CHAPTER I

THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

“Challenging students”, according to its definition, events that serve to decrease

an individual’s behaviors are considered to be punishers. Teachers and students should

understand the pros and cons of using punishment in the classroom, as schools frequently

build punishing, or aversive, consequences into plans designed to help manage behaviors

of the students. Punishment such as slapping, paddling or spanking are considered to be

corporal punishment can take various forms in classroom discipline programs.

According to CNN channel, thirty-one nations have banned corporal punishment.

Sweden, in 1979, was the first to make it illegal to strike a child as a form of discipline

(Gumbrecht, 2011). Since then, many other countries in Europe have also instituted bans,

as have New Zealand and some countries in Africa and the Americas. More than 70

additional nations have specific laws in place that prohibit corporal punishment in

schools. In some cases, such as the United States, there are partial bans in place

depending on either location or the age of the children. For the United States, corporal

punishment is prohibited in public schools for 31 states and the District of Columbia.

Two states, Lowa and New Jersey, extend their bans to private schools as well.

According to Article III of the 1987 Constitution that former senator of the

Philippines Leila Delima states: “The State shall defend the right of children to

assistance, including proper care and nutrition, and special protection from all forms of

neglect, abuse, cruelty, exploitation, and other conditions prejudicial to their

environment.”, it means it is imperative to underscore that the protection of all children

1
against acts that harm their physical and psychological integrity is a treaty commitment

of the Philippines as a State Party to the Convention of the Rights of the Child.

The Department of Social Welfare and Development or DSWD of Caraga

Administrative Region strengthens advocacy for the welfare of children. “We always

keep on saying that children are the hope of our future, but children already are tired of

being called the future. They want to enjoy their childhood and end violence now,” Lim

stressed. He also said that, “The damage of violence in childhood goes far beyond

immediate trauma and fear, extending through many aspects of child’s life, affecting the

child’s health and education, and restricting future opportunities.” No violence against

children or anyone is justifiable and all forms of violence is preventable (Lim, 2018).

In Sipocot, specifically the Barangay Impig Captain, Luis O. Pereja Jr. stated that,

corporal punishment should not be implemented because it will not only affect the studies

of the students but also their whole personality (ang pagkulog sa aki ning mga maestro

dae mananggad dapat isulong ta dakulaon ang epekto kaini dae lamang sapag-adal ning

kaakian sagkod sa saindang pagkatawo). He added that though teachers sometimes find

punishment to be effective as a classroom behavior management tool, especially in the

short term because punishment tends to rapidly stop problem behaviors, the teacher in

turn is positively reinforced for using it. On the surface, then, punishment may appear to

be a powerful and attractive behavior in management strategy but this power can come up

to significant cost (Martins and Meller, 1990).

The researchers can see this problem in our own society where extreme

punishments are implemented and the researchers want to minimize this dilemma. The

2
subjective viewpoints will be evaluated by the researchers to find out if corporal

punishment is a helpful technique in controlling the behavior of junior high school

students.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

This study aims to determine the subjective views on corporal punishment as an

effective technique in controlling the behavior of junior high school students in CBSUA-

Sipocot Campus, SNHS and FAFC S/Y 2018-2019. This research study would like to

satisfy the following questions:

1. What are the common punishments used by the teachers to the students?

2. What are the positive effects of corporal punishment law to students and teachers?

3. What are the effective ways to discipline the behavior of the students other than

corporal punishment?

4. What are the different perspectives of teachers about the corporal punishment

law?

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

This study aims to determine the subjective views on corporal punishment as an

effective technique in controlling the behavior of junior high school students in CBSUA-

Sipocot Campus, SNHS and FAFC S/Y 2018-2019. Stated below are the objectives of the

study:

1. To enumerate the common punishments used by the teachers to the students.

3
 2. To distinguish the positive effects of corporal punishment law to students and

teachers.

3. To identify the effective ways to discipline the behavior of the students other than

corporal punishment.

4. To determine the different perspectives of teachers about the corporal punishment

law.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

This study is important to know and understand the subjective viewpoints of both

students and teachers regarding the effectiveness of corporal punishment in disciplining

behavior of the students. This will be beneficial to the following proponents:

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (DepEd). The result of this study will serve

as the basis of DepEd to know if corporal punishment is an effective technique in

disciplining students. Also, for them to inform the students and teachers understand the

positive and negative effects of it.

JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL TEACHERS. The outcome of this study will benefit

the junior high school teachers in terms of their disciplining method. This study will

provide them information for their needs and ways on how to discipline their students.

PARENTS. Through this study, parents will be able to teach their children good

manners and right conduct. And also, they will be able to know how corporal punishment

affects the behavior of their children.

JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS. The outcome of this study will help

the junior high school students know the importance and drawbacks of corporal

4
punishment. And this will also serve as a guide to them how to be a good student and

citizen for them not to be punished corporally.

RESEARCHERS. The researchers will be benefited of this study because they

will be able to gain knowledge about corporal punishment and its positive and negative

effects to the students and teachers.

FUTURE RESEARCHES. This study is beneficial for the future researches

because it will be helpful to know the things that can be added to improve their study.

SCOPE AND DELIMITATION OF THE STUDY

This study investigated the subjective viewpoints of teachers regarding corporal

punishment, whether it is acceptable or not. The respondents will be the 30 Junior High

School teachers. The settings will be Central Bicol State University of Agriculture-

Sipocot Campus, Sipocot National High School and Felix O. Alfelor Foundation College,

Incorporated.

The study will focus on knowing the subjective views on corporal punishment as

an effective technique in controlling behavior of students. The researchers will be able to

know the effects of corporal punishment and its acceptability and effectiveness in

disciplining behavior of students.

LIMITATION OF THE STUDY

The researchers will focus only on the subjective views of junior high school

teachers S/Y 2018-2019 of Central Bicol State University of Agriculture - Sipocot

5
Campus, Sipocot National High School and Felix O. Alfelor Foundation College,

Incorporated regarding corporal punishment.

ASSUMPTIONS

The study is based on the following assumptions:

1. The junior high school teachers of CBSUA-Sipocot Campus, SNHS, and FAFC

S/Y 2018-2019 will deny corporal punishment as an effective technique in

disciplining the behavior of the students.

2. Some teachers will affirm to the usage of corporal punishment in the society.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURES AND STUDIES

This introduces and presents a review of related literatures and studies bearing

upon the present pursuit of knowledge. The clear understanding and ideas procured from

this review provided the researchers useful and worthy insights to uphold and support the

present investigation.

OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF TERMS

This introduces and presents the operational definition of terms of the

study bearing upon the present pursuit of knowledge. The clear understanding and ideas

procured from this is provided the researchers useful and worthy insights to uphold and

support the present investigation.

Corporal Punishment

6
 It is the concept being used by the teachers upon controlling the behaviors of

students at school.

