Review of article

Nexus of Students' Behavior and Teacher Attitudes with Corporal

Punishment in Peshawar Schools

Submitted by: Noor Ul Huda

Submitted To: Ma’am Nighat Altaf
Subject: Clinical Psychology
Department: Psychology (7th)
Roll No: 259
Date:17-Dec-2024

GOVT. GIRLS. DEGREE. COLLEGE. NO.2 HARIPUR

 Punishment a Therapeutic Technique

Definition

Punishment is a process in which a consequence is applied to reduce the likelihood of a

behavior happening again in the future. It involves introducing an unpleasant or aversive
stimulus (positive punishment) or removing a pleasant stimulus (negative punishment) after an
undesirable behavior occurs. The goal of punishment is to discourage the repetition of that
behavior.

Operant conditioning is a type of learning where behaviors are influenced by the

consequences that follow them. It was developed by psychologist B.F. Skinner. In this process,
the behavior of an individual is either strengthened or weakened based on the rewards or
punishments they receive.

Concepts of Operant Conditioning:

1.Reinforcement (Encourages behavior):

❖ Positive Reinforcement: Adding something pleasant to increase the likelihood of a

behavior.

Example: A child gets a treat for doing their homework, so they are more likely to do

Homework again.

❖ Negative Reinforcement: Removing something unpleasant to encourage a behavior.

Example: A teacher stops giving extra homework when students behave well,
encouraging good behavior.

2.Punishment (Discourages behavior):

❖ Positive Punishment: Adding something unpleasant to decrease the likelihood of a

behavior.

Example: A child talks back to their parent, so the parent gives them extra chores to
do. The extra chores are something unpleasant added to stop the bad behavior.

❖ Negative Punishment: Removing something pleasant to decrease a behavior.

Example: A child doesn’t finish their homework, so their parent takes away their TV
time. The TV time (something enjoyable) is taken away to stop the bad behavior.
Over time, the understanding of punishment has evolved, with researchers recognizing that
while it can be effective in stopping undesirable behavior, it often doesn't teach a person what
to do instead. This led to more emphasis on using positive reinforcement and other techniques
for long-term behavior change. However, punishment remains a part of behavior modification
techniques, especially in cases where other methods are less effective.

Punishment in Behavior Therapy vs. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT)

Punishment is mainly used in behavior therapy to reduce unwanted behaviors. In behavior

therapy, it is part of operant conditioning, where unpleasant consequences (positive
punishment) or removing something enjoyable (negative punishment) are used to make a
behavior less likely to happen again. In Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT), the focus is more
on changing thoughts and behaviors through positive methods, like reinforcing good behaviors,
rather than using punishment. While punishment can sometimes be used in CBT for certain
behaviors, it is not the main technique; CBT typically focuses on understanding and changing
thought patterns to improve behavior.

Steps of Punishment as Part of Therapy:

1. Identify the Problem Behavior

The first step is to clearly identify the behavior that needs to be reduced or eliminated. This
might be a harmful behavior, such as self-harm, aggression, or unwanted habits like substance
abuse.

2. Determine the Type of Punishment

Decide whether positive punishment (adding something unpleasant) or negative punishment

(removing something pleasant) is most suitable for the situation.

❖ Positive Punishment: Adding an unpleasant consequence (e.g., scolding, timeout).

❖ Negative Punishment: Removing a pleasant reward or privilege (e.g., taking away
phone time, restricting access to something enjoyable).

3. Ensure Ethical Considerations

Punishment should be used ethically and within professional guidelines. It should never cause
harm, and the therapist should ensure that it’s proportionate to the behavior. The goal is to
reduce the negative behavior without causing emotional or physical damage.
4. Implement the Punishment Consistently

The punishment must be applied immediately after the unwanted behavior occurs to create a
clear connection between the behavior and the consequence.

Consistency is key in making the therapy effective, so the person understands the direct cause-
and-effect relationship between their actions and the consequences.

5. Monitor the Effectiveness

The therapist should closely monitor the individual’s response to the punishment. Are they
learning to avoid the undesirable behavior? Is the behavior decreasing?

If the punishment is not effective, or if it leads to negative emotional reactions, the therapist
may adjust the approach or use other methods.

6. Pair with Positive Reinforcement

Often, punishment is combined with positive reinforcement to teach the person what they
should be doing instead of the undesirable behavior. This helps in encouraging new, positive
behaviors alongside reducing the negative ones.

7. Reassess and Adjust the Plan

Over time, the therapist reassesses the progress and adjusts the strategy as needed. If the
unwanted behavior decreases or stops, the therapist may gradually reduce the use of
punishment and focus more on reinforcing positive behaviors.

