I posted the following in another thread yesterday. I don't want to hijack that thread, but I have some comments to make concerning some of the statements made in the article, because I think it illustrates how certain 'facts' in the corporal punishment debate have sometimes been misrepresented in various ways to give false impressions. This article concerns Victoria, Australia, which is the place I'm most familiar with having been a student in Victorian schools from 1980-1992, and now working as an institutional historian in this state. One of my areas of professional interest is the history of schools, a personal interest is the history of corporal punishment in schools. Reading this article yesterday, I noticed a few of the impressions it gives are... problematic from the perspective of truth. Whether they are actually lies or not, depends on your point of view, but certain things are at least mistakes, and other statements seem to me to have been deliberately written to give a false impression without necessarily being untrue. It might be clearer after I have finished.
I'm going to post the article in black text, but comments I have to make will be interspersed where appropriate with
red italic text.
Melbourne, Australia
July 3, 1994
Page 13
Spare the rod?
Corporal punishment is now outlawed in the vast majority of Victorian schools, forcing teachers to devise more creative forms of discipline.
Denise Ryan reports.
THE crack of the cane has not echoed in the corridors of Scotch College in more than a decade.
When the principal, Dr Gordon Donaldson, meets parents, he finds that fathers often quip that the last time they were in his office they were bent over receiving "six of the best".
It mystifies Dr Donaldson how old boys can recall the cane with "a certain fondness". When he joined the school 11 years ago, it was already regarded as an inappropriate punishment.
According to Scotch's colleges own official history, A Deepening Roar: Scotch College, Melbourne, 1951-2001 published in 2001, the cane was still in use within the corridors of Scotch College until 1988, and still used in its boarding house until 1990. While Dr Donaldson, as Headmaster, may well not have used it in the eleven years prior to this articles publication in 1994, that does not mean it was not used in that period. It was - by form masters and the boarding house master.
The use of corporal punishment in Melbourne's most traditional schools - the likes of Scotch, Xavier College, Melbourne Grammar School and Camberwell Grammar School - has acquired almost legendary status thanks to tales told by former pupils.
Their memories are of nervous (or defiant) students lined up outside the principal's door awaiting a whack for a foolish prank. Many men smile when recalling the camaraderie, mischief and fear that characterised their boyhood. "The cane never did me any harm," is a popular catchcry of this generation.
A recent United Nations report, which criticised Australia for failing to outlaw the physical punishment of children, has added to the impression that schoolchildren are still beaten today.
The reality is tamer. Most Melbourne boys' schools abolished corporal punishment more than a decade ago. A survey by 'The Sunday Age' of independent schools found only two schools still using the cane - St Michael's Grammar, St Kilda, and Heathdale Christian College, Werribee.
Actually, what 'The Sunday Age' found was only two schools that would admit they still used the cane - there were, to my certain knowledge, at least fifteen schools still using corporal punishment at that point and there may have been others.
Several principals say schools that still cane can be counted on one hand. Once a remedy for disobedience in almost all schools, the cane was banned in Victorian state schools in 1983.
Actually the cane was banned in Victorian state schools by 1901 - the strap was permitted in state schools until 1983. This is quite a common error that pops up in educational discussions in Australia - either the term 'strap' or 'cane' being used as if it just means corporal punishment in general, including sometimes being used in cases where it just wasn't used in reality.
Catholic schools have a reputation for caning that is no longer deserved. A 1985 policy statement by the Catholic Education Commission of Victoria said corporal punishment was "inappropriate and should not be used". The principals of several Catholic schools admit this position differs greatly from 20 years ago when errant lads were regularly caned.
The reasons for the demise of this ancient form of punishment are as varied as the disciplinary policies that have replaced it. Some principals say teachers hated administering the cane, so it fell into disuse. Others say major changes in societal thinking - a greater emphasis on the rights of the individual, on the need to foster sensitivity in men and to lead by example, not threat - made it unacceptable.
Girls have rarely been subjected to corporal punishment. When boys' schools became co-educational it proved difficult to maintain separate discipline policies. Wesley College, for example, abolished the cane 20 years ago to coincide with the change to co-education.
THE educational philosophy of many boys' schools has changed markedly over the past 20 years. The authoritarian, imposed discipline of old has been replaced by a belief in self-discipline and mutual respect between teacher and pupil. As one Catholic school principal puts it: "We now know you attract more flies with honey than vinegar".