Subjective Views

This refers to the opinions of both students and teachers on the topic, Corporal

Punishment as a method in disciplining.

Discipline

This refers to the behavior of students that is being judged by how it is affected

after subjected to punishment.

Physical Integrity

It is the natural aspect that exists obtained by the students that perceives the

different types of punishment.

Psychological Integrity

It is the natural aspect that refers to the morality of the students that is being

affected after subjected to punishment.

Violence

This is connected to the punishment that is used to refer the physical force to

harm and damage someone, either physically, emotionally or psychologically.

Learning

7
 It is the concept being affected (either positively or negatively) that refers to the

knowledge or skill gained by the students.

Emotional Consequences

This refers to the outcome of Corporal Punishment to the feelings and morality of

students being affected.

Behavioral Consequences

This refers to the outcome of Corporal Punishment to the actions and demeanor of

students being affected.

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURES

This introduces and presents a review of related literatures bearing upon the

present pursuit of knowledge. The clear understanding and ideas procured from this

review provided the researchers useful and worthy insights to uphold and support the

present investigation.

According to the Bartleby Writing (2015), corporal punishment is a form of

physical punishment that inflicts pain on kids for their negative actions such as spanking.

This topic is controversial because some people feel very strongly that they should be

allowed to continue using these methods and others feel very strongly that they should

not be allowed to. This method of punishment is inhumane and should not continue to be

used. The modernization of psychology has proved that hitting children will not help

them learn that what they did was wrong and will probably just make them angry or

frustrated why they were abused. Even if they do not do it again because they are scared

8
not to and once they are not scared anymore then they may continue to commit that

action. Also if it is legal for people to do then in some cases it will be overused and the

person will not be able to get into trouble if they get caught.

Being abused can be a very traumatizing life event that can affect somebody

forever, if we start bringing it back into schools then it could really ruin some kid’s lives.

According to Yun Jinies, who writes for ABC News, he wrote this article to inform

people about some of the dangers that come along with corporal punishment being in

schools.

According to the American Psychological Association (2012), in Washington,

corporal punishment remains a widely used discipline technique in most American

families, but it has also been a subject to controversy within the child development and

psychological communities. In a large-scale meta-analysis of 88 studies, psychologist

Elizabeth Thompson Gershoff, PhD, of the National Center for Children in Poverty at

Columbia University, looked at both positive and negative behaviors in children that

were associated with corporal punishment. Her research and commentaries on her work

are published in the July issue of Psychological Bulletin, published by the American

Psychological Association.

“The act of corporal punishment itself is different across parent – parents vary in

how frequently they use it, how forcefully they administer it, how emotionally a aroused

they are when they do it, and whether they combine it with other techniques. Each of this

qualities of corporal punishment can determine which child mediated processes are

activated, and, in turn, which outcome may be realized,” Gershoff concludes.

9
 Baumrind et al. suggest that those parents whose emotional make-up make cause

them to cross the line between appropriate corporal punishment and physical abuse as

technique to discipline their children. But that other parents could use mild to moderate

corporal punishment effectively. “The fact that some parents punish excessively and

unwisely is not an argument, however, for counseling all parents not to do punish at all.”

According to article of Tim Walker (2016), in 1977, the United States Supremes

Court legitimized the use of corporal punishment in schools by deciding that the practice

did not qualify as “cruel and unusual punishment.” Despite the ruling in Ingraham V.

Wright, corporal punishment – the use of physical force (usually paddling) on a student

intended to correct misbehavior – would soon decline rapidly across the country.

Between 1974 and 1994, 25 states would ban the practice, recognizing that it was an

ineffective and inappropriate school discipline measure. The widespread use probably

comes as a surprise to many people, says Dr. Elizabeth Gershoff, a developmental

psychologist at the University of Texas at Austin.

“Most people assume that corporal punishment has already been abolished across

the United States. Even people in states where it is legal do not always know it is so,”

explains Gershoff. “We know that it is increasingly being used only in rural areas, which

means fewer children and families have experience with it, and that may have contributed

to its falling from view.” Corporal punishment is concentrated in southern states and to a

lesser extent, in some states out west. More than half the school districts in Mississippi,

Arkansas and Alabama, use corporal punishment, a level that surprised Gershoff.

10
 Most alarming are the blaring racial disparities in how the punishment is meted

out. Students of color, predominantly African American Boys, are on the receiving end of

a paddle significantly more often than their white counterparts. In Mississippi and

Alabama, black students are 51 percent more likely to be hit than white students and

more than half of those states districts. In one-fifth of districts, that likelihood soars to

500 percent. This is a disparity that cannot be explained away by black students attending

school more likely to use the punishment – because they don’t, across the South, white

students are more likely to attend these schools, according to the report.

According to Debatewise.org, corporal punishment as described by the Collins

Dictionary and Thesaurus (in one volume – 1990) is “punishment of a physical nature

such as canning”. The term mainly relates to children being punished at home. As of

2008 corporal punishment has been banned in 24 countries, including Germany, Greece

and the Netherlands. Nevertheless, it is still widely used by parents in their homes. In the

UK, corporal punishment has been banned in school for numerous years. However a

debate is now arising as to whether the decision to ban corporal punishment or should be

introduced.

According to Politics.co.uk, as an officially administered or sanctioned method of

enforcing discipline, corporal punishment is in decline. Despite persistent enthusiasm for

physical chastisement in significant sections of population, social scientist are virtually

unanimous in arguing that corporal punishment has more negative than positive effects.

The infliction of physical pain as an official means of punishment is as old

as human history. In United Kingdom’s schools and prisons, until relatively recently,

11
physical punishment was perceived as part of the educative and disciplinary process, and

was often viewed as ‘character building’.

Although the various methods of corporal punishment was steadily outlawed

throughout the 20th century, it was not until after the 1967 Plowden report, ‘Children in

their Primary Schools’, that the abolition of corporal punishment in state schools was

treated as a major issue, and in 1986 it was outlawed altogether.

The issue on corporal punishment must now be considered in light of the Human

Rights Act 1998 and the European Convention of Human Rights, particularly article three

on protection against torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The

provisions of the Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989, is also important for child

punishment , as Article 19 states that, “Parties shall take all appropriate legislative,

administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of

physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment

or exploitation.”

According to the 15th Congress of the Republic of the Philippines introduced by

Senator Manny Villar, it is stressed that the need to extend particular care to the child has

been stated in the Geneva Declaration of the Rights of the Child of 1924 and in the

Rights of the Child adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1959 and

recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In fact, Declaration on the

Rights of the Child explicitly provides that “the child by reason, of his physical and

mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal

protection, before as well as after birth.”

