Abstract

The policy “MAAR NAHI PIYAR” (Not to beat but Love) is the initiative taken by the government of Punjab education department, which intends to enhance children's academic performance and improve their behavior. This study aimed at exploring the effects of the policy “MAAR NAHI PIYAR” on students’ behavior and their academic performance in public schools of Pakistan through the lens of teachers and students. The study sample consisted of two groups of respondents i.e. teachers and students. The study surveyed opinions of a randomly sampled 100 teachers, 100 students, and ten public schools in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. The quantitative method approach was adopted. Data were collected through self-developed questionnaires. Five Point Likert scale was used. Findings illustrated a need for continued research of the policy “MAAR NAHI PIYAR” and its impact to a district-by-district and a school-by-school basis. The findings of the study have indicated that the behavior of a teacher profoundly influences students’ behavior and their academic performance.

Key Words

Effects, Corporal Punishment, Academic Performance, Behavior, Initiative

Introduction

Corporal punishment is culturally acceptable in societies like Pakistan. As a result, despite the existence of numerous legislatures, physical punishment in schools has not been abolished in the twenty-first century, when human rights violations are a hot topic of discussion. Pakistan has accepted international treaties forbidding the use of cruel, barbaric, or humiliating physical or mental punishment. Teachers who inflict violence are subjected to disciplinary action by the Punjab government and school administrators, but the order is regularly disobeyed. Last year, Pakistan's federal minister for human rights suggested legislation to prohibit the country's use of corporal punishment. Pakistan, on the other hand, is experiencing a crisis in education. 




Million People

Students who are subjected to corporal punishment suffer not only physically but also mentally. Unfortunately, many teachers around the world continue to view corporal punishment as a technique for constructive behaviour adjustment, despite the fact that this is inaccurate in reality. Because pupils are taught that violence can be used as a technique to achieve desired ends, violent conduct develops in them. This aggressive behaviour is not only bad to the child's mentality, but it can also be hurtful to others.




Statement of the Problem

The determination of research was to learn about the viewpoints of instructors and students

participating in the secondary school educational process on the consequences of the policy "MAAR NAHI PIYAR" on students' conduct and academic performance.

Objectives of the Study

They were to:

1. see effects of policy “MAAR NAHI PIYAR” and its implementation in public schools. 

2. Compare the opinions of teachers and students about policy “MAAR NAHI PIYAR” and its impact on students’ academic performance.

3. Compare the opinions of teachers and students about policy “MAAR NAHI PIYAR” and its impact on students’ behavior.

4. To recommend the required measures to improve the practice of the policy "MAAR NAHI PIYAR." in public schools.




Research Questions 

The main questions are as under:

1. What are the opinions of the instructors about teaching with MAAR (corporal punishment) and its impact on the students’ behavior and their academic performance in public schools?

2. What are the opinions of the teachers about teaching with PIYAR (love) and its impact on the students’ behavior and their academic performance in public schools?

3. What are the opinions of the students about teaching with MAAR (corporal punishment) and its impact on the students’ behavior and their academic performance in public schools?

4. What are the opinions of the students about teaching with PIYAR (love) and its impact on the students’ behavior and their academic performance in public schools?

5. What are the alternative methods to improve the pupils ’behavior problems?

6. What are the alternative methods to improve the pupils’ performance?




Research Hypotheses               

H1: Educators' and pupils' opinions toward the use of MAAR  in the institutes are not significantly different.

H2: Is there no substantial difference in teachers' and students' opinions of PIYAR (love) teaching in public schools?

H3: There is no noticeable difference in the effect of MAAR (corporal punishment) and PIYAR (love) on students’ behavior.

H4: There is no significant variance between MAAR (corporal punishment) and PIYAR (love) on pupils'  performance.

       

Limitations and Delimitations of the Study

In Rawalpindi public schools, 100 students from classes9-10, ranging in age from 12 to17, were chosen. A total of 100 secondary school teachers were chosen in a similar fashion. Their ages ranged from 25 to 50, while their levels of experience ranged from 0 to 20.




Significance and Contributions of the Study

The study will present recommendations for improving the learning and teaching environment in public schools. This research will assist teachers in gaining a better understanding of their own child-handling styles. The research will assist policymakers in making changes that will benefit instructors in overcoming behavioural issues and improving student academic achievement.

