According to Krauth, (1996), punishment usually involves the deliberate incision of ache, misery or the removal of rights and/or freedom. Basically, these actions are definitely wrong.
However, our society/community are using these methods particularly in law-breaking issues to maintain peace and order. The community gives punishment to avoid crimes and violence. The people are encouraged to be vigilant and to disclose any information pertinent to the occurrence of violent offenses (Krauth, 1996). Krauth, (1996) cited that a number of communities in some parts of the world have attempted to develop community-based crime prevention strategies as supplemental action for the government’s efforts in giving punishment.
Basically, punishment of offenders in society is a wide context, thus to narrow the context this review will cover only the role and effect of punishment in shaping the behavior of an individual; i.e. parenting and learning strategies which summarizes the studies conducted by Ballantine, J. (2001), Moeller (2001), and Hill (1990).
On the other hand, in the report of Hyman and Zelikoff (1987), the issues regarding the worst result of punishment to an individual i.e. trauma is also reviewed. In follow up to this, Bartol (1995) identifies the possible bad result of punishment i.
e. aggression. The report concerning the theories of behavior in accordance to learning behavior were further discussed in the paper of Slavin (1995), Kounin (1970), Skinner (1974), Thorndike (1912) and Pavlov, (1927). During our childhood days, our parent usually imposed punishment to us if we got mistakes. Actually, this punishment affects our development as a child. It could have either positive or negative effects. And of the negative effects of it is aggression (Bartol 1995). With this regard, this review of literature also seeks to realize why people permit the legitimation of this type of infiltration.
Thus, it evaluates the reason behind why discipline relies on punishment and negative consequences to improve child’s behavior. Punishment also affects the education and learning behavior of a child, thus we will also cover issues of punishment in school setting.ReviewIn the study conducted by Ballantine, J. (2001; p.46), he argued that parents usually give punishment to their children just to discipline them.
However, parents should be cautious in giving punishment. This might cause physical, emotional and mental problems or this may also results to rebellious behavior or worst a trauma. Research has long proven that the parenting styles adopted by parents often have a great impact on the development of the child (e.
g. Ballantine, J. 2001; p.46).Ballantine, J. (2001; p.46) stated that there are three basic parenting styles i.
e. authoritative, authoritarian and permissive styles. Basically, Ballantine, J. (2001) stated that authoritarian parents tend to control their offspring. Also, they are very demanding and have high expectations for their children. But also, they tend to be less responsive to their children’s needs. They rely very heavily on punishment.
Authoritative parents, on the other hand, though also very demanding, gain the favor of their children by being highly responsive as well. They have clear definitions on the limitations and freedom of their children. They are also very supportive and give out punishment but explain the reasons for the action. Permissive parents are the opposite of authoritarian parents. They require les of their children but still is very responsive to them, they are often very lenient and don’t, if possible give out punishments.
The uninvolved parents are also opposite of authoritative parents. As the name suggests, they are really uninvolved with their children. Often, they are very apathetic to the happenings in their children’s lives. They put a very high risk on their children since they do not put a defined line on what they expect of their children.Parenting styles differ and have profound effects in child development.
According to Ballantine, J. (2001; p. 46), parenting styles that involve punishment trigger aggression in children, and then the aggression in children continue on to their own children, thus, resulting in an endless and vicious cycle.But just what is aggression? According to Bartol (1995; p.184), aggression is a “behavior perpetrated or attempted with the intention of harming another individual physically or psychologically (as opposed to socially) or to destroy an object” (p. 184).
According to Moeller (2001), agreement to Bartol (1995; p. 2), defines aggression as an act to that has intent to harm another object or person.Aggression as effect of punishments can either be physical or psychological (Bartol 1995; p.
2 and Moeller, 2001). Many factors point to a child’s aggression, one of which is parenting styles adopted by parents. Actually, if the child is constantly exposed to excessive punishments, it is most likely that the child would be inclining to aggressive behavior. Punishment is actually a form of aggression that can very well make the child inclined to aggression himself. If the child is repeatedly treated aggressively or punished excessively by his parents would most likely resort to aggression later on.As shown in the study of Hill (1990; pp. 70-77), punishment is also observed in schools or in any learning situation.