12
 The in-depth study conducted by an independent expert commissioned by the

United Nations on violence against children reports a wide range of impacts on children

subjected to such violence which include short and long-term repercussions that are often

grave and damaging. It concluded that “violence may result in greater susceptibility to

lifelong social, emotional and cognitive impairments and to health-risk behavior. Related

mental health and social problems include anxiety and depressive disorders

hallucinations, impaired work performance, memory disturbances as well as aggressive

behavior. Early exposure to violence is associated with lung, heart, and liver disease,

sexually transmitted diseases and fatal death during pregnancy, as well as relationship

violence and suicidal attempts.

The author believes that the child, for the full and harmonious development of

his/her personality, should grow up in the peaceful environment. The child must be

nurtured in an atmosphere of happiness, love and understanding in order to ensure that

they will grow up as productive and morally upright citizens.

All stated, there is an urgent need to prohibit all forms of corporal punishment in

the home, in schools, in private and public institutions, in the juvenile justice system and

in all other alternative care system. And this legislation which ensconced that great idea

should be enacted soonest.

REVIEW OF RELATED STUDIES

This introduces and presents a review of related studies bearing upon the present

pursuit of knowledge. The clear understanding and ideas procured from this review

13
provided the researchers useful and worthy insights to uphold and support the present

investigation.

Based from the study by Baraka Manjale Ngussa and Samwel Mdalingwa (2017),

entitled “Students’ Perception on Corporal Punishment and its Effect on Learning: A

Case of Secondary Schools in Babati Rural District, Tanzania”, this study sought to

establish students’ perception on corporal punishment and its effect on learning among

Secondary Schools of Babati Rural District, Tanzania using Descriptive Design. A

random sample of 370 students participated by filling the questionnaire. Experienced

researchers from the University of Arusha validated the instrument before data was

collected and Cronbach’s Alpha of between .668 and .736 was yielded by reliability test.

Study findings established that corporal punishment takes place in schools under

investigation.

First, students believed that punishment can help to monitor their discipline and

agreed that punishment has positive influence toward learning, motivates them to learn

effectively and makes them understand quickly. Second, on the other hand, students

perceived that punishment may cause them to escape from the classrooms, may lead into

dropouts and can instill fear to learn and therefore contribute to poor performance in their

subjects. Third, corporal punishment frequently takes place in schools under

investigation. Particularly, students are told to kneel down when they do mistakes and

teachers use canning, slapping and pinching as punishment measures. Lastly, there is a

significant negative correlation between corporal punishment and participation in

learning. This implies that the more corporal punishment takes place, the less the students

14
are involved in the learning process. Therefore, corporal punishment hinders students’

involvement in learning.

Based from the study of Narasappa Kumaraswamy and Aziza Othman (2010)

entitled “Corporal Punishment Study: A Case in Malaysia”,the study investigates the

occurrence of childhood corporal punishment at home on a sample of participants who

resided in the northeast of Malaysia, Kelantan. The Discipline Questionnaire (DQ) - a 32-

item self-report instrument was completed by 196 medical students studying in fourth and

fifth year at School of Medical Sciences Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM). The

participants were asked about the type, frequency, and severity of parental corporal

punishment they remembered to receive at home during childhood, in addition to their

attitudes toward corporal punishment on children. Sixty three percent of participants

remembered being corporally punished at home, as children. Only 3% of them reported

that the punishment reaches an abusive level – which was defined as physical punishment

that results in welts, bruises, bone fractures or breaks, or large/deep cuts. Pinching was

the most commonly reported types of punishment used at home (35%), followed by

slapping on the hand, arm or leg (31%), whipping using flexible material such as leather

or rope (23%), and spanking/slapping on the buttocks with open hand (20%). The study

indicates that on average the participants had a fairly favorable attitude towards corporal

punishment.

Malaysia is located in Southeastern Asia with an approximate population of 23.27

million. Of this number, about 21,890 or 94.1% were Malaysian citizens. By races,

majority is Bumiputera (65.1%); others are Chinese (26.0%) and Indians (7.7%). Islam is

the official religion and is the most widely professed in Malaysia. Child maltreatment has

15
been in the society for many years. However, only few years back it has been given

substantial attention and considered as problem in the community. Child abuse and

neglect is claimed can be found in all cultural, ethnic, and both rural and urban areas

(Wan Ismail, 1995). There are many factors and causes leading to child abuse and

neglect. An abusive environmental model suggests several factors including child related

factors, parental factors, and social factors (Wan Ismail, 1996). A Malaysian child is

protected from social and economic exploitation by several legislations. The Juvenile

Courts Acts 1947 for example, has a dominant concern on issues amongst children’s aged

10 to 18 years old. The rights, liabilities and duties of parents are contained in the

Guardian of Infant 1961. Any persons who neglects or refuses to look after his legitimate

child may be ordered by court to do so under The Married Woman and Children

(Maintenance Ordinance) 1950 (Department of Social Welfare Malaysia, 2000). The

Child Protection Act 1991 protects children from all forms of abuse and to prevent the

abuse from recurring. Section 2 (3) for example, gives legal authority for children to be

transferred to a children’s home as “a place of safety” in the event of physical abuse or

neglect, emotional or sexual abuse (Fulcher & Mas’ud, 2000). Under the same Act, The

Minister of National Unity and Community Development is responsible to provide a

social plan to eligible children that includes opportunities for the child’s physical, mental,

socio-emotional and language development. A recent statue called Child Bill 2000 which

combines the aforementioned acts defines a Malaysian child as one below 18 years of

age. The Act is a breakthrough in the country’s successful attempt to include the spirit of

the Convention Rights of the Child as preamble of the Act henceforth being part of the

law (Department of Social Welfare Malaysia, 2000). In providing immediate responds to

16
the victims, the Sexual Child Abuse and Neglect (SCAN) teams are established. The

team provides a 24 hour toll free hotline for reporting, counseling and registration of

abused children. Preventive measures including the setting up of child activity centers

within the community that provide educational and development support services to

children and families in socially high risk areas (Department of Social Welfare Malaysia,

2000). In Malaysia, the incidence of child abuse can be inferred from various survey

studies conducted in the country. The Ministry of Community Welfare stated that 1,013

abuse cases were reported in Peninsula Malaysia, from 1981 to 1988 (Samad, 1992) and

from 1983 to 1993, 4479 new cases were reported (Man, 1995). A report from General

Hospital Kuala Lumpur (GHKL) reveals an increase number of reported cases of

suspected child abuse and child neglect, from 25 cases in 1985 to 211 cases in 1991. The

cases were either categorized as physical abuse, sexual abuse, or physical neglect. Many

of the victims were small children and a third was less than three years old, similar to

international data in physical abuse (Wan Ismail, 1995). Of those detected abuse cases in

GHKL, 82 were classified as mild, and 37 were severe. Thirty death cases were detected

due to physical abuse in between those years. The report indicates that those severely

mistreated were more often than not abused by their caretakers. Fathers were the most

frequent abusers, followed by mothers, and then the caretakers (Kassim, 1997). The

incidence of child abuse and child maltreatment is very much related to one’s cultural

practices and values. To illustrate, in a traditional family, father is the key figure, who is,

in most Malay families applies authoritarian parenting style. Authoritarian in this sense

implies certain aspects like he is the person who will give punishment for any

wrongdoings in the house, he makes most of family decision, and he must be informed of

17
any important occurrences in the family. Usually, the father-figure is a quiet, calm, and

less talk-more action oriented person. Normally, small children are afraid of him, and

gradually as they become older they develop respect to the father. As far as the

punishment in the house is concerned, father has authority to punish his children.