Review of Related Literature

Discipline and Corporal Punishment

Paddling, stunning, beating, punching, shoving, prolonged exercise, and corporal punishment, which causes children to adopt uncomfortable body positions, are all examples of techniques to purposefully inflict pain on a kid.  Switching devices, paddles, palms, and leather straps are all used in schools to cause pain to kids. As a result of corporal punishment, students may have clotting, bruises, blisters, and welts. (in 2008) (David). Punishment always makes a behaviour less likely to happen again. Problematic behaviour among students has been a big concern in schools around the country in recent years. This essential issue, on the other hand, has existed for years, and many teachers have battled to discover the best effective solution. Historically, schools have relied only on disciplinary measures such as suspensions, expulsions, fines, and, on rare occasions, corporal punishment. 

"Such procedures, according to Maag (2001), may contribute to school safety by removing students who demonstrate the most severe problem behaviours from the classroom." These efforts, on the other hand, do little to prepare children for appropriate behaviour."According to Meltz (2002), corporal punishment is inefficient for disciplining children and increases the likelihood of academic failure. If children are to grow up to be social, productive, and responsible adults, they must be nurtured and educated with discipline. As a result, teachers are more prone to use facial expressions, reprimands, detention, assigning unpleasant assignments, issuing time out, and, in some circumstances, physical punishment to convey their disapproval (Baron, 2006, p. 24) 

A recent study in Pakistan has dashed hopes of the Punjab government's "MAAR NAHI PIYAR" strategy being implemented in schools. According to the study, most educators are indifferent about corporal punishment; however, family members, particularly poorer and less educated family members, are considerably more supportive of physical punishment of children than teachers and education authorities. Teachers who justified the use of corporal punishment in the classroom were found to be more likely to employ it in the classroom than those who condemned child maltreatment. Despite the rhetoric of public leaders, research undertaken after the legal ban found that corporal punishment was still used. Furthermore, the consequences of strong corporal punishment can extend well beyond the school years and into adulthood, leading to more serious psychiatric problems. Although this research felt that all bodily penalty is damaging, further research is needed to determine the degree of the corporal punishment applied and brutality (lack thereof) of impact which can occur. Furthermore, research should be carried out to establish where there is an effective discipline. Teacher training has sanctioned using bodily penalty for many reasons, and as a result, parents, teachers, and principals perceive it to be a good technique (Vally, 1998). 

Research Methodology

Details are ahead:

 

Research Design

A cross-sectional survey design was used. The survey method was used. The researcher used this approach to gain detailed and in-depth knowledge in the areas of corporal punishment and teaching with love by comparing the opinions of stakeholders, the policy "MAAR NAHI PIYAR" and its impact on students' behavior and academic performance.

 

The Study's Population and Sample

The population for this study included all secondary schools, all teachers, and all students from the province of Punjab in Pakistan. This study's sample size was limited to ten public schools in Rawalpindi.one hundred teachers from public schools 100 hundred students from public schools. A minimum of ten teachers and ten students were chosen for a total of 10 public schools. To obtain true data, stratified sampling was used to collect data from teachers and  students. Because Rawalpindi has 684 schools, the researcher used only ten schools. There were 100 teachers and100 students who took part in this study. This demonstrates that both teachers and students participated equally.




 

Table 1. Sample Size of the Study

S. No	Sample	Total
1	Teachers	100
2	Students	100
3	Schools	10
	Total	210

 




Data Collection Procedure

with the types of questions being closed

-ended and the same questions being given to both teachers and students. To avoid

ambiguity, the questionnaires were self- developed in English and translated into Urdu. 

Data Analysis

Table 2. Group Statistics Teachers

Statements	Gender	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	Std. Error Mean
1-The Policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR is promoting good behavior by the teachers?	Male	50	4.58	.538	.076
	Female	50	4.58	.538	.076
2-The Policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR is promoting teaching with love?	Male	50	4.58	.538	.076
	Female	50	4.28	1.051	.149
3-After the implementation of the policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR students are motivated?	Male	50	1.84	.584	.083
	Female	50	1.58	.642	.091
4-The Policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR is helpful in maintaining the respect of teachers?	Male	50	4.58	.538	.076
	Female	50	4.70	.505	.071
5-Teachers are still facing difficulties to keep students disciplined in the classroom after the policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR implementation?	Male	50	1.76	.555	.079
	Female	50	1.98	.714	.101

 

Table 3. Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means

Statements	F	Sig.	t	df	Sig. (2-tailed)	Mean Diff.	Std. Error Diff.
1-The Policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR is promoting good behavior by the teachers?	.000	1.000	.000	98	1.000	.000	.108
2-The Policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR is promoting teaching with love?	12.995	.000	1.797	98	.075	.300	.167
3-After the implementation of the policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR students are motivated?	4.767	.031	2.119	98	.037	.260	.123
4-The Policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR is helpful in maintaining the respect of teachers?	2.733	.102	-1.150	98	.253	-.120	.104
5-Teachers are still facing difficulties to keep students disciplined in the classroom after the policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR implementation?	2.053	.155	-1.720	98	.089	-.220	.128

