Race and Gender Bias in the Administration of Corporal Punishment.

The disciplinary actions taken by school building administrators after receiving a discipline referral were examined ti identify evidence of race and gender bias in administration of corporal punishment (CP). The relationships between race and CP, and gender and CP, were examined after controlling for the severity and frequency of punishable behaviors by students in each group. Analyses of discipline files (IV = 6,244) demonstrated a small, yet statistically significant relationship between race and CP, and a larger, statistically significant relationship between gender and CP. The results indicated evidence of race and gender bias in the administration of CP. Results were discussed with reference to educational and legal issues. The professional literature on school Despite harsh criticism, CP is used in discipline policies is replete with emo31 states. CP is the second most-frequently tional pleas to ban corporal punishment (CP). The popular press and professional journals frequently publish lurid anecdotal accounts of the abuse of corporal punishment by overzealous educators (e.g., Bard, 1973; Dubanowski, Inaba, & Gerkewicz, 1983; Hart, 1987; Holcomb, 1988). Many professional organizations, ranging from the American Bar Association to the American Medical Association, have official policies denouncing CP (Maurer, 1981). Perhaps the most telling challenges to CP are the accusations that CP is administered in a manner biased against males and minority groups (Glackman, McDowell, Martin, Berv, Hyman, & Spino, 1978; Lively, 1987). Nationwide, 24.6% of students are black, yet 37.3% of CP cases involve black children (Office for Civil Rights [OCR], 1984). Males comprise 61.3% of the nation’s school children, yet 80.1% of the cases of CP involve males (OCR, 1984). Such large discrepancies between used form of school discipline in the states of Oklahoma, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida (Maurer, 1981), where CP in schools is supported by the majority of the citizens (Simpson, 1988). However, according to a 1989 Harris poll, a slight majority of the citizens, nationwide, are opposed to CP. The U.S. Supreme Court has twice upheld the school’s right to use CP despite parent objections (Baker v. Owen, 1976), and despite potential mental and physical harm (I&graham v. Wyight, 1977). The majority of school board members, building administrators, and teachers support CP as a “last resort” critical for maintaining discipline in the schools (Hyman, 1979; Hyman & D’Alessandro, 1984). Clearly, CP has support from many segments of society. The issues of racism and sexism in the administration of CP are emotionally charged, much like the issues of gender and race bias in mental testing. Bias can be defined the same way for CP as for groups add fuel to the smoldering fire mental testing: viz., systematic error surrounding corporal punishment in the underor over-predicting of the behavior schools by suggesting race and gender of a group (e.g., Jensen, 1980; Reynolds, bias. However, the cause of these discrep1984). In the mental testing model, it is ancies is unknown. possible for two groups to have different This study was funded in part by the Florida Association of School Psychologists. Requests for reprints should be addressed to Jeffery P. Braden, Department of Psychology, San Jose State University, San Jose, CA 95192-0120.