Usually, traditional parenting practices involve canning, but it is rarely done as it applies

only to the most depraved acts. In Malaysia particularly, it is difficult to ascertain the

abusive incidence in the society as many people are reluctant to become involved through

reporting of such cases. Malay children in particular, are raised in an environment which

involves elements of secrecy, guilt, and shame. Sue (1997) as quoted by Futa et al.,

(2001) mentions that the feelings of guilt and shame may extend to children’s tendency to

blame themselves for problems in the family due to egocentric thinking. It is also

common for parents to instill guilt and shame feelings to control the behavior of family

members. Shon and Ja (1982), as reported by the same previous author, explain the social

concept of shame in the culture is frequently associated with the phrase “loss of face” in

the literature, which means shame in the face of society. Shame and loss of face are

among ways how the culture enforces values of conformity, inconspicuousness and

interdependent, group oriented society. When a person is shamed, there is risk the family,

community, and societal confidence and support will be withdrawn (Futa et al., 2001).

Islam, as a religion, serves as a protective factor as it promotes compassionate and kind

treatment to children. It is the responsibility and obligation of the parents to take care of

their children, as every child is considered as a trust and a gift from Allah. The present

study aims to investigate: 1. The occurrence of childhood corporal punishment at home

on a sample of participants who are medical students of Malaysia. 2. To confirm the

18
occurrence of corporal punishment and to know at what extent these students

remembered the corporal punishment. 3. To know the student attitude towards corporal

punishment.

The participants consisted of a total of 196 Malaysian students of School of

Medical Sciences Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia (HUSM) Kelantan Malaysia. All of

them were medical students aged from 24 to 26, either in their fourth or fifth year of

study. Data was collected in the year of 2000 by the first author.

The Discipline Questionnaire (DQ) is a 32-item self-report instrument that took

approximately 10 to 15 minutes to complete. Items 1-12 asked about demographic

information that included age, gender, ethnicity, religion, and socioeconomic status.

Items 13-22 measured the type, frequency, and severity of parental corporal punishment

remembered in the home by the participant. Items 23-25 assessed the participants’

remembered experience with alternative disciplinary strategies used by their parents.

Finally, items 26-32 asked participants’ attitudes toward corporal punishment in children.

All the DQ items were selected from Hyman’s Survey of Attitudes toward Children

(SATC), and used to compile a total attitude score, a key element of the present study. To

determine a total attitude score, items 26 to 32 were summed. However, items 27, 29, 31,

and 32 were reverse scored. That is, a response of 1 on these items would be scored a 5; a

response of 2 would be scored as a 4; and vice versa. Therefore, a higher total attitude

score is indicative of a respondent in favor of the use of corporal punishment. The actual

possible range of scores for the total attitude scale was 8 to 40. The DQ has been

reviewed by an advisory panel of prominent abuse researchers including Murray Straus,

Joan Durrant, Edward Zigler, Cynthia Price- Cohen, Stuart Hart, and Ralph Welsh, and

19
the participating international scholars, and has been found to have strong content

validity. Test-retest reliability was conducted with a two- week interval for re-test from

the American sample, and was also found to be acceptable at 0.87.

Potential researchers from various part of the world were invited to join the cross

cultural studies on corporal punishment by the American researchers through

international bodies related to children maltreatment such as the International School

Psychology Association (ISPA), the International Society for Research on Aggression

(ISRA), and the International Society for Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect

(ISPCAN). More researchers were invited to participate via an announcement in the

Psychology International Winter 2000 Newsletter of the American Psychological

Association’s (APA) Office of International Affairs. Ethical approval to conduct research

at the university was obtained and students who agreed to participate signed the consent

form before completing the questionnaires. The original English version of the

questionnaire was used since all students are assumed to know the language well as

English is the medium of learning instruction for medical student Year 4 and 5. The

questionnaire was filled in the class after a brief description of the study by the

researcher. Correspondence established and maintained with researchers in the U.S.

mainly via electronic mail and phone calls as necessary. The data collected in were sent

to the U. S. via an e-mail attachment and synthesized for comparison.

The present article presents the main findings of the cross cultural study on

corporal punishment as experienced by Malaysian students studying at school of Medical

sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia. We examined the percentage of participants who

admitted receiving corporal punishment as a child, at home; the typical types of

20
punishment they remembered getting and its severity; as well as the participants’

perceptions and attitude towards the usage of corporal punishment at home in general.

The answers for Question 13 of the DQ were used to measure how many percent of the

participants remember receiving corporal punishment when they were at home. The

question read, “As a child did you ever receive corporal punishment in your home?” The

results indicated that more than half (63%) of participants in the present study

remembered being corporally punished at home, as children. Items 20 and 21 of the

Discipline Questionnaire were examined separately to determine whether the

remembered experience of corporal punishment a child received in the home reached a

physically abusive level. Item 20 relates to the severity of the typical incident of corporal

punishment, while item 21 requires a response to the most severe incident of corporal

punishment. According to Straus’ 1994 definition, child abuse is defined as clear,

identifiable harm or injury to the child that usually includes physical evidence of attacks

on the child such as bruises, welts, contusions, broken bones, or scars. Based on that

definition, two of the choices for respondents on items 20 and 21 were used to determine

if the physical punishment they received reached an abusive level. Either of the following

responses was considered to be abusive discipline: caused welts or bruises; or caused

physical injury more serious than welts or bruises (such as bone fractures or breaks, large

or deep cuts). Responses to either of these items were summed to determine the

percentage of participants who were physically abused as children. The results indicated

that only 3% of the participants remembered the typical experience with corporal

punishment that reaches an abusive level – which was defined as physical punishment

that results in welts, bruises, bone fractures or breaks, or large/deep cuts. Five percent

