The role of race in preservice teachers' perceptions of and attitudes towards corporal punishment & child maltreatment

Teaching and Teacher Education 59 (2016) 318e326

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Teaching and Teacher Education journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tate

The role of race in preservice teachers' perceptions of and attitudes towards corporal punishment & child maltreatment John Kesner*, Kyong-Ah Kwon, Chaehyun Lim Early Childhood and Elementary Education, Georgia State University, United States

h i g h l i g h t s
Corporal punishment used in U.S. homes and some schools
Teachers are mandated reporters of maltreatment
Examined racial group effects on corporal punishment, child maltreatment and reporting
African Americans more accepting of corporal punishment
Asian participants lower in rating of abusiveness in hypothetical discipline scenarios

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 10 November 2015 Received in revised form 18 June 2016 Accepted 28 June 2016

In school contexts where corporal punishment is permitted, teachers have two potentially conflicting roles; an indirect participant in the administration of corporal punishment and as a mandated reporter of child maltreatment. Attitudes influenced by racial group may further complicate the issue. The purpose of this study was to examine the associations between preservice teachers’ race and their attitudes towards corporal punishment, child maltreatment, mandated reporting and their perceptions of parental discipline techniques. Results indicated differences by racial group on attitudes towards corporal punishment and ratings of abusiveness of parental discipline practices. Implications for teacher education are discussed. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Child maltreatment Race Preservice teachers Corporal punishment

Internationally, the use of corporal punishment is one disciplinary practice that simultaneously receives widespread public support, as well as condemnation from child development experts (Robinson, Funk, Beth & Bush, 2005, pp. 117e139). Despite worldwide support for an international ban on corporal punishment, parents in the U.S. are free to utilize corporal punishment in disciplining their children. By the time a child reaches adolescence, eighty-five percent of children in U.S. homes have received some form of physical punishment at the hands of their parents (Gershoff, 2010, pp. 33e58). In the U.S. despite a decline in positive attitudes towards the use of corporal punishment as a discipline practice with children, the research is unclear about whether that has translated into a decline in the actual use of corporal punishment (Taillieu, Afifi, Mota, Keyes,

* Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (J. Kesner). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.06.015 0742-051X/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

& Sareen, 2014, pp. 1885e1894). Some studies suggest that there has been an overall 18% decline in the use of corporal punishment to discipline children over the years 1975e2002 (Zolotor, Theodore, Runyan, Chang, & Laskey, 2011, pp. 57e66). In addition, between, 1992e2004, substantiated cases of physical abuse declined fortythree percent (Finkelhor & Jones, 2006, pp. 658e716). However, it should be noted that lack of substantiation by child protective services (CPS) does not necessarily mean lower rates of corporal punishment or even fewer cases of physical abuse. A lower substantiation rate means fewer cases were substantiated during that time. In the international context, the seemingly contradictory attitudes towards corporal punishment and its use found in the U.S., are also in evidence. Every country in the world but one (USA), has ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) which prohibits “degrading treatment and punishment” (UN General Assembly, 1989) and encourages national legislation prohibiting such punishments. Thus, 197 countries in the world have

J. Kesner et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 59 (2016) 318e326

signed and ratified the CRC, yet only 48 countries have now banned the use of corporal punishment in all areas of a child’s life (home and school) (Freeman & Saunders, 2014, pp. 681e709); Global Initiative 2016; Watkinson & Rock, 2016, pp. 86e98). In countries which have banned corporal punishment in all settings, declines in the use of corporal punishment have been dramatic. For example, in Finland, the second country to ban corporal punishment, one study found that in 1964 94% of parents reported using physical punishment towards their children but by the beginning of the 21st century the rate had fallen to 11%. Outside of Europe, the use of physical punishment in disciplining children is more widespread (Watkinson & Rock, 2016, pp. 86e98). A recent report by UNICEF. (2010) indicated that over half of children from middle and low income countries experienced physical punishment or psychological aggression in 2005e06. Thus, despite changes in official policies, corporal punishment of children remains an international issue. In the U.S, in addition to its widespread use in the home, nineteen of the fifty states still allow corporal punishment in schools. Some estimates put the number of children experiencing corporal punishment in schools at nearly a quarter million a year. These punishments, usually administered with wooden paddles, have resulted in 10,000 to 20,000 visits per year to doctors seeking medical treatment (Wasserman, 2011, pp. 1029e1101). Proponents of school use argue that corporal punishment is an effective way to promptly control risky student behaviors (Robinson, Funk, Land, & Bush, 2005, pp.117e139); Vockell, 1991, pp. 278e283; Wilson, 2002, pp. 409e416). Others argue that corporal punishment not only violates human rights’ laws, but is also an ineffective method of discipline and teaches the child that violence is acceptable for dealing with misbehavior (Farmer & Stinson, 2010, pp. 1035e1069); Little & Akin-Little, 2008, pp. 227e234). Some research also indicates adverse psychological outcomes in children who experience corporal punishment, such as increased aggression, poor behavioral and emotional adjustment, delinquency and other criminal behavior (Aucoin, Frick, & Bodin, 2006, pp. 527e541; Gershoff, 2002, pp. 539e579). Internationally, physical discipline is still a regular part of school life for children, particularly in low income countries. For example, in South Korea and China, more than half of children in grades four through six experienced corporal punishment in their schools (Kim et al., 2000, pp. 1163e1173). Teachers in many Asian countries tend to have trouble differentiating between corporal punishment and educative discipline (Lwo & Yuan, 2011, pp. 137e164). Additionally, the use of corporal punishment in schools is also acceptable in many African countries. In Kenya for example, most of preschool aged children have experienced corporal punishment by their teachers. Teachers use corporal punishment as one method to maintain order and rules in their classrooms (Mwai, Kimengi, & Kipsoi, 2014, pp. 90e100). In addition, most of primary school aged children in Tanzania have experienced corporal punishment in their schools (Hecker, Hermenau, Isele, & Elbert, 2014, pp. 884e892). In the U.S. school context where corporal punishment is permitted, teachers have two potentially conflicting roles; an indirect participant in the administration of corporal punishment and a mandated reporter of child maltreatment. All 50 states have now passed mandatory reporting laws, which require teachers, among other professionals, to report suspected child maltreatment. Data on child maltreatment reporting indicates that teachers and other educational personnel, are one of the largest contributors to maltreatment reports each year, but have the lowest substantiation rates (Kesner & Bingham, 2010, pp. 267e274). This potential conflict in roles may be complicated by regional and racial/cultural attitudes towards corporal punishment. For example, the majority of states which still permit corporal