 

Table 3. Group Statistics

Statements	Gender	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	Std. Error Mean
6-After policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR implementation, students become more responsible towards their academic performance?	Male	50	4.58	.538	.076
	Female	50	4.46	.579	.082
7-The Policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR is helpful in creating a pleasant relationship between the teacher and the student?	Male	50	1.76	.555	.079
	Female	50	1.98	.714	.101
8-Teaching under pressure affects teachers ‘performance?	Male	50	4.58	.538	.076
	Female	50	4.16	.912	.129
9-Policies are the only solution to overcome students’ behavior problems?	Male	50	4.44	.541	.076
	Female	50	4.48	.544	.077
10-Is the Policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR effective to control incidents due to corporal punishment by the teachers?	Male	50	4.48	.646	.091
	Female	50	4.26	.487	.069

 

Table 5. Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means

Statements	F	Sig.	t	df	Sig. (2-tailed)	Mean Difference	Std. Error Difference
6-After policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR implementation, students become more responsible towards their academic performance?	.957	.330	1.074	98	.286	.120	.112
7-The Policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR is helpful in creating a pleasant relationship between the teacher and the student?	2.053	.155	-1.720	98	.089	-.220	.128
8-Teaching under pressure affects teachers ‘performance?	39.975	.000	2.806	98	.006	.420	.150
9-Policies are the only solution to overcome students’ behavior problems?	.028	.867	-.369	98	.713	-.040	.108
10-Is the Policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR effective in controlling incidents due to corporal punishment by the teachers?	10.550	.002	1.922	98	.058	.220	.114

 

Table 6. Group Statistics

Statements	Gender	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	Std. Error Mean
11-Corporal punishment is still prevailing after the implementation of the policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR?	Male	50	1.92	.695	.098
	Female	50	1.98	.714	.101
12-There should be psychological experts in schools to deal with behavior problems?	Male	50	1.56	.760	.108
	Female	50	1.20	.404	.057
13-There should be alternative   methods to improve students’ academic performance?	Male	50	1.76	.555	.079
	Female	50	1.98	.714	.101
14-There should be psychological experts in schools to deal with behavior problems?	Male	50	4.48	.646	.091
	Female	50	4.26	.487	.069
15-The policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR is an effective policy?	Male	50	1.76	.555	.079
	Female	50	1.98	.714	.101

 

Table 7. Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means

Statements	F	Sig.	t	df	Sig. (2-tailed)	Mean Difference	Std. Error Difference
11-Corporal punishment is still prevailing after implementing the policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR?	4.492	.037	-.426	98	.671	-.060	.141
12-There should be psychological experts in schools to deal with behavior problems?	35.213	.000	2.957	98	.004	.360	.122
13-There should be alternative methods to improve students’ academic performance?	2.053	.155	-1.720	98	.089	-.220	.128
14-There should be psychological experts in schools to deal with behavior problems?	10.550	.002	1.922	98	.058	.220	.114
15-The policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR is an effective policy?	2.053	.155	-1.720	98	.089	-.220	.128

 

Table 7. Group Statistics Students

Statements	Gender	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	Std. Error Mean
1-The Policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR is promoting good behavior by the teachers?	Male	50	4.58	.538	.076
	Female	60	4.75	.474	.061
2-The Policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR is promoting teaching with love?	Male	50	4.58	.538	.076
	Female	60	4.75	.474	.061
3-After the implementation of the policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR students are motivated?	Male	50	1.80	.404	.057
	Female	60	2.00	.000	.000
4-The Policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR is helpful in maintaining the respect of teachers?	Male	50	4.58	.538	.076
	Female	60	4.75	.474	.061
5-Teachers are still facing difficulties to keep students disciplined in the classroom after the policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR implementation?	Male	50	1.76	.555	.079
	Female	60	1.98	.651	.084

 