Hill (1990; pp. 70-77) claimed that reliance on such measures i.e. punishment have negative effects on the learners. In all styles of teaching and classroom management, there are proper ways of carrying out the strategies so that the ends to these styles may be met (Hill 1990; pp.
70-77). In the case of assertion as added by Meyer, A. (1990), there are positive and negative methods of reinforcing these strategies. As students’ behavior vary, the teachers’ delicate role is to determine which would work best for the particular students.
Basically, Meyer, A. (1990) stated that learners will react differently to situations, and if every positive method does not work out with them, then negative reinforcement is called for. This is not to become unfair to the students. This is just to show them that there are regulations to be observed and authorities to be respected, as that virtue will better prepare them for life outside the confines of the school. There is no perfect way of teaching and classroom management. There are only receptive teachers who are attuned to individual students’ needs, thus a successful implementation of the assertive style of teaching and classroom management (Meyer, A. 1990).In the report of Hill (1990; pp.
70-77) on an incident in preschool in which punishment was used to help children learn to obey rules. One of the punishment procedures was to write the name of the offending child on the board the first time non-compliance with rules occurred. The goal is impressive in that it make the most of learning time, but there were some unintentional depressing side effects.
In this case, a child told to his parents the list of names of “bad kids” in the class, and the child also described how they were being reprimanded. The child also told to her parents that these kids had their names written on the board. In relation to this, the child asked his parents if being with the kids would make him become one of them. From the child’s story, the mother decided to visit the school where she found a group of 5 and 6 year olds trying not to speak or move. As the parent observed, the teacher was diligently using rewards and punishment to mould the behavior of children.
But every time a child giggled or laugh extremely or spoke without permission, another name went on the board. As the result, most of boys who came from families of lower socioeconomic background are found on that board (Hill 1990; pp. 70-77).
From the results of the study of Hill (1990; pp. 70-77), it appears evident that what the child had absorbed from their punishment experiences, either vicariously or literally, was to spotlight on the manners that the teacher found unpleasant. The children tend to avoid such behavior at all costs, even if it is annoying just to impress the teacher instead of attending to the learning activities.As part of the giving punishment in shaping the behavior of the child, classroom management as stated by (Slavin, 2005; p. 1) in his paper should be observed. One characteristic of effective classroom management introduced by Slavin is that it involves a clear, specific plan of classroom rules and procedures that would guide performance (Slavin, 2005; p.
1). There was also a reward and punishment system observed. According to the teachers in the report of (Slavin, 2005; p. 1), every student was treated without bias but recognition was given to the most deserving and punishment was also implemented to address misbehavior. Praise or exemptions from some projects were the usual rewards given to performing students. The usual punishments were extra assignment, reprimand, or in worst case, detention. The purpose of the reward and punishment system was to delineate the acceptable behavior from the unacceptable. Praise i.
e. “catching the students in the act of doing right”, can be a powerful motivator for many students. One strategy for reducing misbehavior in class is to make sure to praise students for behaviors that are incompatible with the misbehavior you want to reduce (Slavin , 2005; p.1).In relation to this, Kounin (1970; p. 10) justified that the transfer of pupil attention to the child being punished is a usual phenomenon, and almost always results in less attention, rather than more, being paid to the desired learning outcomes.
Every so often, the teacher’s intent to help a child alter a behavior to one which is more acceptable to both the youngster and his superiors has tragic sequelae. Educators using disciplinary procedures perceived by the child as stringent and unfeeling can cause trauma. According to Hyman and Zelikoff (1987; pp. 1-2), the symptoms of this trauma are often similar to those observed in adults with Post Traumatic Stress Disorders. Symptoms seen in children include somatic complaints, avoidance of school, and sleep disturbances.
As Skinner (1974; p. 18) emphasized a behavior which is followed a positive reinforcing motivation or circumstance will result in an increased tendency or probability that the person will repeat such behavior, this concept also operates in the opposite direction wherein the person will have a decreased tendency to do an act from which he or she received a negative reinforcement in the form of punishment.According to Thorndike (1912; p. 164-165), the main business of thought surely is to guide and control action. To make it intelligent, adaptive, efficient, Thorndike’s Law of Effect proposed an alternative means of achieving the same end.