Punishment Technique in CBT: Example of Overcoming Nail-Biting

Sarah is a 28-year-old woman who has a habit of nail-biting whenever she feels stressed or
anxious. This behavior has become so automatic that she does it without realizing it, and it
causes her to feel embarrassed. Sarah seeks Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) to help
break this habit.

❖ Identifying the Problem Behavior:

Sarah has a habit of nail-biting when she feels stressed, and this behavior is affecting her life.
The therapist identified this problem as the target behavior in CBT.

❖ Behavioral Analysis:

The therapist understood that nail-biting was Sarah's way of managing stress. To change this
behavior, a punishment plan was created.
 ❖ Introducing Negative Punishment:

The therapist decided that whenever Sarah bites her nails, she must give up her 10-minute
phone time. This punishment was unpleasant for her.

❖ Setting a Plan and Consistency:

Sarah was told that every time she bites her nails, she would immediately lose her phone time.
This punishment was applied consistently.

❖ Monitoring and Reflection:

Sarah tracked her progress and noticed the consequences of her actions. This motivated her to
improve her behavior.

❖ Gradual Reduction of Punishment:

As Sarah's nail-biting behavior decreased, the punishment was gradually reduced, and positive
reinforcement was introduced.

❖ Behavioral Change:

Sarah stopped nail-biting and adopted new coping strategies, such as deep breathing. The
therapist reinforced this new behavior.
Review of article

Nexus of Students' Behavior and Teacher Attitudes with Corporal

Punishment in Peshawar Schools

Author: Sulaiman, G.
Article: Nexus of Students' Behavior and Teacher Attitudes with Corporal Punishment in
Peshawar Schools
Year: 2020

Summary

Sulaiman's (2020) study focuses on the perception of teachers regarding corporal punishment
in educational institutions in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK), Pakistan. In many countries,
including Pakistan, corporal punishment has traditionally been used as a method to maintain
discipline in schools. However, this practice has been observed to lead to students quitting
educational institutions due to its negative impact. The research was conducted in several well-
established educational institutes in Peshawar, where a survey questionnaire was used to collect
data from teachers. The findings of the study indicate that corporal punishment leaves lasting
negative effects on students, often affecting their psychological well-being, and hence, it should
be discouraged. Furthermore, the study revealed that many teachers are unaware of alternative
disciplinary methods that could be employed to manage student behavior effectively. It
highlights the need for teacher training in non-violent approaches to discipline. The research
also explores various alternative methods, such as positive reinforcement, counseling, and
other behavioral management strategies, that can help teachers control student behavior
without resorting to corporal punishment. The study suggests a shift towards more humane and
constructive ways of addressing student discipline in schools.

Introduction:

Corporal punishment refers to the use of physical force to cause pain or discomfort, such as
hitting, slapping, kicking, or spanking children (UN Committee, 2007). This form of
punishment is argued to have a negative impact on a child's mental health, academic
performance, and self-esteem, as it creates fear, leading to avoidance of school and lack of
participation in class (Morrow & Sing, 2014). According to Straus (1998), various forms of
corporal punishment include hitting, punching, and other physical acts, which can leave lasting
psychological effects on children. Despite its harmful effects, many teachers in countries like
Pakistan, where classrooms are overcrowded and education systems are developing, may
consider corporal punishment an effective tool to maintain discipline (Straus & Donnelly,
2005).

Research has shown that corporal punishment undermines students' confidence and interest in
learning, especially in developing countries like Pakistan, where it is still practiced in some
schools (Morrow & Sing, 2014). Teachers often see it as a way to establish control, despite its
negative consequences on students' well-being and academic outcomes (Straus & Donnelly,
2005). This study examines the perspectives of teachers in Peshawar, Pakistan, on whether
corporal punishment should continue or be discontinued, focusing on the potential harm it
causes to students' motivation and overall development.

Methodology:

Faculty serving in Peshawar Model Educational Institutes in Peshawar is taken as target

population. A sample of this study is made up of faculty including males and females serving
in (PMEI) Peshawar Model Educational Institutes. To gather information regarding faculty and
faculty attitude towards physical punishment samples in different schools have been taken
gender wise from different areas, 80 participants were nominated. The sample comprises 80
instructors who represent the population of 410 instructors. Their ages fall in from 20 to 48
years. The first 43 teachers are from city and the rest of 37 teachers are from rural areas. These
teachers conduct their classes from grade 1 to grade 10th.

The group of 47 teachers in the sample can be categorized as female while 33 of them were
male teachers. A survey is conducted and data is collected through Comprehensive
questionnaire containing open-ended questions are used to collect the data. Each survey was
composed of 20 questions. The survey was short enough to keep the concentration/focus of the
applicants.

