and constructive discipline. Children appreciate order as can be seen from the behaviour of normal children; they play games with very strict rules, they are unhappy if others break the rules. Children from good home environments find support in the rules laid down by their parents. On the other hand, children from a disorderly home will feel insecure and often look for the attention they do not get in the home from the school. Therefore, constructive and sensitive discipline ought to prevail in schools and classrooms.
The members of our Association adhere to Rule 130:—Teachers should have a lively regard for the improvement and general welfare of their pupils, treat them with kindness combined with firmness and should aim at governing them through their affection and reason and not by harshness and severity. Ridicule, sarcasm or remarks likely to undermine the pupil's self-confidence should be avoided.
Corporal punishment should be administered only in cases of serious misbehaviour and should not be administered for mere failure at lessons.
Corporal punishment should be administered only by the Principal teacher or other members of the school staff authorised by the manager for the purpose.
Any teacher who inflicts improper or excessive punishment will be regarded as guilty of conduct unbefitting a teacher and will be subject to severe disciplinary action.
Rule 130, properly administered, is fair and just. We see no particular reason for changing this rule except to satisfy the wishes of a very small minority opinion.
We realise, indeed that the issue of Corporal Punishment is a very live issue of debate but we do not regard it as a major problem in modern education. Other problems such as class sizes, remedial and special classes, maintenance of schools, adequate equipment and many others are of far greater importance. However, these problems have not got the emotive value of the so-called corporal punishment issue. Emotions can easily be whipped up in arguments which conjure up extraordinary pictures in some people's minds. Some readily confuse corporal punishment with birching and flogging.
We contend that corporal punishment is fast becoming a non-issue in practice in modern education. We are extremely happy to note that the use of corporal punishment has diminished greatly over the past number of years. We submit that the following are the reasons for this: - 1. Reduced numbers of pupils per Teachers; 20 years ago 60+ pupils per teacher was common; 10 years ago 50+ pupils per teacher was common. Even now 40+ pupils per teacher is common and this number is unacceptable. With the decrease in class size there has been an obvious decline in the use of corporal punishment.
2. Reduced pressures on teachers; with the advent of the new Curriculum and the freedom given to the teacher to teach children at their own level according to their various abilities and backgrounds there is far less pressure on either pupil or teacher than there was before when set standards were demanded by a subject-centred curriculum.
3. Since the abolition of the Primary Certificate and local scholarships there is less pressure on schools from the system, from parents and society to see that certain standards were met and maintained. These standards, we contend, were often quite false and gave an artificial picture of the abilities of schools and children. They also put pupils and teachers under severe and unnecessary psychological pressure.
4. Under the old system school inspection was often very severe and could put a school under an amount of strain. Children were warned "the cigire is coming" or even after the days of H.E. teachers competed to get "an mhaith" or even the coveted "sár mhaith" as such marks helped in no small way to advance promotion. The cigire bogey-man syndrome is happily no longer with us and this has relaxed teachers in no small way. Inspection is now carried out in a positive and helpful manner.
5. It was not uncommon up to 10 years ago to have two classes of 50+ sharing the one room. Under the old curriculum which gave little room for flexibility this situation demanded extremely strict discipline which taxed pupils and teachers alike.
It is no coincidence that with the introduction of the New Curriculum and the removal of many of the pressures on schools there is now a far more relaxed atmosphere in Primary Schools. Discipline is not so rigid. Rules are not so sacrosanct. Children have more scope for their abilities. Interesting and enjoyable subjects are more to the fore. Children like coming to school. Staffs are more relaxed and at ease among themselves. Principals view themselves as leaders of a team. Neither is it a coincidence that with these improvements children are more interested and the use of corporal punishment has diminished greatly.
It is generally agreed that in any organised grouping there have to be rules—written or understood—and that infringements of these rules normally call for sanctions of some sort or other. Schools are no exception to this rule. Schools must be orderly places in which children can learn. Disturbances of the good order of a school or class normally affect the whole school or staff and disorderly or unruly children can and do prevent other children from learning. Most normal, healthy children will be disorderly from time to time and if they are not checked can and do become uncontrollable. No teacher can teach and no pupil can learn in a disorderly situation. Therefore, it would seem logical that to maintain a reasonable order in schools and to check unruly children certain sanctions may be considered necessary and useful. Indeed, children who look for a certain security from teachers demand order and agree that when they are unco-operative sanctions are necessary.