319

punishment in schools; lie in the southern region of the U.S. Robinson et al. (2005, pp. 117e139) summarized the findings of several studies which support the idea that teacher acceptance of corporal punishment use in schools is higher in the southern United States. Educators in southern states rated the importance of abolishing corporal punishment in schools at a lower rate than teachers from other regions of the U.S., 38% vs. 68% respectively (Abrahams, Casey, & Daro, 1992, pp. 229e238). Some have suggested that cultural beliefs related to the beneficial effects of corporal punishment may be more prevalent in the southern U.S. (Dupper & Dingus, 2008, pp. 243e250; Human Rights Watch, 2008). Supporting the practice and ideas of corporal punishment could be deeply embedded in cultural traditions and values (RipollNunez & Rohner, 2006, pp. 220e249), which may influence the acceptance of the use of corporal punishment in schools (Marones, 2013, pp. 10e11). Race is a social construct. Culture on the other hand is comprised of cultural beliefs, values, attitudes and behaviors shared by a particular group of people (Nieto & Bode, 2011). Race and culture are often conflated especially in the literature on corporal punishment and child maltreatment. However, despite the inadequacies of categorizing an often time disparate group of people with one racial label, researchers in the U.S. utilize the U.S. Bureau of the Census categories to disaggregate the experiences of various racial and cultural groups. With this caveat in mind, trends indicated that between 2002 and 2012 racial demographics in U.S. schools shifted. White student representation in school populations decreased 8%e51%, while African American student representation declined from 17% to 16%. Hispanic student representation increased 6% such that Hispanic students now comprise about one-fourth of the school population (U.S. Department of Education, 2015). These student demographics coupled with an overwhelmingly White teacher population greatly increases the likelihood of cultural conflict. While there has been a slight shift in the racial demographics of teachers in the US, teachers are overwhelmingly White. Eight-four percent of teachers in 2011 were White, down from 91% in 1986 (Feistritzer, 2011, p. 15). Although there is tremendous diversity within each racial group, there are some commonalities. Different racial groups may have different expectations regarding the appropriateness and use of corporal punishment in disciplining children (Gershoff, 2002, pp. 539e579; Ripoll-Nunez, & Rohner, 2006, pp. 220e249). For example, historically, Hispanic parents report the use of corporal punishment at a rate similar to White parents, although the rate of decline in the use of corporal punishment has been greater for White parents over the past 20 years (Sedlak, McPherson, & Das, 2010). In addition, one study found acculturation differences in Hispanic populations may impact the use of corporal punishment (Lee & Atschul, 2015, pp. 475e498). One study found that foreignborn Hispanic immigrants were less likely to use corporal punishment than US-born Hispanics. African American parents tend to utilize corporal punishment at a higher rate than the three other racial groups (Landsford, 2010, pp. 89e106; Taillieu et al., 2014, pp. 1885e1894); however some research suggests fewer deleterious effects of corporal punishment in African American children compared to White children (Horn, Joseph, & Cheng, 2004, pp.1162e1168; Landsford, 2010, pp. 89e106; Simons, Su, & Simons, 2013, pp. 1273e1285; Taillieu et al., 2014, pp. 1885e1894). On the other hand, as collectivistic in nature, Asian culture views individuals as interdependent and children are expected to be obedient to their parents (e.g., authoritarian parenting style). Parents view their children and the actions of their children as extensions of themselves. Asian parents are less likely to use rewards in disciplining their children and more likely to use corporal punishment (Kim & Hong, 2007, pp. 60e68).

320

J. Kesner et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 59 (2016) 318e326

There is limited evidence of an association between attitudes towards corporal punishment and its use (Clement & Chamberland, 2014, pp. 13e29). However, it may also be possible that the differences among racial groups in beliefs and attitudes toward the use of corporal punishment and its effect on children, may have an impact on the execution of the legal mandate of teachers to report suspected child maltreatment. This may be particularly true as the line between “acceptable” physical discipline and abuse is usually vaguely defined and may vary by racial group. However, the literature is unclear about whether or how teachers’ attitudes toward corporal punishment as a discipline method differ, or are related to their decision to report suspected maltreatment. One study has found an association between teacher race and reporting. In a study of reporting practices, Kenny (2001, pp. 81e92) found that African American teachers reported less maltreatment than other racial groups. However, it is unclear to what degree cultural factors related to race were involved. The suggestion that cultural factors may influence beliefs about the appropriateness of corporal punishment, necessitates the examination of the role of race in relation to attitudes towards parental discipline, corporal punishment in schools and the role of the teacher as a mandated reporter (Lansford, 2010, pp. 89e106). In particular, preservice teachers represent a unique group for study in that their experiences in schools as a teacher in training, may be the first time they experience parental discipline techniques different from their own and corporal punishment as an institutional discipline method. In addition, the training of preservice teachers is a time when perceptions and beliefs about children and the learning process are shaped; which may affect their behaviors as teachers throughout their careers. Thus, it is important to understand preservice teachers’ perceptions and beliefs about corporal punishment and its use in schools, parental discipline and their duties as mandated reporters in order to better prepare them for their responsibilities in a culturally diverse classroom. The purpose of this study was to examine the associations between preservice teachers’ race and their attitudes towards corporal punishment, knowledge of child maltreatment and mandated reporting as well as their perceptions of parental discipline techniques.

