An “Old-Fashioned” Response to Modern Misbehavior
A school district in Texas has decided to adopt a stricter, traditional approach to discipline by allowing corporal punishment, specifically paddling, for students who do not respond to other consequences. The move comes after ongoing issues with misbehaving students and a belief that schools cannot always rely on detentions or suspensions to correct behavior.
What Corporal Punishment Means in This Context
The Texas Classroom Teacher Association defines corporal punishment as the “deliberate infliction of pain” to enforce discipline. In schools, paddling typically refers to a teacher using a wooden paddle to strike a student as a consequence for misconduct.
How Paddling Is Typically Used
Paddling is described as a measure used for serious or repeated behavior problems, often after other interventions fail.
Common behaviors associated with paddling decisions may include:
- Bullying
- Disrupting lessons or creating chaos in class
- Repeated disobedience
- Ignoring prior consequences such as detention or suspension
It is often framed as a final warning for students who do not change their behavior through other disciplinary steps.
Parent Reactions: Support and Strong Opposition
The policy has triggered a divided response among parents and educators.
Some parents support the approach because they believe:
- Pain-based consequences create immediate behavior change
- School discipline should match home discipline to reinforce consistent expectations
- A firm consequence can prevent repeated disruptions
Others oppose it, arguing it could:
- Create fear or anxiety about school
- Damage student-teacher trust
- Increase the risk that punishment could cross into abuse
- Normalize adults using physical force to solve problems
Opt-In Policy: Consent Required
The Three Rivers Independent School District in Texas acknowledges that not all families agree with paddling. To address this, the district uses an opt-in system, meaning:
- Parents must provide written consent
- Parents must provide verbal consent
- A child can be removed from the paddling list if a parent later becomes uncomfortable
The policy suggests that parents who already use paddling at home are more likely to approve it at school, citing consistency as the main reason.
A Wider Trend: Corporal Punishment Reportedly Increasing
The text describes paddling as rising in use, stating that 27 school districts have adopted the practice. This trend has reignited debate over whether physical punishment belongs in public education.
Resistance and Racial Disparity Concerns
Opposition has been led by John B. King Jr., described as the Secretary of Education, who argues paddling should be banned. His concerns focus heavily on disproportionate impact:
Key claims presented include:
- About 40,000 students receive corporal punishment
- More than one-third of students punished this way are Black
- This is described as disproportionate compared to the claim that 16% of public school students are Black
- Black boys are stated to be 1.8 times more likely than white boys to receive corporal punishment
- Black girls are stated to be 2.9 times more likely than white girls to receive it
How Supporters Respond to Discrimination Claims
Schools that support the return of paddling reject the idea that prejudice drives these outcomes. They argue:
- Discipline decisions are based on behavior, not race
- Paddling is presented as a tool to teach consequences and restore order
- The goal is to ensure students understand they must behave in school settings
The Core Question
At the heart of the controversy is whether paddling is:
- A necessary, effective deterrent for serious misbehavior
or - A harmful, outdated practice that can create fear and unequal outcomes
The Texas decision has brought an old debate back into the spotlight: How far should schools go to enforce discipline—and what consequences are acceptable in a modern classroom?