All forms of punishment and sanction depend upon the relationship between parent and child or teacher and pupil. Most misdemeanours can be, and are dealt with by a verbal reprimand or a word of advice. Also, it must be borne in mind that discipline is more and more geared to the individual child, his development and personality. Pupil/teacher relationships can be improved with smaller class sizes in which the teacher, besides having a more manageable group of children, has the opportunity of knowing each child at a personal and social level and is able to deal with each at an individual level. Stories of sanctions taken outside the context of pupil/teacher relationships can be, and often are misunderstood.
It is important that a teacher know his pupils well and understand their personalities and their home and family backgrounds. This is impossible where teachers have to deal with 40+ pupils daily. There are schools in depressed urban areas, where children have severe home problems, in which there are 45 children in classes that should have no more than 20 if they are to be catered for. It is well known that many of these schools have a problem of discipline.
Society is changing and schools change with society and it is admitted that we accept a much less rigid form of discipline than before. We tolerate a lot of behaviour now that we would not have tolerated ten to 15 years ago. This is so with the mores of society in general which are far more liberal in the past decade or so. However, it must be stated that there is a growing anxiousness about modern mores and behaviour patterns. People are not at all happy that standards of discipline and standards of attainment are not as strict in schools as before. And some are worried that this may contribute to lawlessness and immorality generally. But others are of the opinion that discipline is not yet relaxed enough and argue that more freedom in the school situation would educate people to higher standards of personal responsibility.
Where does the truth lie? Must we search for the golden mean?
In the ongoing debate on discipline there seem, according to the media, to be two opposite poles:—
1. Those who favour birching or, at least, far stricter penalties for offenders—especially young offenders.
2. Those who favour a permissive attitude and seem to blame society for the maladjustment of young offenders.
Where do we look for guidance in this debate?
The answer is to be found, in the teaching of the Gospels which urges sympathy with a strong moral and social teaching. Kindness coupled with firmness seems to be a logical answer and excesses are contrary to Christian teaching.
Normally we can leave the matter of class discipline to the good Christian teacher who has the best interests of his children at heart and can relate to them in a personal way. Children, like and respect such people and will accept fair discipline from them.
It is important that we define the aims of our schools and what standard of discipline is necessary to attain these aims.
In recent times, there has been a noticeable change in children's attitudes to their teachers. They approach them in a friendly way and look upon them as people who care about them. They both like and respect their teachers and we view this as a very good development.
Trust and openess in childrens' attitudes to approachable teachers seems generally to have replaced fear and shyness. It seems to us that the improvement in parent/teacher contact has helped this situation in no small way. Family and school have got together in mutual understanding and have learned a lot from each other. Parents have often expressed agreeable surprise at the fact that their children like going to school and are reluctant to miss a day. This, they say, is a far cry from their own experience. It is our experience that parent/teacher meetings are generally in favour of fair and restrained corporal punishment and parents often marvel at the patience of teachers who have to deal with large numbers of lively children.
Let us then:
1. Define "corporal punishment".
Parents have said "okay give him a slap—but I'm against corporal punishment".
2. Discover what hard and fast evidence and what research is available on normal corporal punishment.
3. Be careful of taking an easy opt-out position because the issue is contentious and emotive and place more and more burdens and responsibilities on the shoulders of teachers.
4. Generally leave the matter of punishment for parents and teachers to decide between themselves at parent/teacher meetings or with each teacher talking to individual parents.
5. Be careful not to undermine the authority of teachers or school policy.
National Federation of C.B.S. Parent Councils
This Federation believes that parental opinion in this matter should be sought and given due weight in any decision-making process. Accordingly, we are now undertaking a rapid survey of the views of our members, and look forward to conveying the results of this survey to you as speedily as possible. A questionnaire has been sent to parents in all Christian Brothers Schools in the country and we await replies.
Secretarial of Secondary Schools
The J.M.B. is slightly perturbed about recent debates on this subject. Following a question in the Dáil, corporal punishment seems to have been "discovered" by the Press and is now a live issue. Given the sensational nature of the media, we do not feel that it is a suitable forum for a balanced and sensible discussion on a sensitive subject such as this. To date, the question of corporal punishment has been dealt with in an emotive way and has been divorced from its much wider (and more relevant) context of school discipline. The J.M.B. is naturally reluctant to contribute to such piecemeal treatment of this whole subject.
That said, I am also to advise that the J.M.B. does not feel that it would be serving its members' interests by issuing directives about the methods of discipline which they should adopt. Some schools have few problems in this area, others are not so fortunate. The reasons are many and I do not propose to dwell on them here. Suffice to say that any blanket statement on the part of the J.M.B. would be an inadequate and facile response to what is, after all, a complex question. It is our opinion that any decision about discipline would have to be coloured by the individual school situation and should be taken at local level by those directly involved in the school.