The principals of the two schools that still resort to corporal punishment claim parental support is a major reason for retaining the cane. The principal of St Michael's, Mr Tony Hewison, says his school's strong discipline is a drawcard with parents. The principal of Heathdale, Mr Bill Brisbane, agrees, saying parents still want corporal punishment.
Views like this are no longer widely held, most schools having dropped physical punishment because it is believed parents will not tolerate it.
Sparing the rod has made life tougher for teachers. Where once there was an instant response to misbehavior, schools must now devise more creative solutions. At Melbourne Grammar smoking offenders have to go on 6am runs with the principal. At Mentone Boys Grammar School bullying can lead to solitary confinement.
When positive techniques such as role-modelling fail, schools mostly resort to the traditional - detention, suspension and parental involvement. Theft, smoking and the use of alcohol and drugs can still lead to expulsion from most schools.
Private boys' schools remain conservative: sticklers on uniform, strong on sport and big on rules and regulations. But their principals claim they are striving to produce young men who are more sensitive than their predecessors.
The principal of Trinity Grammar School, Mr Peter Crawley, has experienced the change in boys' schools first-hand.
He went to a school where "you had to have a medical certificate to play tennis because they had to fill six teams of rugby".
In his schooldays, most mothers were at home; now most are in the workforce. He believes the change in the roles of men and women has altered the formerly macho culture of boys' schools.
"The notion that if you put a lot of boys together it becomes like the changeroom after a football game bears no resemblance to boys' schools these days," he says. "People would be surprised to see how forthright boys are in their emotions. They don't hide their sensitivity or their horror at insensitivity."
The principal of Xavier College, Father Philip Wallbridge, shares this view of a changed society.
"I used to cane, but no longer find it appropriate," he says. "I think the women's movement has made us a much more sensitive nation. I don't feel comfortable with all aspects of it but I believe it has been the most powerful thing to happen in our society in the last 15 years."
He says parents want to be involved in the education of their children, which means schools have to be aware of community standards.
I doubt this is untrue, but it does give a somewhat false impression. I am an Old Xaverian and while the cane was used at Xavier, the strap was used, far, far, far more. It wasn't in use in 1994, but had been used up until 1990. I know that first hand.
The principal of St Joseph's Marist Brothers College, Brother Justin Guthrie, says the discipline policies of Catholic schools have changed along with community attitudes. "The Aussie attitude of the past was, `Men don't eat quiche' and `Men don't discuss things', but now people are more sensitive," he says.
At Mentone Boys Grammar School, some parents lament the abolition of corporal punishment 18 months ago. The principal, Mr Neville Clark, said he found the cane a "useful shortcut" in cases of bullying but that he has had to keep pace with society's views.
Again, nothing untrue here, but it does illustrate the difficulty of defining 'abolition' in some cases. Corporal punishment was officially abolished at Mentone Grammar in April 1991 - but when it was found desirable to use it in late 1992, they lifted the abolition, used it, and abolished it again. To me, calling that abolition doesn't seem entirely accurate..
The school is now more inventive in its punishments. As well as a series of detentions - fatigues (cleaning duties) for minor offences, after-school detention for unsatisfactory work and Saturday detention for more serious offenders - he has introduced "solitary confinement" in a room in his own residence.
He has found it difficult to suspend students in cases where both parents work so he has decided that making students work in isolation is a helpful compromise.
At Whitefriars College, the school tries to tailor punishment to the offence. The principal, Father Hugh Brown, says two students who recently harassed a female teacher by making unacceptable comments had to attend detentions after school for two weeks during which they read about the position of women in society and legislation on equal opportunity.
A child who had stolen something, he says, has to pay back the equivalent amount to the victims by earning the money. The child also has to face the victims.
The principal of Melbourne Grammar, Mr Tony Hill, has found his 6am runs for smoking offenders highly effective. "That way," he says, "I get to know them and they get the message - that smoking is bad for their health."
He says corporal punishment waned in the early 1980s because teachers did not want to administer it. "I have since banned it because the notion of teachers acting like sergeant-majors is outdated. Teachers now treat students in a more pleasant, informal way, which creates a more productive learning environment."
Another school where corporal punishment was banned by order of the Headmaster. As far as I know, at Melbourne Grammar, this ban did stay in effect, but it has been a feature of such bans at a number of schools, that because the ban was simply a decision by the Headmaster, he could lift it at will, and so it is not always a total ban.
Many principals seem determined to make their students' experience of school a more positive experience than their own.