21
(5%) of the participants claimed to remember the most severe experience with corporal

punishment that reaches an abusive level. Question 19 of the DQ asked participants to

remember the types of corporal punishment they remember receiving as children in the

home and ticked the applicable types of punishment. The participants can choose to

respond with as many choices as applied. Therefore, many subjects responded that they

received multiple forms of corporal punishment at home as children (e.g., circled more

than one response). Table 1 corresponds to question 19 of the Discipline Questionnaire

on which participants were asked to remember the types of corporal punishment they

remember receiving as children in the home. Not surprisingly, each culture has its own

methods of corporal punishment. The participants responded on questions that asked

them to tick the types of corporal punishment they remember receiving as children at

home. The results showed that pinching is the most commonly reported types of

punishment used at home (35%), followed by slapping on the hand, arm or leg (31%),

whipping using flexible material such as leather or rope (23%), and spanking slapping on

the buttocks with open hand (20%). Other forms of punishment used at home reported by

the participants were slapping on face, head or ears (12%), shaking (5%), hitting with

objects such as hairbrush or paddle (4%) and arm twisting or hair pulling (3%). Punching,

kicking, beating as hard as possible and repeatedly, throwing or knocking down,

chocking, burning or scalding on purpose or threatening with knife or gun were the least

commonly reported types of punishment (2% and lesser) experienced by participants in

Malaysia. Finally, the participants’ attitude towards corporal punishment was measured

using seven single statements of 5-point scale. The score closer to 1 indicating an attitude

against the use of corporal punishment, and scores closer to 5 indicating an attitude for

22
the use of corporal punishment. The mean attitude score of the participants regarding the

use of corporal punishment was 2.9, indicates a fairly favorable attitude towards corporal

punishment.

The findings of the study suggest that majority of parents in Malaysia have been

using corporal punishment on their children – primarily of mild types. Generally, the

participants have had a fairly favorable attitude towards corporal punishment which may

suggest that corporal punishment in this context is not perceived as an action of abusing a

child, but rather one of many ways to teach the child a lesson in life.

Based from the study of Alison Breen, et al. (2015), entitled “Children

Experiences of Corporal Punishment: A Qualitative Study in an Urban Township of

South Africa”, exposure to violence is a serious mental and public health issue. In

particular, children exposed to violence are at risk for poor developmental outcomes and

physical and mental health problems. One area that has been shown to increase the risk

for poor outcomes is the use of corporal punishment as a discipline method. While

researchers are starting to ask children directly abouttheir experiences of violence, there

is limited research with children about their perspectives on physical punishment,

particularly in low-and middle-income countries (LMIC). This paper begins to address

this gap by reporting on the spontaneous data that emerged during 24 qualitative

interviews that were conducted with children, aged 8–12 in South Africa. The themes that

emerged indicated that corporal punishment is an everyday experience, that it has

negative emotional and behavioral consequences, and that it plays a role in how children

resolve interpersonal conflicts. The study highlights the challenges for violence

prevention interventions in under-resourced contexts.

23
 The study was conducted in Khayelitsha, a peri urban township near Cape Town,

with an estimated population of approximately 400,000. Housing is both formal and

informal (homes which consist of shacks, either in a formal dwelling backyard, or as a

stand-alone structure), unemployment levels (at 38.2%) (SDI & GIS, 2013) that are

considerably higher than the national average of 24.3%. 74% of households are estimated

to have a monthly income R3200/month or less (approximately $280) (SDI & GIS,

2013). Many residents do not have access to running water, electricity and sanitation.

There are high levels of violence and crime; however this is not the area with the highest

crime rates in Cape Town (Crime Stats SA, 2014). In 2014, there were 233 sexual crimes

reported in Khayelitsha, 144 attempted murders, 687 assaults with intent to cause

grievous bodily harm, 774 common assaults, and 1,185 reported robberies with

aggravating circumstances (Crime Stats SA, 2014).

In this qualitative study, in-depth interviews were conducted with 24 Xhosa

speaking children (11 boys and 13 girls), aged 8–12 years old (mean = 9.4 years) living in

and attending school in the same setting. Forty six percent lived with their mothers and

fathers (45.8%), 33.3% lived with their mothers but not their fathers, and 20.8% lived

with other relatives such as grandparents and aunts. The children had been zero to 5

siblings (mean = 1.6) and the mean number of other children living with the children in

the sample was 2.0. Sixteen percent (15.9%) lived in households where three household

members were working, 29.1% had two members who worked, 20.8% had 1 household

member who worked, 8% had household members on social support grants, and 25%

appeared to have no means of formal income. Three primary schools, which served

children from different areas of Khayelitsha were selected as sample sites. All three

24
schools were no fee, under-resourced and overcrowded facilities, with over 1,000

children registered. There were up to 6 classes per grade and between 40 and 50 children

per class to one teacher. One school primarily served an area where the children lived in

informal dwellings, one where most of the children lived in formal dwellings, and the

final school served children in both formal and informal dwellings. Children from these

schools were invited to participate, using a purposive sampling process. Permission to do

research at the schools was sought from the provincial education authority, and from the

schools’ principals. The researcher and interviewer then met with the teachers of the

relevant grades to explain the study aims and process. We asked the teachers to include

children who they would describe as “good”, “bad” and “troubled” in the sample, in an

attempt to ensure that teachers did not over select from one group. Consent forms were

then sent home with the children for their caregiver’s to sign and return. However, in the

end, the only sampling criterion that was relevant was the return rate of the consent forms

with parental authorization. Return rates of forms sent home from school were reportedly

very poor and so in order to ensure a sample of at least 20 children, 40 consent forms

were sent home, 24 of which were returned by the caregivers with their signed

authorization to take part in the interviews.

Analysis of the content related to corporal punishment revealed 3 themes.

Corporal punishment (1) is an everyday experience, (2) has negative emotional and

behavioral consequences, and (3) plays a role in how children resolve interpersonal

conflicts.

There is a dearth of good quality data on the prevalence of corporal punishment in

South Africa, and this knowledge gaps weaken efforts to develop viable interventions to

25
address this form of violence against children (Dawes et al., 2005). Given that

discrepancies exist between adult and child reports of corporal punishment (Vittrup &

Holden, 2010), eliciting children’s experiences helps provide a more complete picture of

what is happening in their everyday lives. Further research is needed to build on this

study, to understand more about children’s experiences in other contexts as well as

develop child-centered, sensitive methodologies to explore these issues. Research with

parents, teachers and other key role players is also needed to understand their experiences

and the beliefs that maintain this practice.

Based from the study of Anne Smith entitled, “The State of Research on the

Effects of Physical Punishment”, long considered an effective, and even necessary,

means of socializing children, physical punishment has been revealed to be a predictor of

a wide range of negative developmental outcomes. The extent of agreement in the

research literature on this issue is unusual in the social sciences. Physical punishment is

associated with increased child aggression, antisocial behavior, lower intellectual

achievement, poorer quality of parent–child relationships, mental health problems (such

as depression), and diminished moral internalization. The evidence about whether

physical punishment results in short-term compliance is mixed, with some studies

showing effectiveness in achieving this and others not. Short-term compliance can,

however, be achieved as effectively without using physical punishment. Physical

punishment has negative effects on child outcomes, especially if it is harsh, regardless of

culture. When punishment use is normative in a culture, the effects are slightly less

negative. Research findings support ongoing efforts to help parents use more positive

26
methods of parenting, and the removal of a defense in law for the use of physical

punishment against children.