Should the Department of Education have any proposals for a more in-depth study of discipline, the J.M.B. would be most happy to contribute.
Conference of Convent Secondary Schools
Thank you for your letter of 31 January last. The position of the Conference is that discipline is a matter which is the responsibility of the individual school. We are however, totally opposed to excessive punishment of any kind.
The Association of Irish Headmistresses
In our Secondary Schools—which are girls' schools—we have not found a need for corporal punishment, nor would we support the idea that it might be necessary. If work is not completed on time, it is completed in free time, and if a child misbehaves she may be deprived of something she enjoys doing while she does something useful to help the school community or some reading for her own advancement. The punishment is made "to fit the crime". In the case of Senior girls the special privileges which are their normal due may be withheld—privileges tie up with responsibility and have to be earned.
Methodist Board of Education
Our Board has now decided to give considerable thought to this subject during the next few months and we have set up a working party to carry out the study.
We are of the opinion that the subject of Corporal Punishment is not a simple question, on which comment can be made without proper consideration.
Catholic Headmasters' Association
Our Association does not have any official policy on corporal punishment and as in many other matters, decisions in this area are left to the discretion of individual headmasters.
Irish Vocational Education Association
The Vocational Education Committees do not permit teachers in their employ to use corporal punishment. No useful purpose would be served by permitting the use of corporal punishment.
Since 1930 the Vocational Schools have achieved results without corporal punishment. In its place they have relied on the clock, common sense, consideration for others and reasonable conventions.
Schools maintain discipline to enable each child to live at peace with himself and in social harmony with his teachers and fellow students and to work hard.
In a democratic society a wide range of choices and activities is essential. This should be reflected in the schools. If a child is to have freedom to choose between a number of courses of action the soundest form of discipline for him is self-discipline. Good self-discipline cannot begin until close supervision is withdrawn.
If the child is to align himself positively with the aims and objectives of his school, discipline must be based on the mutual respect of teacher for student and student for teacher.
The good school does not make its students behave well but rather makes them want to behave well. For the majority of children the school should provide an easy atmosphere where they can decide for themselves that what is asked of them is reasonable. Responsibility with independence is what is required in the students' behaviour and application to work.
First, the majority of children do not resent authority. The trouble begins only when authority verges on authoritarianism. If school rules are made after consultation with teachers and students the likelihood of serious indiscipline will be greatly reduced. Adults and children find it easier to obey rules when they have some say in the making of the rules. This does not mean that a vote has to be taken every time a rule is changed. It means that rules are properly communicated to those who have to obey them. It means that rules should be seen to be fair, just and necessary for the promotion of the greater good of the students.
Second, students may be deprived of privileges and personal freedom in cases of indiscipline or serious failure at lessons. Purposeful detention can be used here in place of corporal punishment. Students may be debarred from participating in games and extra-curricular activities. They may not like this restraint on their personal liberty but it may be all the more effective for just that reason.
Third, if detention or other forms of restraint on personal freedom fail students may be put "On Report". This will entail reporting to the Principal or his delegate first thing in the morning and last thing in the afternoon.
During the course of the day the students concerned will have a written report made out on their conduct and application to work at the end of each class by the class teacher. If after a week there is an improvement this should be acknowledged. If there is no improvement then other remedies must be sought.
Fourth, where students who have been on report continue to be disruptive the school may suspend them for a limited and definite period. Suspension may help the children. If so, well and good. If it is considered that suspension will do more harm than good then the school will have to regard these as problem students. These students need the school's help and consideration in a special way. A major part of the school's duty to society lies in helping such children to get back into the main stream of life in general and school life in particular.
Three things are essential:
(a) That each problem child is intimately known to a member of the teaching staff,
(b) That any problem which is important to the child is important to that teacher and through him to the school,
(c) That personal contact is established with the child's parents.
Working with the parents the teacher will endeavour to enhance the child's self-esteem and give him some feeling of success. The child who has no interest in school subjects, games or extra-curricular activities may be given responsibility for such a simple thing as ensuring that there is an adequate supply of chalk in the classrooms every morning.
Fifth, if all else fails the educational psychologist for the area may be called in.
Sixth, if at the end of the day the school cannot help, the parents can be advised that a change of school or perhaps a school with special facilities is required.
The vocational schools should continue to rely on example, vigilance and persuasion for the promotion of acceptable standards of discipline and work.
These views are carefully thought out and responsible. They indicate the very high ideals that motivate the various organisations.