and 24% Asian. The classification of racial groups is not without its problems. As discussed previously, race is a social construct created to minimize cultural and ethnic diversity in order to devise a classification system that reduced this diversity into static categories. Although we were aware of the issues surrounding the debate about the essentialization of race and culture (Allport, 1954; Haney-Lopez, 2000, pp. 163e175; Haslam, Rothschild, & Ernst, 2000, pp. 113e127; Prentice&Miller, 2007 , pp. 202e206), we were not aware of any alternative method of operationalizing race, thus the categories utilized by the U.S. Bureau of the Census were used. In addition, in order place our findings into the larger research literature (the majority of which use these same categories) it was critical to utilize the same. These sample demographics were consistent with previous cohorts of students in the teacher education program. All participants were in their first semester of a teacher education program at large urban research university in the southeastern U.S. Participants ranged in age from 20 to 45 years and had a mean age of 23.5 (4.6) years. Because this study focused on racial differences, it was essential to control for other factors that may influence the dependent variables. The link between socio-economic status (SES) and the acceptance of corporal punishment has been well established (Bornstein, Hahn, Suwalsky, & Haynes, 2003, pp. 29e82; Culp, Culp, Dengler, & Maisano, 1999, pp. 503e509; Hemenway, Solnick, & Carter, 1994, pp. 1011e1020; Straus & Stewart, 1999, pp. 55e70). Lower SES parents are more likely to endorse the use of corporal punishment than are higher SES parents. It is also well established that certain racial groups (African American) report using corporal punishment at a higher rate than others (Whites) (Deater-Deckard, Lansford, Dodge, Pettit, & Bates, 2003, pp. 351e360). Give that certain racial groups are overrepresented in lower SES groups, it is critical to partial out the independent effects of race and SES (Vittrup & Holden, 2010, pp. 211e220). Thus, it was important to control for SES in all data analyses. Additionally, as all participants were students, there was most likely not much difference in their current SES. Attitudes towards corporal punishment were most likely formed when the participants were growing up, thus information was gathered in relation to their family of origin SES. 1.2. Instruments

1. Method 1.1. Sample and procedure One-hundred-five preservice teachers completed a survey of their attitudes towards corporal punishment in general and specifically in schools, their knowledge of child maltreatment, duties as mandated reporters, and perceptions of hypothetical parental discipline scenarios. Upon approval of the study from the university institutional review board, participants were recruited from an undergraduate child development class for elementary teacher education majors. Participation in the study was available for all students in the class and data were collected over the course of two semesters. There were no exclusion criteria in the recruitment process. Students were offered a 5-point extra-credit bonus if they successfully completed the study. The students were offered an alternative way to earn the 5-point extra-credit that was similar in time needed to complete to study participation. However, onehundred percent of those recruited agreed to participate. Participation was voluntary and participants were allowed to withdraw from the study anytime without penalty. Once they agreed to participate, and informed consent was obtained, participants were asked to complete paper-pencil questionnaires. It took about 20 min in total to complete the questionnaires. Participants were 95% female, 43% African American, 33% White

Demographics and Hollingshead Four-Factor Index of Socioeconomic Status (HFFISS). Participants completed a demographic questionnaire that asked about their gender, age, racial group, marital status, number of children, and information about their family of origin. To calculate their score on the Hollingshead Four-Factor Index of Socioeconomic Status (Hollingshead, 1975), participants were asked about their family of origin living situation (lived with mother and father, mother only etc.) their mother and father’s educational attainment, occupation and income while they were growing up. The Hollingshead index is a four-factor index of social status. The four domains include marital status, employment status, educational level and occupational prestige. Educational attainment is scored on a 7-point scale where the higher the score, the greater the educational attainment. Occupational status is scored on a 9-point, again where a higher score indicates an occupation with greater social prestige. If the participant lived with both parents during childhood, then information about both is used to calculate family of origin SES. If they lived with only one parent, then that parent’s information is used. The score on educational attainment and occupational prestige are entered into a formula that results in a total SES index score. Index scores can range from a low of 8 to a maximum of 66 (Hollingshead, 1975). Corporal Punishment Scale (CPS). Attitudes toward corporal punishment and the use of corporal punishment in schools were

J. Kesner et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 59 (2016) 318e326

assessed with a measure developed by Bogacki, Armstrong, and Weiss (2005, pp. 367e386). This measure consisted of 29 items assessing the respondent’s attitudes toward corporal punishment (in general and in school). Items such as, “Physical punishment should not be allowed in the schools.”, “Corporal punishment is just and necessary.” and “Corporal punishment is absolutely never justified.” were some of the items which comprised the CPS. Respondents scored each item by assigning a score of 1 (strongly disagree), 2 (mildly disagree), 3 (neither agree nor disagree), 4 (mildly agree) or 5 (strongly agree). A factor analysis by the measure’s authors suggested that the measure was unidimensional, with one factor accounting for 88% of the variance. Thus, scores were summed and ranged from 29 to a maximum of 141. A higher score indicated more favorable attitudes towards corporal punishment. The authors of this measure report an internal consistency coefficient alpha of 0.95. In the present study, the internal reliability coefficient alpha was 0.85. Educators and Child Abuse Questionnaire (ECAQ). A questionnaire designed to assess the preservice teachers’ knowledge and competence in identifying child maltreatment and their knowledge of reporting procedures and their overall attitudes towards corporal punishment was completed by the participants. This questionnaire developed by Kenny (2004, pp. 1311e1319) was comprised of 12 statements in which participants responded on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from (1) strongly disagree to (5) strongly agree. Factor analysis by the instrument’s author revealed four factors accounting for 62% of the variance. Thus, the measure yields four subscales, 1) Awareness of the signs and symptoms of the various forms of child maltreatment, (2) Knowledge of reporting procedures, (3) Attitudes towards discipline in the home and at school and (4) Beliefs about the seriousness of child abuse. The authors of this measure indicate that this instrument has good content validity based on expert review and subsequent modifications (Kenny, 2001, pp. 81e92; Kenny & McEachern, 2002, pp. 59e75). Discipline Vignettes. Nine vignettes of parent-child discipline encounters created by Smith, Ray, Stefurak and Zachar (2007, pp. 757e767) were used in this study. These vignettes combined three different physical discipline techniques with three different types of child transgressions. Based on research into discipline techniques, the authors of this measure chose three discipline techniques: mild, moderate and severe. Mild discipline included gently taking the child by the arm, while moderate discipline involved spanking with a bare hand. Slapping the child in the face with a bare hand was considered a severe discipline technique. These discipline techniques were paired with three types of behavioral transgressions. Again, based on previous research, the authors of these vignettes created behavioral transgressions that varied by the intent of the child and severity of the outcome. The mild transgression involved the child accidently knocking another child over. The moderate and severe transgression involved intentional behavior by the child with the former involving knocking the child over and the latter with behaviors that would be described as an attack, leaving the victim with a black eye. All vignettes involved a male child, seven years old receiving discipline from his mother in order to control for differences related to the age, gender and parent involved. Each vignette placed the respondent as an uninvolved bystander who witnessed the discipline encounter. After reading each vignette, participants responded to five questions, rating each on a 6-point Likert-type scale. These questions asked the participant to evaluate the (1) severity of the transgression, (2) severity of the discipline, (3) appropriateness of the discipline, and (4) effectiveness of the discipline. The responses ranged from (1) not at all severe, appropriate or effective to (6) extremely severe, appropriate or effective. Participants were then

