Even as late as 1980, in some private schools, boys could still be required to lower their trousers before receiving a caning. Depending on the seriousness of the offence and the school’s established procedures, punishment might be administered over underpants or directly on the bare buttocks. These punishments were not carried out in secrecy. In many older school buildings, classrooms and headmistresses’ offices were overlooked by paths or walkways used by parents and visitors. It was entirely possible for adults outside the building to witness corporal punishment taking place through the windows. No effort was generally made to conceal it because, at the time, such discipline was widely accepted as a legitimate part of school life.
It is also worth remembering that educational circumstances were very different during much of the twentieth century. Until 1947, the school leaving age in Britain was 14, after which it was raised to 15, and only later increased to 16. Consequently, many of the older pupils who would today still be in compulsory education had already left school. This affected both the age range within schools and the disciplinary issues teachers encountered.
Another noticeable difference between generations was physical development. While this is simply a personal observation rather than a scientific conclusion, many people believed that children reaching adolescence in the mid-twentieth century generally appeared less physically mature than teenagers of the same age today. By contrast, modern fourteen-year-olds often seem to develop earlier physically than pupils of a similar age during the 1940s or 1950s. Whether this perception is entirely accurate remains open to debate, but it was a view commonly expressed by many teachers of the period.
During the post-war years, secondary schools increasingly recognised that discipline should take account of the differing needs of boys and girls. Where a school had a male headteacher, it became common practice to appoint a female deputy headmistress or, alternatively, a Senior Mistress. One of her principal responsibilities was the welfare and discipline of the girls. This arrangement reflected the social attitudes of the time, when it was considered more appropriate for female staff to deal with sensitive matters involving female pupils.
From a personal standpoint, I would never have considered hand spanking an older girl, nor indeed any girl beyond junior school age, whether over clothing or on the bare skin. By the early 1960s there was already growing awareness that teachers needed to exercise great caution whenever corporal punishment involved older pupils, particularly girls.
This concern was reflected in guidance issued around 1960 by the Head Teachers’ Association, which advised headmistresses to ensure that, even in junior schools, any punishment administered to girls could never give rise to questions about improper motives. Similar principles were increasingly applied when disciplining boys. Schools became more aware that public confidence depended not only on fairness but also on avoiding any situation that might be misunderstood.
As a result, many schools gradually moved away from administering the cane across the buttocks and instead favoured caning on the hands. Although the cane on the seat had long been accepted as an effective punishment, concerns arose that punishment involving the buttocks, even when administered over clothing, might be open to misinterpretation. Hand caning was seen as both effective and less likely to raise questions about propriety.
Some of the reasons behind these changes were practical as well as social. By the final years of junior school, some girls had begun menstruation. School uniforms of the period often included heavy dresses, petticoats and substantial cotton knickers. If corporal punishment on the buttocks was intended to have its customary effect, clothing frequently had to be lowered or removed, creating embarrassment for both pupil and teacher. Many schools therefore concluded that punishment on the hands was a more dignified and appropriate alternative, avoiding unnecessary discomfort or awkwardness while maintaining discipline.
Hand spanking occupied an uncertain position within school discipline. In the area where I taught, it was generally not regarded as an appropriate school punishment. Parents expected corporal punishment, where authorised, to be administered formally, usually with the cane. A simple slap with the hand was often considered insufficient and ineffective.
As attitudes towards corporal punishment gradually changed during the 1960s and 1970s, opinions about hand spanking also evolved. What had once been dismissed as too mild began to be viewed as a less severe alternative for younger children. At the same time, however, increasing sensitivity about physical contact between teachers and pupils meant that some parents questioned whether any form of hand spanking, particularly on the buttocks, was appropriate. Concerns that such punishment might be misunderstood became more common as public opinion shifted against corporal punishment in general.
Throughout my teaching career, I can honestly say that I never placed a child over my knee to administer punishment. That style of discipline belonged far more to the home than to the classroom. I have, however, occasionally given my grandsons a traditional smack on the bottom in a family setting, something that I regarded as entirely different from school discipline.
There were occasions in school when a quick slap on the seat was used simply to gain immediate attention rather than as formal punishment. For example, if boys were fooling around in the changing rooms instead of getting dressed after games, a sharp pat or slap on the bottom while they remained standing might accompany the instruction, “Stop messing about and get changed.” I never regarded this as corporal punishment in the formal sense. It was an instinctive disciplinary gesture intended to restore order immediately, quite different from the structured punishments that, at the time, were governed by school rules and official procedures.
Looking back, it is clear that attitudes towards discipline changed significantly over the course of the twentieth century. Practices once regarded as entirely routine gradually came under increasing scrutiny as society developed a greater awareness of children’s welfare, professional boundaries, and changing expectations of teachers. What had been accepted for generations eventually gave way to approaches that placed greater emphasis on safeguarding, respect, and non-physical methods of maintaining discipline in schools.