Our review of research has established that there is little evidence to recommend

retaining physical punishment in the parental repertoire of discipline. Only one desirable

outcome for child behavior has been associated with physical punishment – in some, but

not all, studies – and this outcome is immediate compliance. Even those who argue in

favor of the use of physical punishment as a backup to other disciplinary strategies, such

as reasoning and time out, suggest that it is only effective under severely limited

conditions (as to age of child, severity, timing and context among other things). When

compliance is just as easily (and effectively) achieved with alternative inductive and

positive methods of child rearing and milder forms of punishment, it is unnecessary, risky

and unethical to use physical punishment.

Research on the long-term effects of physical punishment isconsistent and

overwhelmingly negative over a wide variety of child development outcomes. The use of

physical punishment has been associated with many negative social outcomes, including

aggression, disruptive behavior in school, and lack of acceptance by peers, crime and

delinquency. Children’s cognitive and intellectual developments are also adversely

affected by parental use of physical punishment. Physical punishment is linked to

insecure attachment and poorer relationships between children and parents, and to a

variety of mental health problems, such as anxiety, depression and suicidal ideation. The

overall goals of family discipline for most families are for children to internalize the

values and attitudes that will lead to appropriate behavior, rather than relying on external

monitoring and control. Research suggests that the use of physical punishment does the

27
reverse, and inhibits the development of moral internalization. While the effects of

physical punishment may be a little less severe when it is normative in a culture, the

effects are still negative. In societies like Aotearoa New Zealand, where it is increasingly

being accepted that physical punishment is not desirable, it is likely that the ongoing

outcomes will be negative.

The use of physical punishment is deeply embedded in our culture and history,

but it is a clear and preventable health risk for children. One very frequently used

everyday argument in favor of corporal punishment is from people who say “I was

spanked and I am okay”. Straus (1999) points out that people who say this may be among

the lucky ones who were not adversely affected by corporal punishment. Corporal

punishment does not guarantee a harmful effect, but the more that children experience

corporal punishment and the more frequent and severe it is, the more they are at risk for

problems like aggression and depression, regardless of their cultural background. The use

of corporal punishment as a method of family discipline is a health risk for children – a

risk to which parents might not expose their children if they understood the probability of

harmful consequences.

There is no universal recipe for effective discipline, and while research findings

may seem clear, their application to real life is a different matter. Many parents, however,

want to avoid the health risks inherent in punitive approaches towards their children, and

feel increasingly uncomfortable with the use of physical punishment. Parents can and do

change their ideas about discipline, with or without external support. Ongoing efforts to

encourage and help parents to use positive disciplinary approaches, such as the Ministry

of Social Development SKIP programs (Strategies with Kids – Information for Parents),

28
3 are therefore to be supported. These efforts, in my view, need to be supported by a

change in the law so that parents cannot use as a defense that they were using reasonable

discipline when they have assaulted children.

Based from the study entitled “An Insight to Corporal Punishment: A Review of

Literature”, corporal punishment is a highly controversial practice of disciplining a child.

The multiple numbers of views that it brings makes it a constantly changing topic.

Corporal punishment can be seen being performed on children all around the world. A

brief overview of what corporal punishment is and the numerous effects that it has, and

the different views and policies that are revolving around this topic will be discussed

throughout this review. It will provide an overview from experts from different fields

including journalists, doctors, and some information from governmental personnel

involving legal issues. The review will address four main questions to give an insight and

an understanding on the topic of corporal punishment.

Corporal punishment has become a widely discussed topic across the country

from people bringing awareness of the topic to people discussing the different effects that

it can have. Corporal punishment most certainly has its negative effects but also

contributes its positive effects to children and parents. The issue of corporal punishment

being related to child abuse has also been of some concern but with the insight of the

review can now be seen as having many similarities and differences as abuse. Lastly, the

policies of corporal punishment vary across the country allowing it to be practiced in

some states but at the same time reformation are being addressed to end this practice

nationwide. The topic of corporal punishment is a never ending controversy and like most

topics has its variety of views.

29
 SYNTHESIS OF THE STUDY

This introduces and presents a synthesis of the study bearing upon the present

pursuit of knowledge. The clear understanding and ideas procured from this synthesis

provided the researchers useful and worthy insights to uphold and support the present

investigation.

Corporal punishment remains a hot topic that is widely debated by experts and

parents. New stories about the horrors of student abuse often raise questions about

whether corporal punishment should remain legal and what steps could be taken to

reduce incidents of physical abuse to students. It encompasses all types of physical

punishment, including spanking, slapping, pinching, pulling and hitting with an object. It

may also include forcing a child to consume unpleasant substances, such as soap, hot

sauce or hot pepper. In several states, corporal punishment is legal on a federal level, but

state laws vary on what types of physical punishment are allowed.

This may lead to immediate compliance. A student who gets spanked, slapped, or

pinched, may change his behavior in the short-term. In the long-term, however, studies

consistently show that corporal punishment is ineffective. In fact, it can worsen behavior

problems over time. Spanking students increases aggressive behavior. Multitudes of

research studies have found students who are spanked are more likely to hit other people.

Corporal punishment models aggressive behavior which teaches children to solve

problem with violence. Spanking is not any more effective than time-out. Research show

that spanking quickly loses effectiveness over time. When children are spanked, they

don’t learn how to make better choices and eventually, spanking stops being a deterrent.

Corporal punishment also damages the relationship between students and their

30
caregivers. Trust, stability and security, are keys to helping a student develop the skills he

needs to managing his own behavior. It erodes the relationship and makes behavior

management more difficult.

A 2009 study published in Journal of Aggression Maltreatment & Trauma found

that spanking lowers a student’s IQ. Researchers suggest that the fear and stress

associated with being hit takes a toll on a student’s brain development. The study found

that the more a child was spanked, the slower the student’s mental development. This was

especially true when students continue to be subjected to punishments at older ages.

Students who are subjected to corporal punishment, such as spanking, pushing,

grabbing and paddling, are more likely to develop mental disorders. A 2012 study

published in Pediatrics reported that harsh physical punishment was associated with

increased odds of mood disorders, anxiety disorders, substance abuse, and personality

disorders. Even when the physical punishment was not considered child abuse, the

researchers found that corporal punishment placed students at a higher risk of developing

almost every type of mental illness.

Despite much public opposition to spanking, a 2013 survey conducted by the

Harris Poll discovered that 81 percent of Americans privately support spanking students.

The poll found that older generations are more accepting of spanking with 88 percent

mature parents, 85 percent baby boomers, 80 percent of Gen X parents and 72 percent of

millennial parents approving corporal punishment. Corporal punishment can be a difficult

cycle to break. Most children who were spanked grow up to become parents who use

physical punishment.

31
 The AAP has taken a strong stance against corporal punishments in schools,

stating that schools should not use any type of physical punishment. Despite their

statements, paddling is still allowed in many public schools in the United States.