321

asked to reread the vignette and respond to a fifth question related to the abusiveness of the discipline technique used in the vignette. A score of 1e6 was given where (1) indicated that the participant did not feel the discipline used was at all abusive to (6) which indicated that the discipline was extremely abusive. 1.3. Data analysis Descriptive statistics of means and standard deviations, for each key variable are provided in Table 1. Pearson Product-Moment correlations were computed between the pre-service teachers’ attitudes toward corporal punishment (CPS total scores) and their knowledge of mandated reporting (ECAQ subscales). Additionally, a multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) was computed to assess differences between the racial groups on (1) attitudes towards corporal punishment (CPS), (2) attitudes about child maltreatment and mandated reporting (ECAQ) and (3) reactions toward hypothetical parental discipline scenarios. Participant race was the independent variable. The dependent variables consisted of, (1) scores on attitudes towards corporal punishment as measured by the total score of the CPS, (2) child maltreatment and mandated reporting, as measured by the four subscales of the ECAQ (a) Child Maltreatment Awareness, (b) Knowledge of reporting procedures and perceived school support in reporting child maltreatment, (c) corporal punishment in school and in the home, (d) beliefs about the seriousness of child maltreatment, and (3) reactions towards the hypothetical parental discipline encounters (vignettes) comprised the dependent variables. Family of origin SES was the control variable. The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) 22 program was utilized for all statistical analyses. Post hoc tests utilized the Least Significant Differences Pairwise Multiple Comparison test. 2. Results 2.1. Family of origin SES Participants’ family of origin SES ranged from 8 to 66 with a mean of 36.6 (11.6). The majority of participants’ family of origin SES were second, third and fourth level of Hollingshead 4-factor index. The remaining scores were in the lowest and highest strata (5% & 7% respectively). 2.2. Descriptive statistics and correlational analysis Table 1 shows descriptive statistics of the main variables. Correlational analysis was conducted in order to investigate associations between pre-service teachers’ attitudes toward corporal punishment (CPS total scores) and their awareness of the signs and symptoms of the various forms of child maltreatment, knowledge of reporting procedures, attitudes towards discipline in the home and at school and beliefs about the seriousness of child abuse (four subscales of the ECAQ). The only significant correlation found between these two measures was between the total score on the CPS and the corporal punishment subscale of the ECAQ (r ¼ 0.46, p < 0.001). 2.3. Preservice teachers’ race and attitudes towards corporal punishment Results of the MANCOVA indicated significant effects of racial group on preservice teachers’ attitudes toward corporal punishment. The inclusion of two variables that measured attitudes towards corporal punishment increased the risk of artificially increasing the variance accounted for by the factors. However, it

322

J. Kesner et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 59 (2016) 318e326

Table 1 Descriptive statistics of variables (N ¼ 105).

Corporal punishment scale total Identifying child maltreatment Knowledge of reporting procedures Overall attitudes towards corporal punishment V1 Severe misbehavior V1 Severe discipline V1 Appropriate discipline V1 Effective discipline V1 How abusive V2 Severe misbehavior V2 Severe discipline V2 Appropriate discipline V2 Effective discipline V2 How abusive V3 Severe misbehavior V3 Severe discipline V3 Appropriate discipline V3 Effective discipline V3 How abusive V4 Severe misbehavior V4 Severe discipline V4 Appropriate discipline V4 Effective discipline V4 How abusive V5 Severe misbehavior V5 Severe discipline V5 Appropriate discipline V5 Effective discipline V5 How abusive V6 Severe misbehavior V6 Severe discipline V6 Appropriate discipline V6 Effective discipline V6 How abusive V7 Severe misbehavior V7 Severe discipline V7 Appropriate discipline V7 Effective discipline V7 How abusive V8 Severe misbehavior V8 Severe discipline V8 Appropriate discipline V8 Effective discipline V8 How abusive V9 Severe misbehavior V9 Severe discipline V9 Appropriate discipline V9 Effective discipline V9 How abusive

Mean

SDa

Range

Minimum

Maximum

67.78 12.01 20.70 7.92 1.62 2.40 3.11 2.82 1.35 4.23 2.29 2.85 2.50 1.34 5.48 1.77 1.57 1.42 1.48 1.69 4.76 1.72 2.21 3.52 4.14 4.26 3.47 3.37 2.63 5.63 4.33 4.10 3.66 2.42 1.66 5.60 1.10 1.67 5.40 4.03 5.43 1.62 2.19 5.25 5.70 5.36 1.97 2.41 5.12

14.37 1.83 2.14 2.96 0.94 1.41 1.73 1.79 0.88 1.30 1.29 1.65 1.49 0.78 1.24 1.45 1.26 0.94 0.96 1.15 1.36 1.30 1.67 1.27 1.15 1.29 1.47 1.55 0.98 0.85 1.33 1.59 1.56 1.05 1.25 1.19 0.57 1.37 0.71 1.24 1.24 1.23 1.59 0.78 0.89 1.41 1.58 1.75 0.84

79.00 9.00 9.00 12.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 4.00

38.00 6.00 16.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00

117.00 15.00 25.00 15.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00

Note. V1: Mild Transgression/Mild Discipline, V2: Moderate Transgression/Mild Discipline, V3: Severe Transgression/Mild Discipline, V4: Mild Transgression/Moderate Discipline, V5: Moderate Transgression/Moderate Discipline, V6: Severe Transgression/Moderate Discipline, V7: Mild Transgression/Severe Discipline, V8: Moderate Transgression/Severe Discipline, V9: severe Transgression/Severe Discipline. a SD ¼ standard deviation.

was determined that the correlation coefficient between the CPS score and the score on the corporal punishment subscale of the ECAQ was not large enough to create an issue with multicollinearity. Thus, a significant effect of race was found on CPS scores after controlling for SES, F (2, 101) ¼ 9.09, p < 0.01, partial h2 ¼ 0.15. Post-hoc tests revealed that the score of African American participants was significantly higher than Asian (Mean difference ¼ 8. 26, p < 0.05) and White (Mean difference ¼ 11.73, p < 0.01) participants. Additionally, results indicated a significant effect of racial group on the subscale of the ECAQ which measured attitudes towards corporal punishment at home and in school after controlling for SES, F (2, 101) ¼ 23.25, p < 0.01, partial h2 ¼ 0.32. Post-hoc tests revealed that the score of African American participants was significantly higher that Asian (Mean difference ¼ 3.07, p < 0.01) and White (Mean difference ¼ 3.5, p < 0.01) participants.