Effects, rewards and punishments, were seen as stamping actions “in” or “out” and selectively, intelligently, adaptively determining behavior (Pavlov, 1927; p. 25). The effects of a given action thus altered redirected, controlled subsequent conduct and left no place or need for thought or intellect. While Pavlov’s formulations, though different principle from those of Thorndike but similar in goal. Pavlov was likewise interested, not just in a theory of learning but also in the organism’s total behavior, in what was later referring as the principles of adaptive action.
Both trial and error learning and conditioning imply adaptation to the environment but this end was achieved in both cases mechanically, non-mentalistically without thought (Pavlov, 1927; p. 25).As part of development in shaping the behavior of an individual Thorndike 1912 reported that the two-factor learning theory in its version accepted Thorndale’s theory of habit formation, essentially unmodified and in doing so, necessarily aligned itself with the thoughtless psychologies or behavior-zoologies (Thorndike 1912; p. 164-165). In admitting fear conditioning and in developing a feedback conception of punishment, the theory disposed itself toward what has become explicit. Now response facilitation as no less a matter of conditioning and meaning change than is response inhibition.
And what is more immediately important, this new position, while in some ways just as mechanical and automatic as were the views of Thorndike and Pavlov. The prototype of knowledge in general are hopes and fears, both are internal events and such are assumed to be learned and after learning, to occur in a purely automatic, involuntary manner, these are mechanism and determinism. There is no simple and direct relationship between what an organism learns and what it does. Action is the result of more or less intricate and elaborate processes intervening between the end result of more or less intricate and elaborate processes “intervening between the end results of learning and the execution of behavior” (Thorndike 1912; p. 164-165).As described in the previous discussions, motivation and reward offers more positive effect in learning than punishment.
Punishment normally directs the action to do desired behavior which results to aggression, weak learning and trauma. The incident of trauma from punishment initiated by educators is much greater than one would think. According to the study of Hyman and Zelikoff (1987; p. 11), 40 to 60 percent of college graduates remember an event of extremely retaliatory disciplinary action given by educators. In Unites States over 1,000,000 students were beaten by their teachers in 1980 (Meyer 1990; 30-47).
As revealed in the study of Hyman and Zelikoff (1987), an individual that was previously abuse, beaten and punish are prone to become aggressors and criminals. Thus, the community should identify the significant risk factors of aggression and punishment provided by the community itself, the families that comprise the community, schools and academic institutions in the area, and individual backgrounds of the people. Moreover, the family also provides certain risk factors of aggression and punishment contributory to the development of violent attitudes and behaviors among children such as lack of oversight of children’s activities and habits, unfair and severe punishment for any misdemeanors and mistakes, conflicts between parents and children and between siblings, and parental toleration of violent behaviors.
Review SynthesisFrom the given reviews concerning punishments, it is justified that parents, should very well know how to raise their children. Psychologists and researchers often recommend the use of authoritative parenting since it is well-rounded in all parenting aspects but they should be cautious in giving punishments. Since authoritative parents have high expectations of their children, one can expect that a child will be pushed to do the best, and that authoritative parents also reciprocate love and warmth, the child can have feelings of security. Another is that a child can also have the freedom to express his own thoughts and beliefs.
The relationship between parenting styles and punishment resulting to aggression is very clear. Authoritative and Permissive parents’ children often resort to aggression since the upbringing of the parents is, faulty, if you may. The resort to aggression can also be triggered by relatively high and constant exposure to aggression by family, peers and the media. Also, the cross-generational aggression can also trigger aggression. It creates an unending cycle of aggression.On the other hand, punishment given to a child in school setting should be observed by the educators to avoid weak learning effectiveness. Positive learning environment or classroom management involves the strategies that teachers implement in preventing and handling misbehavior, using class time effectively, creating an atmosphere that encourages interest and inquiry, and permitting activities that engage students’ minds and imaginations (Slavin, 2005).
Teacher should carefully observe the effect of punishments to students. Actually, it is suggested that teacher should use rewards strategy more often than giving punishment. Teachers and students have to work together to sustain positive behaviors and effective atmosphere for learning in order to ensure the successful transmission of knowledge in the classroom.