One of the arguments in favour of corporal punishment was its supposed deterrent power.
Yet deterrence depends upon fear of the consequence.
What happened when a pupil ceased to fear it?
Before the First Occasion
Several contributors remember their first punishment as particularly intimidating.
They had heard stories.
They knew the reputation of the cane or slipper.
But they did not know precisely what to expect.
This uncertainty magnified apprehension.
After Experience
Once the first punishment had occurred, the mystery disappeared.
For many pupils this confirmed that they never wanted to experience it again.
For others, however, the effect was different.
They discovered that although the punishment was unpleasant, they could endure it.
The psychological barrier had been crossed.
The Regular Recipient
One contributor from an all-boys school in Lincoln recalled that his first substantial punishment occurred in 1956.
Before that event he had generally avoided serious trouble.
Afterwards he became a more regular recipient of school punishment.
In his own assessment, once he knew what punishment involved, some of its power to frighten him disappeared.
This is an important piece of testimony because it describes precisely the opposite of the intended effect.
Familiarity in the Classroom
The same principle might operate collectively.
Where classroom punishment occurred every day, pupils became accustomed to seeing it.
An event which would have caused considerable excitement in one school could be regarded as routine in another.
Routine punishment might still maintain immediate order.
But its psychological impact was likely to differ from that of an exceptional formal caning.
Escalation
This may help explain why some disciplinary systems increased severity for repeated offenders.
If a minor punishment no longer deterred, a stronger sanction was imposed.
Yet escalation had limits.
A pupil who became accustomed to repeated punishment could continue testing those limits.
At that stage the school might need to consider different methods entirely.
Fear Is Not Constant
The survey therefore suggests that fear should not be treated as a fixed quantity.
It changed with experience.
A pupil terrified at eleven might be far less intimidated at fifteen.
Another pupil might remain strongly deterred throughout his school career.
Personality mattered.
So did frequency.
The punishment itself had not necessarily changed.
The pupil had.
This is one of the clearest reasons why the same disciplinary method could appear highly effective with one child and almost useless with another.