Table 8. Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means

Statements	F	Sig.	t	df	Sig. (2-tailed)	Mean Difference	Std. Error Difference
1-The Policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR is promoting good behavior by the teachers?	7.254	.008	-1.762	108	.081	-.170	.097
2-The Policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR is promoting teaching with love?	7.254	.008	-1.762	108	.081	-.170	.097
3-After the implementation of the policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR students are motivated?	104.727	.000	-3.838	108	.000	-.200	.052
4-The Policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR is helpful in maintaining the respect of teachers?	7.254	.008	-1.762	108	.081	-.170	.097
5-Teachers are still facing difficulties to keep students disciplined in the classroom after the policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR implementation?	4.064	.046	-1.914	108	.058	-.223	.117

 

Table 9. Group Statistics

Statements	Gender	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	Std. Error Mean
6-After policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR implementation, students become more responsible towards their academic performance?	Male	50	4.58	.538	.076
	Female	60	4.75	.474	.061
7-The Policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR is helpful in creating a pleasant relationship between the teacher and the student?	Male	50	1.76	.555	.079
	Female	60	1.98	.651	.084
8-Teaching under pressure affects teachers ‘performance?	Male	50	4.58	.538	.076
	Female	60	4.75	.474	.061
9-Policies are the only solution to overcome students’ behavior problems?	Male	50	4.58	.538	.076
	Female	60	4.75	.474	.061
10-Is the Policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR effective to control incidents due to corporal punishment by the teachers?	Male	50	4.48	.646	.091
	Female	60	4.27	.482	.062

 

Table 10. Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means

Statements	F	Sig.	t	df	Sig. (2-tailed)	Mean Difference	Std. Error Difference
6-After policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR implementation, students become more responsible towards their academic performance?	7.254	.008	-1.762	108	.081	-.170	.097
7-The Policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR is helpful in creating a pleasant relationship between the teacher and the student?	4.064	.046	-1.914	108	.058	-.223	.117
8-Teaching under pressure affects teachers ‘performance?	7.254	.008	-1.762	108	.081	-.170	.097
9-Policies are the only solution to overcome students’ behavior problems?	7.254	.008	-1.762	108	.081	-.170	.097
10-Is the Policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR effective in controlling incidents due to corporal punishment by the teachers?	11.896	.001	1.979	108	.050	.213	.108

 

Table 11. Group Statistics

Statements	Gender	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	Std. Error Mean
11-Corporal punishment is still prevailing after the implementation of the policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR?	Male	50	1.76	.555	.079
	Female	60	1.98	.651	.084
12-There should be psychological experts in schools to deal with behavior problems?	Male	50	1.56	.577	.082
	Female	60	1.17	.376	.049
13-There should be alternative   methods to improve students ’academic performance?	Male	50	1.76	.555	.079
	Female	60	1.98	.651	.084
14-There should be psychological experts in schools to deal with behavior problems?	Male	50	4.48	.646	.091
	Female	60	4.27	.482	.062
15-The policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR is an effective policy?	Male	50	1.76	.555	.079
	Female	60	1.98	.651	.084

 

Table 12. Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means

Statements	F	Sig.	t	df	Sig. (2-tailed)	Mean Difference	Std. Error Difference
11-Corporal punishment is still prevailing after the implementation of the policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR?	4.064	.046	-1.914	108	.058	-.223	.117
12-There should be psychological experts in schools to deal with behavior problems?	35.679	.000	4.299	108	.000	.393	.091
13-There should be alternative methods to improve students’ academic performance?	4.064	.046	-1.914	108	.058	-.223	.117
14-There should be psychological experts in schools to deal with behavior problems?	11.896	.001	1.979	108	.050	.213	.108
15-The policy MAAR NAHI PIYAR is an effective policy?	4.064	.046	-1.914	108	.058	-.223	.117

Findings and Results

Conclusion

The revision of educational regulations and the implementation of a consistent education system that eliminates discriminatory conduct toward students would assist in reducing the number of dropouts. It will eventually raise the literacy rate in Pakistan's state. In Pakistan, corporal punishment in schools has become a culturally accepted standard. The author observes that, based on her conversations with teachers and pupils at several Pakistani schools, institutions are turning a blind eye to corporal punishment. As a result, children have been left to endure the long-term consequences.

Recommendations

1. The teachers' trainers and institutions of higher learning should guarantee that student instructors are appropriately educated with alternate ways of discipline while undergoing training.

2. To control behaviour and overall academic problems, a positive relationship between teacher and student should be created.

