What has been the impact of the ban on corporal punishment in South Korea, and how has it changed the teaching profession and students’ human rights?

Since the implementation of the 2011 law against corporal punishment in South Korea, there has been a weakening of teaching power and disruption in the education field, and there have been calls to protect students’ human rights and consider ways to educate without corporal punishment.

 

On March 18, 2011, the ‘No Corporal Punishment Act’ was enacted in South Korea by amending the Enforcement Decree of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Previously, corporal punishment was allowed to inflict physical pain when it was necessary for educational purposes, but the new law prohibits the use of tools or the body to inflict physical pain on students. In the 2000s, films about school violence spread negative perceptions of excessive corporal punishment in schools, especially after a case of a teacher beating a pupil, known as the “Oh Jang-pung Teacher Incident,” went viral on the internet, directly contributing to the ban.
Today, some schools in Seoul and Gyeonggi Province have banned corporal punishment, which means that teachers are no longer allowed to beat their students. However, other regions have either banned corporal punishment altogether, such as Seoul, or have allowed indirect corporal punishment. The side effects of this are also becoming apparent. Cases of students assaulting teachers have surfaced frequently in the media, and it has become a powerful social issue. This, coupled with the fact that the ban on corporal punishment has resulted in a decline in discipline, a disorganized school environment, and a lack of control over students, has led some to argue for its return to address these negative effects.
However, these adverse events were caused by some specific students, and the ability of teachers to control them without corporal punishment may be problematic. Corporal punishment should be banned so that the inexplicable behavior of some students does not lead to a situation where the majority of students are again subjected to corporal punishment and oppressed by coercive control. From a basic human rights perspective, corporal punishment should be banned.
In the Joseon Dynasty, the relationship between master and pupil was vertical, and the master used corporal punishment to teach the pupil the right lessons. However, modern society has come to the position that basic human rights must be respected since the United Nations defined human rights in 1948, and legal regulations to protect human rights have been created and managed by each country. In the eyes of the modern world, corporal punishment, even if it is used in schools for the purpose of teaching, is tantamount to assault. The physical pain and mental stress caused to the student is the same as that of an assault. Corporal punishment is a violation of human rights and should be banned by the international community.
Corporal punishment is traumatizing in itself. It’s offensive to both the teacher and the student who is being punished. For teachers, it was the fastest and most powerful tool to control students. However, humans are already social animals, capable of dialog and reasoning. There are more elegant ways to discipline than corporal punishment, and we don’t have to stick to teaching animals.
Proponents of corporal punishment argue that it’s a way to impose discipline and order on students. But what they mean by efficient is that it’s a convenient method for teachers. While corporal punishment may provide momentary control, it omits the process of students understanding and correcting their own misbehavior. Even if it’s uncomfortable for teachers, even if it’s hard to control students, they need to think about and find other ways to reach them. Teachers believe that it is the quality of a teacher to give students a true education without using corporal punishment. The current educational situation is in a transitional phase as the debate on banning corporal punishment grows. Rather than using quick and efficient control methods such as corporal punishment, it is necessary for teachers and students to compromise and create new methods of discipline other than corporal punishment.