2.4. Preservice teachers’ race and their ratings of parental discipline Results of the MANCOVA also indicated that there was no significant effect of race on ratings of the severity of the transgressions and the severity of the discipline techniques used in all nine vignettes. However, significant effects were found on the racial groups’ ratings of the abusiveness of the most severe discipline technique, used in three of the vignettes, i.e., Mild Transgression/ Severe Discipline, Moderate Transgression/Severe Discipline, and Severe Transgression/Severe Discipline. Additional effects were found on the racial groups ratings of the effectiveness of the discipline technique used in the moderate transgression/severe discipline vignette. There was a significant effect of racial group on the ratings of abusiveness in the Mild Transgression/Severe Discipline vignette

J. Kesner et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 59 (2016) 318e326

after controlling for SES, F (2, 101) ¼ 16.47, p < 0.01, partial h2 ¼ 0.25. The score of Asian participants was significantly lower than African American (Mean difference ¼ 0.70, p < 0.01) and White participants (Mean difference ¼ 0.91, p < 0.01). There was also a significant effect of racial group on the ratings of abusiveness in the Moderate Transgression/Severe Discipline vignette after controlling for SES, F (2, 101) ¼ 12.47, p < 0.01, partial h2 ¼ 0.20. The score of Asian participants was significantly lower than African American (Mean difference ¼ 0.84, p < 0.01) and White participants (Mean difference ¼ 0.76, p < 0.01). Finally, there was a significant effect of racial group on the ratings of abusiveness of the discipline technique used in the Severe Transgression/Severe Discipline vignette after controlling for SES, F (2, 101) ¼ 9.92, p < 0.01, partial h2 ¼ 0.16. The score of Asian participants was significantly lower than African American (Mean difference ¼ 0.82, p < 0.01) and White participants (Mean difference ¼ 0.75, p < 0.01). In addition to effects on ratings of abusiveness, there was a significant effect of racial group on the participants’ ratings of the effectiveness of the discipline used in the Moderate Transgression/Severe Discipline vignette after controlling for SES, F (2, 101) ¼ 3.61, p < 0.05, partial h2 ¼ 0.07. The White participants’ scores were significantly lower than Asian (Mean difference ¼ 0.98, p < 0.05) and African American participants (Mean difference ¼ 0.78, p < 0.05). 2.5. Preservice teachers’ race and child maltreatment reporting MANCOVA results also indicated a significant effect of racial group on preservice teachers’ knowledge of their role as a mandated reporter of child maltreatment (F (2, 101) ¼ 3.35, p < 0.05, partial h2 ¼ 0.06) as measured by the ECAQ, after controlling for SES. The results of the pairwise comparisons showed that White participants’ knowledge regarding their role as a mandated reporter was significantly higher than Asian (Mean difference ¼ 1.42, p < 0.05) participants. White participants’ scores were not significantly different from African American participants on this variable. There was no significant difference among the racial groups on any other subscales of the ECAQ. 3. Discussion The present study attempted to fill the gap in previous literature on preservice teachers’ role as a mandated reporter for child maltreatment by exploring preservice teachers’ race as a potential factor influencing their attitudes toward corporal punishment, perceptions of parental discipline methods and mandated reporting. The use of parental discipline scenarios with pre-service teachers may seem counter-intuitive. One of the primary purposes of this study was to examine how race may affect behavior surrounding corporal punishment and maltreatment reporting in schools. However, attitudes about corporal punishment are most likely formed in childhood (Douglas, 2006, pp. 23e30), therefore the frame of reference for pre-service teachers is what they remember experiencing in childhood. They are not yet as familiar with the institutional use of corporal punishment or in their role as mandated reporters. Thus, the inclusion of preservice teachers was significant as they are at a crossroads where the attitudes developed in childhood intersect with their duties as a mandated reporter of child maltreatment. The acceptance and use of corporal punishment in their school may further complicate the issues, and may impact their future performance in the classroom. Attempts to influence their development as educational professionals may still be possible during their training. In addition, this study included a significant number of African American and Asian participants,

323

which have been underrepresented in educational research. The findings of the present study have important implications for the teacher’s role in the use of corporal punishment in school and mandated reporting of child maltreatment. This is of particular significance as classrooms in the U. S. become increasingly diverse. One of the main findings of the study was the significant difference in attitudes toward corporal punishment among racial groups of pre-service teachers. Specifically, the finding that showed that African American preservice teachers exhibited more favorable attitudes toward corporal punishment than Asian and White preservice teachers confirmed what has been found in other studies. It has been well documented that the use of corporal punishment is a more frequent and acceptable discipline practice in the African American community compared to other racial groups (Straus & Stewart, 1999, pp. 55e70). Some studies suggest that the adverse effects of physical punishment found with White children reported by other studies, may not be as prevalent in African American children (Lansford, 2010, pp. 89e106; Horn et al., 2004, pp. 1162e1168; Simons et al., 2013, pp. 1273e1285; Taillieu et al., 2014, pp. 1885e1894). Landsford (2010, pp. 89e106) reviewed several studies which found that White children who experienced corporal punishment exhibited more behavioral problems that those who did not. The same association was not found for African American children. While the present study did not directly address this issue, the differential effects of corporal punishment on children of other races may be related to the findings of this study. Some studies also suggest that Asian parents are more likely to utilize corporal punishment in disciplining their children (Chao, 1995, pp. 328e354; Mamatey, 2010, pp. 190e200). However, these studies have been criticized for a lack of comparison of Asian samples to those of other races (Landsford, 2010, pp. 89e106). This study did make the comparison of Asian participants to participants of other races and did not find that their attitudes towards physical punishment differed significantly from the White participants. The lack of significant differences between the African American and White participants’ ratings of the severity of transgression, and the appropriateness, effectiveness and abusiveness of the discipline techniques used in all of the vignettes, suggests that between the African American and White participants, race was not related to assessments of parental discipline techniques. In the moderate transgression/severe transgression, White participants rated the discipline technique used less effective than the other two racial groups. We attributed this to a greater acceptance of corporal punishment in the African American and Asian populations. However, despite this one difference on the rating of a discipline’s effectiveness, a greater acceptance of corporal punishment by African American participants, did not blur the line between physical punishment and abuse as their ratings did not differ significantly from those of White participants. Additionally, African American participants did not differ in their knowledge of child maltreatment and attitudes towards their responsibilities as mandated reporters. There were no significant differences between African American participants’ and the other racial groups. Once again, despite a greater acceptance of corporal punishment, African American participants, did not differ from the other racial groups in terms of how they understand child maltreatment and view their role as a mandated reporter. This is also supported by the findings of our correlational analysis that showed no significant association between preservice teachers’ attitudes toward corporal punishment and their knowledge of child maltreatment and mandated reporting. This suggests that the attitudes toward corporal punishment and knowledge of maltreatment and mandated reporting may be independent. Although all three racial groups agreed that physically striking the child was the most severe discipline technique (as evidenced by the lack of