Results:

The study results showed that factors like teachers' lack of knowledge, frustration, home issues,
and classroom problems are strongly linked to the use of corporal punishment. Specifically,
lack of knowledge was found to decrease corporal punishment, while frustration, home issues,
and classroom problems increased it. These factors together explained 73% of the variation in
corporal punishment, suggesting they have a significant impact on its use.
The study results also focused on the relationship between student behavior and corporal
punishment. It showed that student behavior explains about 39% of the variation in corporal
punishment. Better student behavior was found to lead to less corporal punishment. This
indicates that improving student behavior could help reduce the use of corporal punishment in
schools.

In this study, several statistical methods were used in SPSS. Reliability analysis (Cronbach's
Alpha) was conducted to check the consistency of the data, with alpha values above 0.70
indicating reliable results. Correlation analysis was used to measure the strength and direction
of the relationship between the independent variables (like lack of knowledge, frustration,
home issues, and classroom problems) and the dependent variable (corporal punishment).
Multiple linear regression helped determine how well the independent variables predicted
corporal punishment, with R and R square values showing how much of the variation in
corporal punishment is explained by these factors. Lastly, hypothesis testing with p-values less
than 0.05 confirmed the statistical significance of the findings.

Critical Evaluation:

Strengths:

The study has several strengths, including a comprehensive data collection approach, using
both open-ended questions and structured surveys, which allows for in-depth analysis from
multiple angles. The sample of 80 teachers, representing a mix of genders and urban-rural
backgrounds, ensures diverse perspectives, making the findings more relevant and
generalizable within the context of Peshawar Model Educational Institutes. The research also
focuses on an important and timely issue—corporal punishment—offering clear research
objectives and questions that can inform educational policies and teacher training. By
addressing the practical impact of corporal punishment on both teachers and students, the study
contributes valuable insights to the ongoing debate on this issue.

Weaknesses:

Despite these strengths, the study has some limitations. The sample size of 80 teachers may be
too small to draw broad conclusions about the entire teacher population in Peshawar or
Pakistan. Additionally, the reliance on self-reported data through surveys could introduce bias,
as teachers might either justify their use of corporal punishment or underreport its negative
effects. The study also focuses solely on teachers' perspectives, excluding students' voices,
which limits a full understanding of the impact of corporal punishment on those directly
affected. Finally, the study's regional focus on Peshawar restricts its applicability to other areas
of Pakistan with different socio-cultural contexts.

Discussion:

The study highlights the complex issue of corporal punishment in educational settings,
particularly in Peshawar, Pakistan. It sheds light on teachers' perceptions and the factors
influencing their use of physical punishment, such as lack of knowledge, classroom control
issues, and personal frustrations. The findings suggest that while some teachers view corporal
punishment as an effective discipline tool, its negative impact on students' self-esteem,
behavior, and academic performance cannot be ignored. The study also emphasizes that the
fear and trauma caused by corporal punishment can hinder students' learning and participation,
leading to a vicious cycle of poor performance and increased disciplinary actions.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, the study provides empirical evidence that corporal punishment in schools has
detrimental effects on both students and teachers. Although some teachers continue to use
corporal punishment as a means of discipline, the negative consequences, including lower
student morale and academic performance, suggest that alternative methods should be
explored. The lack of awareness among teachers regarding the harmful impacts of corporal
punishment, coupled with the pressures of overcrowded classrooms, highlights the need for
better training and support for educators. The findings underscore the importance of rethinking
the use of physical punishment in schools.

Recommendations:

Based on the findings, it is recommended that educational authorities in Pakistan implement

comprehensive teacher training programs focused on alternative discipline strategies that do
not involve physical punishment. Schools should promote positive behavior management
techniques, such as restorative practices and peer mediation, to foster a supportive learning
environment. Additionally, it is crucial to raise awareness about the psychological and
academic consequences of corporal punishment through workshops and educational
campaigns. Teachers should be encouraged to develop better classroom management skills and
seek support when dealing with personal or professional frustrations, reducing their reliance
on punitive measures. Finally, schools should establish clear policies against corporal
punishment to create a safe, nurturing environment for all students.

References

Sulaiman, G. (2020). Nexus of student’s behavior and teacher attitudes with corporal
punishment in Peshawar schools. Sulaiman, G., Khan, MWJ, Ali, I., & Ahmed, (2020), 359-
370.

Gershoff, E. T. (2002). Corporal punishment by parents and associated child behaviors and
experiences: A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 128(4), 539–579.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.4.539

Azrin, N. H., & Holz, W. C. (1966). Punishment. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of
Behavior, 9(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1966.9-1