Corporal Punishment in the Schools of Ghana: Does Inclusive Education Suffer?

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Elsa

This paper compares corporal punishment practices in ten basic schools in Ghana’s Greater Accra District, distinguishing five inclusive project schools (IPS) from five non-inclusive project schools (NIS). It uses a six-item questionnaire completed by 100 teachers and interviews with 22 participants including teachers, pupils, and education directors, supported by classroom observation. Results show corporal punishment persists at similar levels in both sites, driven by punishment as a learning, moral, and religious imperative. Implications for inclusive education are discussed.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages16

Reading Time40 min

AccessFree to download

Introduction

The concept of inclusion

Key indicators of inclusive schools

Education and social inclusion in Ghana

Corporal Punishment in the Schools of Ghana: Does Inclusive Education Suffer? Joseph S Agbenyega University of Ghana-Legon Abstract This paper reports on a study that compared the practice of corporal punishment in ten basic schools in the Greater Accra District in Ghana. Five of the ten schools were designated as inclusive project schools (IPS) and the other five as non-inclusive project schools (NIS) . The primary purpose was to find out if the inclusive project schools were more effective in eradicating corporal punishment from their schools than were thenon-project schools. One hundred teachers responded to a six-item questionnaire. A further 22 participants comprising ten teachers from the survey group, ten pupils and two directors of education were interviewed. Observation of the classroom practices, where these teachers work, substantiated the questionnaire and interview findings. The overall results indicated that corporal punishment still persists in both school sites at relatively the same scale. Three themes were found to underpin the administration of corporal punishment to students in these schools. (1) Punishment as an effective learning imperative (2) Punishment as a moral imperative (3) Punishment as religious imperative. The implications of these findings pertaining to inclusive education are discussed. Introduction The concept of inclusion The concept of developing inclusive schools as the most effective means for achieving quality education for all is underpinned by the notion of social justice, empowerment and democratic participation in regular school. Regular school inclusion is expected to be free from child abuse, forceful, and oppressive pedagogy (Gibson 1986, Giroux 1997, Hook 1994) . Inclusive schools are identified on the basis of inclusive indexes (Booth, Ainscow, Black-Hawkins, Vaughan and Shaw 2000) . Thus, an educationally inclusive school is: The Australian Educational Researcher, Volume 33, Number 3, December 2006 •107 JOSEPH S AGBENYEGA An effective school and one in which the teaching and learning, achievements, attitudes and well being of every student matter. This includes students with and without disabilities. This is evident not only in the school’s performance but also in its culture and willingness to review provision in order to offer new opportunities to pupils who may have experienced previous difficulties (Lupton and Jones 2002, p.1) Key indicators of inclusive schools The broad definition by Lupton and Jones (2002) implies that effective schools: • Demonstrate sound inclusive practices which include collaborative leadership styles and good practice (Loreman, Deppeler and Harvey 2005, Lupton and Jones 2002) • Ensure that the school’s mission statement is well articulated towards promoting inclusion and raising attainment • Ensure that all the members of the school’s community are fully aware of and actively support the principle of inclusion • Identify resources to support progressive inclusion • Ensure all staff are actively using sound strategies to provide better support and greater access to all students and teaching • Ensure learning is routinely monitored by teachers, head teachers and senior mangers to ensure they are in tune with the school’s mission statements (Booth et al. 2000, Lupton and Jones 2002) . Additionally, inclusive schools demonstrate school cultures in which admission policies do not discriminate on grounds of racial, ethnic, religious or disability status (Booth et al. 2000, UNESCO 1994, 2001, United Nations 1989, 1998) . Inclusive schools should have a clear policy on bullying and punishment; have child protection policies in place; provide safe environments for all students; recognise and value the achievements of all students who experience barriers to learning and offer students the opportunity to play a full and active part in their own learning and encourage them to develop independence and self-advocacy skills

FAQs

What was the main purpose of comparing inclusive project schools and non-inclusive project schools?

To determine whether inclusive project schools were more effective than non-project schools in eradicating corporal punishment from their schools.

What data collection methods were used in the study?

The study used a six-item questionnaire for teachers, interviews with teachers, pupils, and directors of education, and classroom observation to validate the findings.

What did the overall results show about corporal punishment in the schools studied?

Corporal punishment still persisted in both inclusive and non-inclusive school sites at relatively the same scale.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Elsa