Hitting With Boards

Most, or maybe all, of you were raised with spankings, whippings or paddlings so you take it for granted as a customary and reasonable part of rearing children. I can understand that. Most or all of us who are parents have used physical punishment at times on our children. So why change our custom, or habit, at this time? Why not leave well enough alone?

I can only say that I understand that hesitation, but I ask that you suspend your hesitation for a moment and keep an open mind -- open to change -- as you hear the facts I am about to present.

So why should we end corporal punishment in our school?

ONE It isn’t necessary. There are many proven methods for controlling discipline that do not involve the legal and moral negatives of hitting kids with boards. Teachers in 30 states and in every developed country in the world are educating children and maintaining order in the classroom without hitting kids with boards. Many of the “best” systems in our state have banned the practice. Our own high school has banned it. Our elementary and middle school teachers are just as capable.

TWO Discipline improves when paddling is banned. Studies have proven that it’s an urban myth that discipline deteriorates if we stop paddling. Surveys of school principals taken two to three years after a paddling ban show that nearly all say discipline improved or remained the same. Almost none said it worsened. A study of teachers surveyed before a ban showed that most opposed a ban -- they wanted to keep using paddling. But a year after, the number wanting paddling restored dropped to about half. And two years after a ban almost no teacher at all wanted paddling brought back.

THREE We will more successfully educate kids if they don’t face corporal punishment. All the research studies that have ever been done on school corporal punishment reach the same conclusion: Districts that eliminate corporal punishment have higher graduation rates than districts that use paddling. Non-paddling districts have less school vandalism, and their students do better on national achievement tests.

FOUR We lower our liability risks. While Alabama law gives immunity to teachers and school boards for injuries they inflict on students when disciplining, that does not keep us (meaning you and me), or our teachers, out of federal court. In fact, Alabama’s immunity law increases the likelihood that legal action would go to federal courts. There are several national organizations out there looking for a case right now to take the issue to the U.S. Supreme Court. We don’t want us to be that case. I’ll have more on that in a moment.

FIVE We will set forth a good model for our students of how to handle disagreement. Children imitate us. They learn what they live. When we allow someone bigger and stronger to hit with a board someone smaller and weaker, we are not just expressing disapproval of some behavior, we are also sending a message that might makes right, that it is ok to be physically aggressive, and inflict pain to get your way. That is not a good model for our children, especially when research indicates there are much better ways to handle discipline.


Now, in talking to some of you about this issue, you have made points in favor of keeping the policy as is. I will briefly address some of those points:

• One response I’ve heard is that teachers want to keep it. It is a normal reaction to resist change in our routines, to not want to learn new techniques. Ya know what? Our teachers learn new things every day. They excel at it! On top of that, the nation’s largest teacher union, the National Education Association, has twice gone on record favoring an immediate end to school corporal punishment. So has the National PTA and the National Association of Elementary School Principals. The votes in those groups were not even close. They were overwhelmingly in favor of ending this archaic custom.

• Ms. Kirkman, as an African-American, you told me that in your culture physical punishment is widely accepted. That is true. Studies show that African-Americans are more supportive of using of corporal punishment than other cultures. But African-Americans in leadership positions that deal with children have called for an end to school corporal punishment. These include Marion Wright Edelman of the Children’s Defense Fund, Julian Bond as President of the NAACP, Rev. Jesse Jackson, Dr. Winston Price of the National Medical Association, Marc Morial as President of the National Urban League and many others. African-Americans in respected positions want to lead the path away from physical discipline. I hope you will join them in that leadership.

• The most often-heard comment I hear (by far) is something along the lines of, “I was paddled when I was in school and it worked on me!” Yes, paddling certainly does work on students that are afraid of paddling. But I can tell you that it most certainly did not work on me (I hated school and blame much of that on a 1st grade teacher who humiliated me). It worked on my oldest son, Ben. It never worked on my youngest son. We as a school board must support a discipline policy that is applicable to ALL students including the ones that fear paddling, are beaten at home, witness domestic violence on a daily basis or just could not care less either way.

In conclusion, one common thread that you see at every convention or break-out session we participate in is the use of critical thought and evidence-based reasoning in setting our policies. I have done that. I cannot deny the evidence that I have shared with you today. I urge you to research the issue yourself and take a leadership position on this issue. I intend to ask for a motion to initiate a ban on this practice at our next board meeting. I hope I can count on your support.

Alabama Law on Abstinance Only

Minimum contents to be included in sex education program or curriculum.

(a) Any program or curriculum in the public schools in Alabama that includes sex education or the human reproductive process shall, as a minimum, include and emphasize the following:

(1) Abstinence from sexual intercourse is the only completely effective protection against unwanted pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, and acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) when transmitted sexually.

(2) Abstinence from sexual intercourse outside of lawful marriage is the expected social standard for unmarried school-age persons.
(b) Course materials and instruction that relate to sexual education or sexually transmitted diseases should be age-appropriate.
(c) Course materials and instruction that relate to sexual education or sexually transmitted diseases should include all of the following elements:

(1) An emphasis on sexual abstinence as the only completely reliable method of avoiding unwanted teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.

(2) An emphasis on the importance of self-control and ethical conduct pertaining to sexual behavior.

(3) Statistics based on the latest medical information that indicate the degree of reliability and unreliability of various forms of contraception, while also emphasizing the increase in protection against pregnancy and protection against sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV and AIDS infection, which is afforded by the use of various contraceptive measures.

(4) Information concerning the laws relating to the financial responsibilities associated with pregnancy, childbirth, and child rearing.

(5) Information concerning the laws prohibiting sexual abuse, the need to report such abuse, and the legal options available to victims of sexual abuse.

(6) Information on how to cope with and rebuff unwanted physical and verbal sexual exploitation by other persons.

(7) Psychologically sound methods of resisting unwanted peer pressure.

(8) An emphasis, in a factual manner and from a public health perspective, that homosexuality is not a lifestyle acceptable to the general public and that homosexual conduct is a criminal offense under the laws of the state.

(9) Comprehensive instruction in parenting skills and responsibilities, including the responsibility to pay child support by non-custodial parents, the penalties for non-payment of child support, and the legal and ethical responsibilities of child care and child rearing.
(Acts 1992, No. 92-590, p. 1216, §2.)