The Newberry herald and news. (Newberry, S.C.) 1884-1903, 1892-03-23
TEACHERS COLUMN.
Corporal Punishment.
GSchOol Journal. !

1School Journal.
"Shall whip him. This question
bv a teacher from Ohio, is asked
by teacher when some act Of disobe-
dience has been committed, or when
no such act has been committed, but
there is a disregard of authority. 1t
would make good subject for a book
the change in the attitude Of the teach
er towards the pupil. Once, whipping
was considered part Of The days pro-
eramme; il was almost as sure to occur
as parsing.
OF course those were the days when
teaching was looked at from material,
mechanical, or physical point of view,
and the teacher ranked down with the
mechanics; he was examined as to his
ability to do physical proves; strength
of arm was considered very essential
The successful teacher was one who en-
forced order, who compelled obedience.
Many kind-hearted man had retired
from the winter school in disgrace be-
cause "he did not lick enough" The
novice would listen in wonderment to
the accounts Of the experienced teacher
of tussles and even knock-downs in the
school-room, and conclude that his way
was described in the words of the hymn:
"Those who would (teach) win
Must surely fight"
Even girls were fogged in schools,
sor all were liable to break the rue
against whispering or apple-eating.
The young woman was obliged to re-
| move her stays las corsets were then
called in order that the body might be
properly panied. The symptom Of re-
bellion against the rod was by mothers;
they would not have their daughters
punished. From this point disuse Of
the rod grew up. IN several cities, like
New York, it is forbidden; in some
States it is prohibited by law.
Itmust be assumed that in the school
of the inquirer whipping is not forbid
den. He has probably boy that is
troublesome, that is possibly defiant,
and who in many ways gives evidence
of an unsubdued will. 1t would seem
that if he were physically hurt or
pained, he would come under authority
and commence an upward movement.
But the opinion of the school, Of the
parents, and of the teacher himself, on
corporal punishment, is not what it
was twenty-five years ago. All wrong
dotng is regarded more leniently.
There is besides a more firm reliance
on moral influences, better compre-
hension of them and of ways of apply
ing them. The school-room does not
resound with blows and shrieks as it
once did; there is quietness, peace, and
dignity there. Moral and spiritual
conquests have taken the place of the
physical warfare that was once waged.
The pupils have been lifted above the
mean tricks they once played on the
teacher when they considered him
their natural enemy. The teacher
furnishes employment for their ener,
gies instead of permitting them to be
tn. ned against himself. The studies
are more practical, and appeal to the
comprehension of the learner. In fact
the school-roam OF 1890 is entirely
different from the school-room Of 1910.
The children have come from homes
where there is far more refinement; the
teacher is in many cases graduate o.
a normal school where principles @
education have been discussed; the
school books, apparatus, and studies
and the furniture even, have taken or
another aspect, and there is general
atmosphere of good will.
Shall the teacher act in line with
this change, or shall he take eye for eye
and tooth for tooth? Is evil to be over
come by resisting it? A noted horse
trainer declares that he never strikes E
horse. And a good many have come
to the conclusion that the nature O
the boy was not worse fifty years ago
but that it was not then understood
These considerations may throw some
light on a difficult question; they are
only part of what may be said.