324

J. Kesner et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 59 (2016) 318e326

differences in ratings of the severity of this discipline technique), the differences in how abusive they perceived it to be, requires closer examination. There is some support for the idea that Asian parents may view physical punishment as necessary to toughen their children and develop their inner strength (Xing & Wang, 2013, pp. 9e16; Tang, 2006, pp. 893e907). However, issues like gender and the degree of acculturation into a non-Asian society have been found to be factors in the use of physical punishment in Asian families (Tang, 2006, pp. 893e907). Thus, the significantly lower rating of abusiveness by Asian participants should not be interpreted as suggesting that the Asian participants were more accepting of abusive discipline practices. In addition, the distribution of ratings of abusiveness in all three vignettes was far from symmetrical. There was a definite nonnormal distribution to the ratings of abusiveness. Skewness statistics for ratings of the abusiveness of the most severe discipline technique used in three of the vignettes were close to or exceeded 1, indicating that all racial groups believed that physically striking the child was abusive. The differences found were in the degree of abusiveness each racial group believed physically striking a child to be, not that Asian participants believed this discipline technique was not abusive (see Table 2). In order to understand the implications of the findings of this study for teacher training related to changing attitudes towards corporal punishment, further research is needed. Previous research has shown that training can have a positive effect on teachers’ attitudes towards corporal punishment (making them less positive about corporal punishment) (Mizra & Ali, 2014, pp. 97e104). Similarly, changes in parental attitudes towards corporal punishment have been found using an educational program for parents (Holden, Brown, Baldwin, & Caderao, 2014, pp. 902e908). The findings from this study indicated that despite personally held attitudes towards corporal punishment White and African American participants agreed on what was abusive. The lower ratings of abusiveness by Asian participants were small in comparison the generally negative skew of these data. So, it appears that with this sample, changing the attitudes towards corporal punishment of pre-service teachers does not seem relevant as they were unrelated to ratings of abusiveness or knowledge of child maltreatment. However, differences in the type of physical punishment used in schools and the type used in the vignettes (hitting the buttocks vs. slapping the face), suggests that vignettes using a discipline method which is closer to that practiced in schools in the U.S. might yield different results. In summary, while attitudes towards corporal punishment did differ among the racial groups, there seemed to be little difference in how they perceived parental discipline practices, their knowledge of child maltreatment and their responsibilities as mandated reporters. With the one exception related to the rating of abusiveness on the most severe discipline technique by the Asian participants, the groups were in general agreement as to the severity, appropriateness, and effectiveness of the various discipline techniques used in the vignettes. Thus, while these groups did differ in their attitudes towards corporal punishment, they were generally in agreement about parental discipline and attitudes towards mandated reporting. This

suggests that other factors are likely more important to consider. A teachers’ knowledge or lack thereof may have more of an influence on their attitudes towards mandated reporting. As reported by Kenny (2004, pp. 1311e1319), teachers’ lack of knowledge about the signs of child maltreatment may have a significant impact on the reporting of child maltreatment by teachers. In addition, effective teacher training may reduce the perceived need for corporal punishment in schools (Han, 2011, pp. 420e430). Thus, the potential conflict between a teachers’ role as mandated reporter and their potential participation in corporal punishment in schools is reduced. There are several limitations of the current study. One of the main limitations is the classification of race into monolithic categories. Race is a social construct and as such is subject to change and variation. Thus, a single category for any racial groups essentializes race and falls short in capturing the full diversity present in all racial groups. It would be more accurate to speak of cultural groups rather than racial categories. The definition of race based on physical characteristics, ethnic background and common geographical origins may be accurate, but is insufficient to infer the social and cultural preferences of an individual within that group. The next logical step in this area of research is to delve more deeply into the social and cultural characteristics of our participants in order to examine the possibility of a “teacher culture” which transcends race and where the lines between “acceptable” corporal punishment and abuse are clearly defined. The findings of this study seem to support this next step in the research. However, as mentioned previously, most studies about child maltreatment, corporal punishment, and mandated reporting rely on the categories utilized by the U.S. Census Bureau. The National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS), which compiles yearly data on reports of maltreatment for the entire U.S. also utilizes these categories. The U.S. Bureau of the Census has made changes to the way it categorizes race and plans on more. For example, in response to complaints from Hispanic, Arab and mixed race people, further delineation of racial identity is being considered for the 2020 census in the U.S. (Krogstad & Cohn, 2014). Another limitation of this study is that the participants were recruited from a limited geographical region (e.g., a teacher education program at urban research university in the southeastern US). Future research should continue to include a racially diverse sample as was done in this study, but should include a more geographically diverse sample to examine any differences associated with regional differences. In addition, given the limitations of current racial categories, future research might focus on the degree of acculturation of individuals into their own racial group. This would demonstrate the diversity within racial groups and potentially the effects of this diversity on attitudes towards corporal punishment and child maltreatment. Even though the teacher population in the U.S., especially at the early and elementary level, is predominantly female, the relationship of gender to the study variables should be explored in future research. Study participants did not report their own experiences of corporal punishment. Rather, they expressed attitudes which may or may not have been influenced by a childhood history of corporal

Table 2 Skewness for the three vignettes with the most severe discipline technique (N ¼ 105).