Interestingly, hitting students with wood paddle is actually considered child abuse in

some states. The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights estimates that

223 190 students were paddled during 2005 to 2006 school year. A 2009 study conducted

by the American Civil Liberties Union and Human Rights Watch found that black

students and disabled students were paddled most often.

Discipline shouldn’t be about controlling students. Instead, it should be about

teaching them to control themselves. Use strategies that will help student learn from her

mistakes while also developing better decision-making skills that will help her make

better choices for the future. If corporal punishment is used with students, it may want to

consider the potential of long-term consequences physical punishment could have on the

student’s well-being.

Consider alternative discipline strategies that could be more effective. Take away

certain privileges, such as electronics, 24 hours. That will hurt more than spanking will.

Use restitution if the student’s behavior hurt someone else. Assign an extra chore or have

him perform a duty that will help makes amends. Use logical consequences that teach life

lessons. If the students break something, make him do chores to earn money to fix it. Use

positive reinforcement to encourage good behavior too. Establish a reward system to or a

token economy system to help students address specific behavior problems.

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

32
 This chapter presents the research design and instrument to be used in the study.

Also, includes the chosen respondents and setting of the research for further information

and understanding.

RESEARCH DESIGN

The researcher chose a qualitative-descriptive design because it best served to

answer the questions and the purposes of the study. Descriptive method will be used to

describe the subjective views of teachers from CBSUA-Sipocot Campus, FAFC, and

SNHS about corporal punishment. The research study will describe if corporal

punishment gives advantage or disadvantages to the students mentally and to control their

behaviors while in the classroom.

RESPONDENTS

The respondents were represented by junior high school teachers S/Y 2018-2019.

The researchers preferred to choose 30 junior high school teachers from CBSUA-Sipocot

Campus, FAFC, and SNHS.

SCHOOL NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS

CBSUA- Sipocot Campus 10

FAFC 10

SNHS 10

Total 30

RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS

The instrument that will be used by the researchers is questionnaire through

interview, where the questions are answerable by the perspective views of the

33
respondents. Over all, it is composed of 4 open-ended questions. By these instruments,

the researchers are going to gather data from its results.

RESEARCH SETTINGS

This study will be conducted at the campus of Central Bicol State University of

Agriculture (Coloy-coloy, Impig, Sipocot, Camarines Sur), Felix O. Alfelor College

Foundation (San Juan Ave. Sipocot, Camarines Sur), and Sipocot National High School

(Tara, Sipocot, Camarines Sur).

Central Bicol State University of Agriculture-Sipocot

34
 Felix O. Alfelor College Foundation

Sipocot National High School

METHOD OF DATA ANALYSIS

The researchers from King Thomas Learning Academy, Inc. want to pursue a

research that will correspond to 5 W’s. In this study the first thing that the researchers

35
need to do is to decide on what topic they want to pursue that corresponds to 5 W’s. The

second thing that the researchers do is to create a title that is suitable to 5 W’s. Third,

they start their study by making the chapter 1. The fourth thing that the researchers do,

they continue the process by making the chapter 2. Fifth, the researchers undergo title

proposal for them to know whether their title was approved or not. The sixth thing that

the researchers do, they make the chapter 3 of the study, lastly the researchers defend

their title to panelist.

CHAPTER IV

DISCUSSIONS OF RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This introduces and presents the data being gathered from the interview in

CBSUA-Sipocot Campus, SNHS and FAFC; and the recommendations by the

researchers. The clear understanding and ideas procured from this review provided by

both the respondents and researchers useful and worthy insights to uphold the present

investigation.

DATA INTERPRETATION

Statement of the Problem 1:

What are the common punishments used by the teachers to the students?

Based from the conducted interview, 13 out of 30 (43.33…%) respondents have

enumerated sanctions that are considered as corporal punishments in which the 4

respondents came from CBSUA- Sipocot Campus, 6 respondents from SNHS and 3

respondents from FAFC; on the other hand, 14 out of 30 (46.66…%) respondents have

enumerated sanctions that are considered as non-corporal punishments in which 4

36
respondents came from CBSUA- Sipocot Campus, 3 respondents from SNHS and 7

respondents from FAFC. For the 3 (10 %) remaining respondents, they have not

enumerated any punishments in which 2 respondents are from CBSUA-Sipocot Campus

and 1 respondent from SNHS.

Chart 1. Common Punishments stated by JHS Teachers from CBSUA-

Sipocot Campus

20%
40%

40%

Corporal Punishment Non-Corporal Punishment Unspecified

Chart 2. Common Punishments stated by JHS Teachers from SNHS

10%

30%
60%

Corporal Punishment Non-Corporal Punishment Unspecified 37

 Chart 3. Common Punishment stated by JHS Teachers from FAFC

30%

70%

Corporal Punishment Non-Corporal Punishment

Statement of the Problem 2:

What are the positive effects of corporal punishment law to students and teachers?

Based from the conducted interview, 9 out of 30 (30%) respondents defended the

implementation of corporal punishment law because it has positive effects to students and

teachers in which the 4 respondents came from CBSUA- Sipocot Campus, 1 respondent

from SNHS and 4 respondents from FAFC; on the other hand, though it is not asked, 20

out of 30 (66.66…%) respondents have shared their opinions that corporal punishment

law has negative effects in which 5 respondents came from CBSUA- Sipocot Campus, 9

respondents from SNHS and 6 respondents from FAFC. For the 1 (3.33… %) remaining

respondent from CBSUA- Sipocot Campus, she stated that corporal punishment law has

both positive and negative effect, and that made her answer neutral to the question.

38
Chart 1. Effects of Corporal Punishment stated by JHS Teachers from
CBSUA-Sipocot Campus

10%
40%

50%

Positive Negative Neutral

Chart 2. Effects of Corporal Punishment stated by JHS Teachers from

SNHS

10%

90%

Positive Negative

39
 Chart 3. Effects of Corporal Punishment stated by JHS Teachers from
FAFC

40%

60%

Positive Negative

Statement of the Problem 3:

What are the effective ways to discipline the behavior of the students other than corporal

punishment?

Based from the conducted interview, 17 out of 30 (56.66…%) respondents have

answered some verbal punishments to discipline students in which the 6 respondents

came from CBSUA- Sipocot Campus, 5 respondents from SNHS and 6 respondents from

FAFC; on the other hand, 3 out of 30 (10…%) respondents have answered non-verbal

punishments in which 1 respondent came from CBSUA- Sipocot Campus, and 2

respondents from FAFC. For the 10 (33.33 %) remaining respondents, they answered

both verbal and non-verbal punishments in which 3 respondents are from CBSUA-

Sipocot Campus, 5 respondent from SNHS, and 2 respondents from FAFC.

