Another comment, which echoed similar sentiments, was that:
Corporal punishment should be re-introduced but with strict limitations. Not all educators should have the powers to practise it. There should be nominated individuals in schools who have the special right to discipline learners through the use of corporal punishment. (Teacher, location unknown, date unknown)
The conditions for the reintroduction of corporal punishment are training, joint implementation with ATCP and specific persons to administer it.
The idea of ‘nominated individuals’ concurs with the old disciplinary method that was used in Kenya where only the head teacher administered corporal punishment or a teacher with the head teacher present. Regulations further stated that there must be a specific place on the body where a specific punishment must be inflicted and records of such an act must be kept (Busienei 2012:156).
The final perception was an emphatic ‘No’ to corporal punishment, and in the words of a participant, ‘[c]orporal punishment should not be re-introduced because the provided
regarding ATCP, whereas others support ATCP. It is evident from the perceptions of learners and teachers that in some schools, ATCP is well entrenched and supported, whereas in others, it is neither well promoted nor supported. Instead, there are calls for the reintroduction of corporal punishment. In schools where ATCP are supported, learners and teachers are positive about its effectiveness and feel that in comparison with other schools, they are able to cope despite deteriorating learner conduct. The following comment captures this sentiment:
Even though we are managing the situation, the level of discipline is bad because learners still repeat the same offences they were punished for. When compared with other schools in the surrounding areas our school is much better even though the level of discipline is bad. (Teacher, location unknown, date unknown)
It is interesting to note how learners value ATCP over corporal punishment. The following comments exemplify this, ‘[t]hey are a much better route for discipline than corporal punishment because they lead to better attitude’ (learner, location unknown, date unknown). ‘They are the tickets to the future when it comes to discipline’ (learner, location unknown, date unknown).
These comments show the depth of maturity in the thinking of these learners. Their perceptions of ATCP as the disciplinary practice of the future with positive spin-offs in shaping a ‘better attitude’ are reminiscent of PD and positive reinforcement principles. Comments indicating that ATCP are perceived as an effective tool for moulding character, developing a disciplined mind and enhancing performance in school are ‘[t]he measures undertaken build me as a person to behave properly in future.
Being detained helped me to read during detention and that contributed positively to my grades’ (learner, location unknown, date unknown).
Not only is ATCP instrumental in building good character in learners, it is also a conduit for the development of the intellect.
‘[It] helped me read […] and contributed positively to my grades’
(Learner, location unknown, date unknown). ‘The alternatives
help the learners to better themselves at school as they effect change in learner behaviour’ (Teacher, location unknown, date unknown).
Such perceptions may be attributed to the fact that the learners who made these comments came from a school that embraced ATCP. This fostered positive feelings in learners and an appreciation of the relevance of ATCP in maintaining discipline. Such an act demonstrates a school culture where learners are disciplined in a respectful manner that promotes PD and enables learners to experience positive effects of ATCP (Özan 2015).
For some learners, ATCP had an effect of reducing violence.
In the words of one learner, ‘[a]lternatives to corporal punishment are effective as they reduce violence’ (Learner F, undisclosed gender, date unknown).
This is an interesting comment especially in the light of escalating acts of violence in schools. It raises the question of the truth of the adage, ‘violence breeds violence’. This view is also supported by Busienei (2012:158), who says:
Giving up corporal punishment does not mean giving up discipline.
Children need clear limits and guidance on what is right and wrong and abandoning the short cut of violence is likely to produce better disciplined children. (p. 158)
Not all perceptions regarding the effectiveness of ATCP are positive. For instance, quite a number of negative perceptions regarding the effectiveness of ATCP were evident in the responses of teachers and learners in some of the schools. Ostensibly, the differing perceptions are a function of the culture of the school, as the majority of positive comments were more likely to come from schools that supported ATCP and the opposite was true of negative comments.
A typical negative perception from a learner was that:
Strategies such as detaining the learners and talking to the learners which are used against troublesome learners especially the smokers
have not really changed their behaviour because they still continue to smoke in the school vicinity. (Learner, location unknown, date unknown)
Discussion
Findings from the study showed contradicting perceptions of ATCP. Although some learners believed ATCP was the best method of learner discipline, others felt that corporal punishment was more effective than ATCP. Interestingly, the majority of sceptical sentiments about ATCP seemed to be a result of the dominant disciplinary practice of the school (namely, corporal punishment). Where corporal punishment was still the norm, perceptions about ATCP were bound to be negative and vice versa. In some cases, however, the perceived ineffectiveness of ATCP was seen as a consequence of lack of training. This suggests that perceptions can improve with provision of appropriate training. It appears that for some learners, preference for ATCP was based on fear of the negative consequences of corporal punishment rather than on the positive effects of the new disciplinary measures.
Although some teachers viewed ATCP as the best form of disciplining, others viewed it as less effective (than corporal punishment). It is not surprising that pre-ATCP era teachers would still prefer a disciplinary measure to which they were accustomed and which they found to be simple and quick. For them, the transition was difficult as is the norm with any change.
Although some of the teachers interviewed admitted to using ATCP to discipline learners, they were not satisfied with the outcomes because learners still repeated the same offences they were punished for. Other complaints raised by teachers were that the ATCP measures were time-consuming and difficult to implement owing to inadequate training and poor parental support. Moreover, these measures are perceived to be ineffective in township schools because in many instances, learner misbehaviour does not always improve; instead, it is repeated.