V7 How abusive V8 How abusive V9 How abusive

Mean

SD

Skewness

SE of skewnessa

Kurtosis

SE of kurtosis

5.40 5.25 5.12

0.71 0.78 0.84

1.62 0.75 0.02

0.24 0.24 0.24

4.11 0.56 1.14

0.47 0.47 0.47

Note. V7: Mild Transgression/Severe Discipline, V8: Moderate Transgression/Severe Discipline, V9: severe Transgression/Severe Discipline. a SE ¼ standard error.

J. Kesner et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 59 (2016) 318e326

punishment. Future research should include measures of the participants’ actual experiences with corporal punishment in their family of origin. In addition, the discipline vignettes used were based on a parent-child interaction. Future research would be enhanced by including vignettes of discipline interactions in a school setting. This would help us better understand the influence of cultural and racial background on these phenomena. It is essential that the teachers’ cultural background be considered as a potential factor in the relationships between these variables. Finally, this study explored preservice teachers’ perceptions and knowledge of child maltreatment. Although it provides insights into how preservice teachers are prepared for their responsibilities in the classroom, future research should follow the preservice teacher as he/she transitions into professional practice and how their attitudes towards corporal punishment are reflected in their classroom practice. References Abrahams, N., Casey, K., & Daro, D. (1992). Teachers’ knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about child abuse and its prevention. Child Abuse & Neglect, 16, 229e238. Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. Aucoin, K. J., Frick, P. J., & Bodin, S. D. (2006). Corporal punishment and child adjustment. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 27(6), 527e541. Bogacki, D. F., Armstrong, D. J., & Weiss, K. J. (2005). Reducing school violence: The corporal punishment scale and its relationship to authoritarianism and pupilcontrol ideology. The Journal of Psychiatry and Law, 33, 367e386. Bornstein, M. H., Hahn, C., Suwalsky, J., & Haynes, O. M. (2003). Socioeconomic status, parenting, and child development: The hollingshead four-factor index of social status and the socioeconomic index of occupations. In M. H. Bornstein, & R. Bradley (Eds.), Socioeconomic status, parenting, and child development (pp. 29e82). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Chao, R. K. (1995). Chinese and European American cultural models of the self reflected in mothers’ childrearing beliefs. Ethos, 23(3), 328e354.
ment, M., & Chamberland, C. (2014). Trends in corporal punishment and attiCle tudes in favour of this practice: Toward a change in societal norms. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 33(2), 13e29. Culp, R. E., Culp, A. M., Dengler, B., & Maisano, P. C. (1999). First time young mothers living in rural communities using corporal punishment with their toddlers. Journal of Community Psychology, 27, 503e509. Deater-Deckard, K., Lansford, J., Dodge, K., Pettit, G., & Bates, J. (2003). The development of attitudes about physical punishment: An 8-year longitudinal study. Journal of Family Psychology, 17, 351e360. Douglas, E. M. (2006). Familial violence socialization in childhood and later life approval of corporal punishment: A cross-cultural perspective. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 76(1), 23e30. Dupper, D. R., & Dingus, A. M. (2008). Corporal punishment in U.S. Public schools: A continuing challenge for school social workers. Children & Schools, 30(4), 243e250. Farmer, A., & Stinson, K. (2010). Failing the grade: How the use of corporal punishment in U.S. public schools demonstrates the need for U.S. ratification of the children’s rights convention and the convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. New York Law School Law Review, 54(4), 1035e1069. Feistritzer, C. E. (2011). Profile of teachers in the U.S. 2011. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Information. Finkelhor, D., & Jones, L. (2006). Why have child maltreatment and child victimization declined? Journal of Social Issues, 62(4), 685e716. Freeman, M., & Saunders, B. J. (2014). Can we conquer child abuse if we don’t outlaw physical chastisement of children? International Journal of Children’s Rights, 22(4), 681e709. Gershoff, E. T. (2002). Corporal punishment by parents and associated child behaviors and experiences: A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 128(4), 539e579. Gershoff, E. T. (2010). More harm than good: A summary of scientific research on the intended and unintended effects of corporal punishment on children. Law and Contemporary Problems, 73, 33e58. Global Initiative. (2016, February 25). Countdown to universal prohibition e Global initiative to end all corporal punishment of children. Retrieved February 25, 2016, from http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org/progress/countdown.html. Han, S. (2011). Probability of corporal punishment: Lack of resources and vulnerable students. The Journal of Educational Research, 104, 420e430. Haney-Lopez, I. F. (2000). The social construction of race. In R. Delgado, & J. Stefancic (Eds.), Critical race theory: The cutting edge (2nd ed., pp. 163e175). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. Haslam, N., Rothschild, L., & Ernst, D. (2000). Essentialist beliefs about social categories. British Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 113e127. Hecker, T., Hermenau, K., Isele, D., & Elbert, T. (2014). Corporal punishment and children’s externalizing problems: A cross-sectional study of Tanzanian primary school aged children. Child Abuse & Neglect, 38(5), 884e892.