40
 Chart 1. Substituted Methods in Disciplining Students stated by JHS
Teachers from CBSUA-Sipocot Campus

30%

60%
10%

Verbal Strategies Non-verbal Strategies Verbal and Non-verbal Strategies

Chart 2. Substituted Methods in Disciplining Students stated by JHS

Teachers from SNHS

50% 50%

Verbal Strategies Verbal ang Non-verbal Strategies

41
 Chart 3. Substituted Methods in Disciplining Students stated by JHS
Teachers from FAFC

20%

20% 60%

Verbal Strategies Non-verbal Strategies Verbal and Non-verbal Strategies

Statement of the Problem 4:

What are the different perspectives of teachers about the corporal punishment law?

Based from the conducted interview, 9 out of 30 (30%) respondents have agreed

to corporal punishment law in which the 4 respondents came from CBSUA- Sipocot

Campus, 3 respondents from SNHS and 2 respondents from FAFC; on the other hand, 11

out of 30 (36.66…%) respondents have said that they are disagree to corporal punishment

law in which 3 respondents came from CBSUA- Sipocot Campus, 1 respondent from

SNHS and 7 respondents from FAFC. For the 10 (33.33… %) remaining respondents,

they both agreed and disagreed in the implementation of corporal punishment law in

which 3 respondents are from CBSUA-Sipocot Campus, 6 respondent from SNHS, and 1

respondent from FAFC.

42
Chart 1. Perspectives of JHS Teachers from CBSUA-Sipocot

30%
40%

30%

Agree Disagree Agree and Disagree

Chart 2. Perspectives of JHS Teachers from SNHS

30%

60%
10%

Agree Disagree Agree and Disagree

43
 Chart 3. Perspectives of JHS Teachers from FAFC

10% 20%

70%

Agree Disagree Agree and Disagree

FINDINGS

Statement of the Problem 1:

“What are the common punishments used by the teachers to the students?”

This question aims for the respondents to enumerate the corporal punishments

used by the teachers to the students. The corporal punishment being asked about requires

offensive physical contact. 14 (46.66…%) teachers from CBSUA-Sipocot Campus,

FAFC and SNHS enumerated different punishments but does not possess any offensive

physical contact such as standing either on ground or above the chair, jagging, facing the

wall, squatting, letting the students stay outside the room, scolding , paying violation

fees, surprise academic activities and cleaning the room or a specific part of school like

comfort room, and gymnasium. 13 (43.33…%) teachers have answered the question with

regards to corporal punishment like hitting the students with objects like sticks or hand,

pinching, beating, kneeling in munggo beans or salt and pulling hair. The punishments

44
that are stated by the teachers are based from what they have experienced when they are

still studying, and what they are still currently doing; on the other hand, 3 (10%) teachers

does not provide any answer because according to them, they did not experience nor

doing the practice of corporal punishment. Based from the interview, punishments

mentioned by the respondents varies upon the situations like when the students are late,

have no assignments/activities, or when they are noisy and whether if the mistakes

committed by the students deserves an offensive punishment for discipline.

Statement of the Problem 2:

Is there a positive effects of corporal punishment law to students and teachers?

This question aims to know the positive effects of corporal punishment law to

students and teachers. Corporal punishment law is a government provided statute

prohibiting the teachers to do physical punishments that would be offensive to the

students. 9 out of 30 (30%) teachers from CBSUA- Sipocot Campus, FAFC, and SNHS

said that corporal punishment law has positive effects, this includes the students being

subjected to less stress, less trauma, and less physical abuse; and that the students would

not feel any inferiority or the feeling of less valued. It is also an effective way to protect

the rights of the students from being battered. Even though some teachers wasn’t asked to

state some negative effect of corporal punishment law, 20 (66.66… %) teachers still

provided their opinions. Plenty negative effects are given by the teachers, like, it reduces

the discipline of some students and makes it difficult for the teacher to set some rules for

the students to follow. They believe that it requires little violence for the students to

follow and learn some lessons. Also, according to them, the students may change their

behavior by being abusive of having their right as a student which able them to do more

45
violations and thinking it would be fine. In terms of the student’s guardians, they are

complaining for their children are subjected to physical offensive punishment and that

they don’t want their children to get hurt. The remaining 1 (3.33… %) teacher from

CBSUA- Sipocot Campus stated that the corporal punishment law have both positive and

negative effects

Statement of the Problem 3:

What are the effective ways to discipline the behavior of the students other than corporal

punishment?

This question aims to know if there are some ways to discipline the behavior of

students other than corporal punishment. 30 out of 30 (100%) of the teachers from

CBSUA- Sipocot Campus, FAFC, and SNHS said that there are other ways to discipline

the behavior of students. The substituted ways in disciplining the students are

characterized into two categories: verbal and non-verbal strategies. 17 (56.66… %)

teachers suggested having “heart-to-heart” talk and consulting students if there is

something happening that affects the behavior as a student then giving advice are

included in verbal punishments. Some of the teachers when disciplining students, they

cite life-long experiences for the students to ponder and reflect upon but when the

students chose not listen, the teachers would likely to talk to the students’ guardians. To

teachers, another way to discipline the student is through proper communication between

students, teachers and parents; and it also lead to better way of understanding. For the 3

(10%) teachers who answered non-verbal strategies, they included hand signals and eye

contact to get the attention and give warning to the students when they are not listening

46
during discussion. “Reward system” in which the teacher gives surprise academic tasks

such assignment, quiz and projects is also an effective way for students to become more

responsible and well-behaved inside the class but based on their interview, the most

common strategies that the teachers subjects to students is jag in 3-10 papers. For the

remaining 10 (33.33… %) teachers, they suggested both of verbal and non-verbal

strategies.

Statement of the Problem 4:

What are your perspectives about the corporal punishment law?

This question aims to know the perspective of JHS teachers about corporal

punishment law. 9 (30%) teachers agreed to corporal punishment law. They viewed

corporal punishment law as beneficial to the students, school’s image, parents and

stakeholders that lessens physical abuse, pressure, trauma, and violence to the students.

According to the teachers, through the implementation of this kind of law, they should

think of another strategy in disciplining students that would not affect any of the said

beneficiaries of this law because the students does not deserve improper physical sanction

that would affect their well-being as a student. 11 (36.66… %) teachers disagreed on the

implementation of the law because they believe that corporal punishment is an effective

way of disciplining though it possess negative effects yet still have good outcomes. Based

on their answers, students are being stubborn and hard-headed. The students tend to get

complacent and continue committing violations. The remaining 10 (33.33… %) teachers

both agreed and disagreed. They agreed because it indeed protects the students’ rights

47
and school’s image; and disagreed because with this law, teachers are not capable on

subjecting punishments that would teach students proper discipline.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendations for Statement of the Problem 1:

Recommendations for Statement of the Problem 2:

Recommendations for Statement of the Problem 3:

Recommendations for Statement of the Problem 4:

The researchers should give priority to seeking if the respondents are against or in favor

regarding corporal punishment law.

48