The principal of Camberwell Grammar School, Mr Colin Black, was brought up in Scotland where the strap was "part and parcel" of going to school. "I don't think we had the relationship with our teachers that our boys have here," he says. "If a teacher administers corporal punishment in a formal, cold way, it makes it difficult to have a relationship of trust."
Caning was also common in Catholic schools when the principal of St Bede's College, Mr Henry Corcoran, began teaching 24 years ago.
"No one has been caned at this school in years," he says. "It has become an inappropriate method of punishment because it works from the position of a threat rather than shared responsibility."
Nobody may have been caned at St Bedes in years (although does that mean two years or twenty?) but as the strap was, by far, the most common method of corporal punishment used at St Bedes, this statement is just a little misleading. I had friends at St Bedes - it was the closest Catholic school to my own home, and most of my local friends went there.
Co-educational schools also emphasise mutual respect. The student welfare coordinator at Carey Baptist Grammar School, Mr Peter Schiller, says students have a great sense of justice and will return a teacher's respect tenfold.
At Wesley College, bad behavior is treated as a "plea for help". The principal, Mr Glen McArthur, says he found the cane "a bit barbaric", particularly when it was known that students who misbehaved needed help.
"If children are struggling in the school environment it is not because they are vindictive or unpleasant, but because they are bringing problems to school with them which are impacting on their behavior," he says.
Discipline in the 1990s is much more difficult, according to Dr Donaldson of Scotch College. "When I was a primary school student and you told your parents you had been spanked they would probably say, `It serves you right'. Corporal punishment was short and sharp. There was a sin, an offender and it was dealt with on the spot. The present system requires much more patience, effort, time and judgment."
Girls' schools say they have always known there were better solutions than physical punishment. They get the best from students by positive reinforcement - an approach, they note, it has taken decades for boys' schools to adopt.
The principal of Firbank Anglican School, Dr Jane Munro, says the cane has never worked. "A school should strive for a code of discipline that makes children responsible for their actions and gives them self discipline as adults," she says. "I have great concerns about physical punishment because I don't think it does that."
At Methodist Ladies College, the acting principal, Mrs Judy McKenzie, said the school has tried to create a supportive, collaborative atmosphere that discourages confrontations with teachers. "I think those defiant situations are more likely to arise in an authoritarian classroom," she says.
Just as the authoritarian teacher is disappearing, so it seems is the angry student. The principal of Trinity, Mr Crawley, says today's students are less rebellious than previous generations, mostly because they recognise they need help from teachers to find a place in society.
He too says he feels caning has never worked. "There are so many mythical stories that indicate that it didn't work," he says. "The fact that parents often say they were beaten time and time again proves it didn't work. The teachers who used it had to keep on using it because the boys who received it weren't frightened of it."
Why we cane (1).
WHEN parents enrol their children at St Michael's Grammar School, St Kilda, they sign a contract allowing the school to administer corporal punishment.
The contract does not mention the cane, stating only that parents accept "the right of the school to discipline students and to apply the school's disciplinary methods".
The school's policy statement says corporal punishment can be applied by the headmaster (or the deputy in his absence) if the school's detention system is inappropriate.
The principal, Mr Tony Hewison, declines to say how many students he has caned this year, but insists "students choose whether it takes place".
"Because it is a learning experience, no one is ever punished without their agreement and without them saying, `This is what I believe ought to happen to me'."
He says many parents choose his school, a co-educational Anglican school with students from kindergarten age to year 12, for its strong discipline.
This claim is endorsed by several parents. Mrs Kathy Rosel says she chose St Michael's for its clear limits on childrens' behavior. "I see the cane as the ultimate limit on acceptable behavior ... I don't like to see a teacher's time wasted by disruptive students."
A parent who declines to be named says she is against caning but feels it "does not do any harm".
Why we cane (2).
AT HEATHDALE Christian College, Werribee, parents also sign a discipline agreement at enrolment.
The principal, Mr Bill Brisbane, has caned six students this year for "serious misdemeanors". He declines to give examples of behavior warranting caning, saying the school does not need to defend its policy.
"Parents support us," he says. "The training and discipline of children is not an option but a scriptural requirement and corporal punishment is part of that."
The president of Heathdale's parents' association, Mr Geoff Watson, says the cane is used only after students have broken a series of rules.
"When my wife and I enrolled our child, the fact that the school used corporal punishment wasn't a big issue. We agreed that if it was necessary ... it was justified."
He says no teacher can "lay into" a child. "There is a clear process and parents are notified. Heathdale is an evangelical Christian college and strong discipline is a scriptural requirement."