References

• Al Khateeb, (2015). Cited by27, Addressing the unique needs of Arab American children with disabilities. Citation. Al Khateeb, J. M., Al Hadidi,
• Baumrind, (1996). The discipline controversy revisited. Family Relations, 45, 405-415
• Baumrind, D. (1994).
• Baumrind, D. R. E., Larzelere, & Cowan, P. (2002).
• Billings, W. H., & Enger, J. M. (1995). Perceptions of Missouri high school principals regarding the effectiveness of in-school suspension as a disciplinary procedure. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association,
• Boser, U. (2006). The Unsparing Rod Schools are still fighting the Right to Paddle. U.S.
• Cohen, L. & Manion, L. (2005). Research Methods in Education. London: Routledge.
• Cohen, P., & Brook, J. (1998). The reciprocal influence of punishment and child behavior disorder in McCord, J: Coercion and Punishments in Long -term perspectives .London, Cambridge University Press.
• Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2006). Business Research Methods (9th Ed.). USA: McGraw-Hill.
• David, R. D., & Amy, E. M. D. (2008). Corporal punishment in U.S. public schools: A continuing challenge for school social workers. Children & Schools, 30(4), 243- 250.
• Davis, M. (2000). The Utilitarian Theory of Punishment. Law and Philosophy, 6, 321- 350. , (1999).Violence by Children against mothers in relation to violence between parents and corporal punishments by parents . Journal of Comparative Family Studies 34, 41-60.
• Foster, G. (1999). South African School Corporal Punishment: Brutality in the Name of God, Johannes burg. Word corporal punishment research group
• Gershoff, E. T. (2008). Report on Physical Punishment in the United States: What Research Tells Us about Its impact to Children, Colombus, Ohio: Center for Effective Discipline
• Gershoff, E. T. (2002). Corporal Punishment by Parents and Associated Child Behaviors and Experiences: A Meta- Analytic and Theoretical Review. Psychological Bulletin, 124(4).
• Gilbert, R., & Gilbert, P. (1998). Masculinity goes to School. London: Routledge
• Gershoff, E. T. (2002). Corporal punishment by parents and associated child behaviors and experiences: a meta- analytic and theoretical review Psychological bulletin, 182(4), 539-579
• Graziano, (1990). Normative Support for Corporal punishment: Attitude, correlates and Implication: University of South Carolina Press.
• Graziano, A. M., & Namaste, K. A. (1990). Parental Use of Physical Force in Child Discipline: Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 5(4), 43-50
• Greydanus, D. E, Pratt, H. D., Spates, C. R., Blake-Dreher, C. R., Greydanus- Gearhart, A. E., & Patel, D. R. (2003). Corporal Punishment in Schools. Journal of Adolescent Health 32, 385-393.
• Greydanus, D. E. (2010). Corporal Punishment in Schools and its Effect on Academic Success. WASHINGTON, DC, U.S. Government Printing Office.
• Han, S. (2011). Probability of corporal punishment: Lack of resources and vulnerable students. Journal of Educational Research, 104(6), 420-430
• Human, R. W. (1999). Spare the Child: Corporal Punishment in Kenyan Schools. Vol.11, Hyman, I.A., (2003) Reading, Writing, and the Hickory Stick: the Appalling Story of
• Hyman, I. A. (2003). Reading, Writing, and the Hickory Stick: the Appalling Story of Iqbal, N. Rights-Pakistan: Call to Spare the Rod in Schools Grows louder. Global Information Network (p. 1). New York,
• Larzelere, Rose, T. L. (1984). Current uses of corporal punishment in American public schools. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(3), 427-41.
• Maag, J. W. (2001). Rewarded by Punishment: Reflection on the Disuse of Positive Reinforcement in School, 67(2), 173-186.
• Saroop, I. (2016). End Corporal Punishment in Pakistan's Schools
• Scarre, & Geoffrey. (2003).
• Status, M. A. (2009). Corporal Punishment by the Mothers and development of Children's Cognitive ability: A longitudinal study of two age cohorts. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment, and Trauma, 1- 33.
• Straus, M. A. (1996). Spanking and the Making of a Violent Society. Pediatrics, 98 Tanzania Corporal punishment Regulation (1979).
• UNESCO. (1975). Report of International Conference of Education. UNESCO Press, Janeva. P. 87. 12. UNESCO. 1986 Glossary of Educational Technology Terms. UNESCO. Pairs. 18, 59.
• UNESCO. (1986). Glossary of Educational Technology Terms. UNESCO. Pairs. 18, 59.
• United Nations Committee on the Right of the Child. (2006). convention on the Rights of the child. General assembly of the United Nations. Retrieved, 1st February 2009,
• United Nations General Assembly. (1989). November adoption of a conversion on the right of the child, United Nation doc. A/Res/44/25. New York.
• WHO. (2009).
• William. (2009). Violence in education, the school politics of discipline Proquest LLC, U.S.A