325

Hemenway, D., Solnick, S., & Carter, J. (1994). Child rearing violence. Child Abuse & Neglect, 18(12), 1011e1020. Holden, G. W., Brown, A. S., Baldwin, A. S., & Caderao, K. C. (2014). Research findings can change attitudes about corporal punishment. Child Abuse & Neglect, 38, 902e908. Hollingshead, A. B. (1975). Four factor index of social status. Unpublished working paper. U.S: Department of Sociology, Yale University. Horn, I. B., Joseph, J. G., & Cheng, T. L. (2004). Nonabusive physical punishment and child behavior among African-American children: A systematic review. Journal of the National Medical Association, 96, 1162e1168. Human Rights Watch. (2008). A violent education: Corporal punishment of children in U.S. public schools. Retrieved from http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2008/08/19/ violent-education. Kenny, M. C. (2001). Child abuse reporting: Teachers’ perceived deterrents. Child Abuse & Neglect, 25(1), 81e92. Kenny, M. C. (2004). Teachers’ attitudes toward and knowledge of child maltreatment. Child Abuse & Neglect, 28(12), 1311e1319. Kenny, M. C., & McEachern, A. G. (2002). Reporting suspected child abuse: A pilot comparison of middle and high school counselors and principals. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 11(2), 59e75. Kesner, J., & Bingham, G. (2010). Educators and mandated reporting of child maltreatment: Comparisons to legal, medical and social service reporters. In G. Papanikos (Ed.), Issues on education and research (pp. 267e274). Athens, Greece: Athens Institute for Education and Research. Kim, E., & Hong, S. (2007). First-generation Korean-American perceptions of discipline. Journal of Professional Nursing, 23(1), 60e68. Kim, D., Kim, K., Park, Y., Zhang, L. D., Lu, M. K., & Li, D. (2000). Children’s experience of violence in China and Korea: A transcultural study. Child Abuse & Neglect, 24(9), 1163e1173. Krogstad, J. M., & Cohn, D. (2014, March 14). U.S. Census looking at big changes in how it asks about race and ethnicity. Retrieved February 1, 2016, from http://www. pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/03/14/u-s-census-looking-at-big-changes-inhow-it-asks-about-race-and-ethnicity/. Landsford, J. E. (2010). The special problem of cultural differences in effects of corporal punishment. Law and Contemporary Problems, 73(2), 89e106. Lee, S. J., & Atschul, I. (2015). Spanking of young children: Do immigrant and U.S. born Hispanic parents differ? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 30(3), 475e498. Little, S. G., & Akin-Little, A. (2008). Psychology’s contributions to classroom management. Psychology in The Schools, 45(3), 227e234. Lwo, L. L., & Yuan, Y. (2011). Teachers’ perceptions and concerns on the banning of corporal punishment and its alternative disciplines. Education and Urban Society, 43(2), 137e164. Mamatey, A. (2010). South Korean EFL teachers’ perceptions of corporal punishment in school: Cultural vs. educational system factors. Novitas-ROYAL Research on Youth and Language, 4(2), 190e200. Marones, A. (2013). Corporal punishment persists in U.S. Education Week, 33(9), 10e11. Mirza, M. S., & Ali, A. (2014). Effectiveness of training program in changing teachers’ attitude towards students’ corporal punishment. Journal of Research and Reflections in Education, 8(2), 97e104. Mwai, B. K., Kimengi, I. N., & Kipsoi, E. J. (2014). Perceptions of teachers on the ban of corporal punishment in pre-primary institutions in Kenya. World Journal of Education, 4(6), 90e100. Nieto, S., & Bode, P. (2011). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson Allyn and Bacon. Prentice, D. P., & Miller, D. T. (2007). Psychological essentialism of human categories. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(4), 202e206. ~ ez, K. J., & Rohner, R. P. (2006). Corporal punishment in cross-cultural Ripoll-Nún perspective: Directions for a research agenda. Cross-Cultural Research: The Journal of Comparative Social Science, 40, 220e249. Robinson, D. H., Funk, D. C., Land, A. B., & Bush, A. M. (2005). Changing beliefs about corporal punishment: Increasing knowledge about ineffectiveness to build more consistent moral and informational beliefs. Journal of Behavioral Education, 14(2), 117e139. Sedlak, A. J., McPherson, K., & Das, B. (2010). Fourth national incidence study of child abuse and neglect (NIS-4): Supplementary analyses of race differences in child maltreatment rates in the NIS-4. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Simons, L. G., Su, X., & Simons, R. L. (2013). Consequences of corporal punishment for African Americans: The importance of context and outcome. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 1273e1285. Smith, B., Ray, G. E., Stefurak, T., & Zachar, P. A. (2007). College student evaluations of parent-child disciplinary situations. Journal of Family Violence, 22(8), 757e767. Straus, M. A., & Stewart, J. H. (1999). Corporal punishment by American parents: National data on prevalence, chronicity, severity, and duration, in relation to child and family characteristics. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 2(2), 55e70. Taillieu, T. L., Afifi, T. O., Mota, N., Keyes, K. M., & Sareen, J. (2014). Age, sex, and racial differences in harsh physical punishment: Results from a nationally representative United States sample. Child Abuse & Neglect, 38(12), 1885e1894. Tang, C. S. (2006). Corporal punishment and physical maltreatment against children: A community study on Chinese parents in Hong Kong. Child Abuse and Neglect, 30(8), 893e907. U.N. General Assembly. (1989, November 20). Convention on the rights of the child

326

J. Kesner et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 59 (2016) 318e326

(United Nations, treaty series, vol. 1577, p. 3). Retrieved from http://www. refworld.org/docid/3ae6b38f0.html. U.S. Department of Education. (2015). Racial/ethnic enrollment in public schools. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cge.asp. UNICEF.. (2010). Child disciplinary practices at home: Evidence from a range of lowand middle-income countries. New York: United Nations. Retrieved from http:// www.unicef.org/protection/Child_Disciplinary_Practices_at_Home.pdf. Vittrup, B., & Holden, G. W. (2010). Children’s assessments of corporal punishment and other disciplinary practices: The role of age, race, SES, and exposure to spanking. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 3, 211e220. Vockell, E. (1991). Corporal punishment: Pros and cons. Clearing House, 64, 278e283. Wasserman, L. M. (2011). Corporal punishment in k-12 public school settings: Reconsideration of its constitutional dimensions thirty years after Ingraham v.

Wright. Touro Law Review, 26(4), 1029e1101. Watkinson, A. M., & Rock, L. (2016). Child physical punishment and international human rights: Implications for social work education. International Social Work, 59(1), 86e98. Wilson, J. (2002). Corporal punishment revisited. Cambridge Journal of Education, 32, 409e416. Xing, X., & Wang, M. (2013). Sex differences in the reciprocal relationships between mild and severe corporal punishment and children’s internalizing problem behavior in a Chinese sample. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 34(1), 9e16. Zolotor, A. J., Theodore, A. D., Runyan, D. K., Chang, J. J., & Laskey, A. L. (2011). Corporal punishment and physical abuse: Population-based trends for three-to11-year-old children in the United States. Child Abuse Review, 20(1), 57e66.