18 Francis J. Reardon Robert N. Reynolds
A Survey of Attitudes
toward Corporal Punishment
in Pennsylvania Schools
IntroductionThe Student Bill of Rights and Responsibilities was adopted by the ( Pennsylvania) State Board of Education after spirited debate. One of the most
controversial portions of the bill was that concerning corporal punishment.
Despite some strong support for abolishing it entirely, a majority of the
board members voted to continue it. The minority requested a study specifically aimed at answering these questions:
|1. ||What kinds of corporal punishment are used in Pennsylvania
|2. ||What variations of corporal punishment regulations are common
in Pennsylvania schools?|
|3. ||What are the positive and negative effects of corporal punishment
from the viewpoint of parents, students, and school personnel (teachers,
administrators, school board)?|
|4. ||What, if any, types of corporal punishment result in desired changes
in student behaviors?|
The study should consider these questions in terms of: school policies,
court cases, due process, and basis for hearings.
Review of the Literature
Spare the rod, spoil the child? This question seems to be the essence
of a long-running debate on the subject of corporal punishment. Hapkiewicz
This is a shortened version of a report entitled Corporal Punishment in Pennsylvania. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania State Department of Education, 1975.
Questia, a part of Gale, Cengage Learning. www.questia.com
Book title: Corporal Punishment in American Education:Readings in History, Practice, and Alternatives.
Contributors: Irwin A. Hyman - Editor, James H. Wise - Editor.
Publisher: Temple University Press.
Place of publication: Philadelphia.
Publication year: 1979.
Page number: 301.
This material is protected by copyright and, with the exception of fair use, may
not be further copied, distributed or transmitted in any form or by any means.