SlideShare a Scribd company logo
DataClientRoom QualityFood QualityService
Quality1GPG2GGG3GGG4GPG5GGG6PGG7GGG8GPG9PGP10
GGG11GGG12PPP13GGG14GGG15GGP16PPP17GGG18GGG1
9PGP20PGP21GGG22PGP23PPP24GGG25GGG26GPP27GPG28
GGG29PPP30PGG31GGG32PPP33PGG34PGP35GGG36PGP37
GGG38PGP39GGG40GPG41GPG42GGG43GGP44PGP45PGG4
6PGG47GPP48GGG49GPP50PPP51GGG52PPG53PPP54GGG55
GGG56GGG57GGP58GGG59GPP60PGP61GPP62GGG63GPG6
4GGG65PPP66GPG67GGG68GGG69GGG70GGP71GGG72GG
G73GGG74GGP75GGP76PPP77GGG78GGG79GGP80GGG81G
GG82GGG83PGG84GGG85GGG86GPP87GGG88PPP89GGG90
PGP91GGG92GGG93GPG94GGG95GPP96PPP97PPP98GPG99
PGG100PPP101GPP102PGP103PPG104GPG105GPG106GGG10
7PGG108PPP109GGG110GGG111GGG112GGG113GGG114GG
G115GGG116GGG117GGG118PPP119PPG120GGG121GGG12
2PPP123GGG124GGG125GGG126GGG127GGG128GGG129PP
P130GGG131GGP132PPP133GGG134GGG135GGG136GGG13
7GGG138GPG139PPP140GGG141PPP142GGG143GGG144PPP
145GGG146GGG147GGG148GGG149GGG150GGP151GGG152
GGG153GGG154GGG155GGG156GGG157PPP158GPG159GG
G160GGG161GGG162PPG163GGP164GGG165PGP166GPG167
GGP168PGG169GGG170GGP171GGG172PPP173GGG174GGG
175GPG176GGG177GGG178PPG179GGG180GGP181GGG182
GGG183GGG184GGG185GPP186GGG187GGG188GGG189GG
G190GGG191GGG192GGG193GGG194GGG195GGP196GGG1
97GGG198GGG199GPP200GGG
Sheet1Room QualityFood QualityService
QualityMeanMedianRangeSTDCoefficientVariationComparision
Corporal Punishment: Legal Reform as a Route to Changing
Norms
Jo Becker
Social Research: An International Quarterly, Volume 85,
Number 1, Spring
2018, pp. 255-271 (Article)
Published by Johns Hopkins University Press
For additional information about this article
Access provided by Ebsco Publishing (8 May 2018 07:55 GMT)
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/692752
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/692752
social research Vol. 85 : No. 1 : Spring 2018 255
Jo Becker
Corporal Punishment:
Legal Reform as a Route
to Changing Norms
THE TERM “HARMFUL TRADITIONAL PRACTICES”
TYPICALLY BRINGS TO MIND CHILD
marriage, female genital mutilation/cutting, and so-called
“honor kill-
ings,” but rarely corporal punishment. Yet corporal punishment
is
arguably the most pervasive harmful traditional practice
children expe-
rience today. In nearly every part of the world, parents use
physical
punishment to “discipline” their children. Such corporal
punishment
typically takes the form of hitting a child with a bare hand or an
object
such as a stick or paddle. A 2014 survey found that four of
every five
children between the ages of two and 14—an estimated 1 billion
glob-
ally—experience physical punishment in their home on a regular
basis
(UNICEF 2014, 96).
The practice of corporal punishment is rooted in both cultural
norms and religious belief. Parents often believe that corporal
pun-
ishment will teach children good behavior. They hit their
children be-
cause it is socially accepted and because they themselves often
were
hit growing up. Some religious teachings appear to justify the
prac-
tice.1 The adage “spare the rod, spoil the child,” rooted in the
Old Tes-
tament Book of Proverbs, suggests not only that corporal
punishment
of children is permitted, but also that it is expected of good
parents.
Influenced by English common law, during the twentieth
century,
more than 70 countries enshrined the rights of parents to
“reason-
able chastisement” in their legal codes (Global Initiative
2015a).
256 social research
Social norm theory suggests that ending harmful practices
depends on changing collective beliefs about the acceptability
and
efficacy of the practice, and that legal reform is of limited
utility,
or even counterproductive (Mackie and LeJeune 2009).
Experience
around female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C), for example,
has
found that extended local dialogue about community values can
lead
to voluntary abandonment of FGM/C (Gillespie and Melching
2010).
Legal reform as a strategy to end FGM/C has generally been
ineffective
or simply driven the practice underground. As long as FGM/C
remains
the norm for most families, individual parents will continue to
have
their daughters cut, perceiving the social inclusion that FGM/C
offers
to outweigh the risks of potential prosecution. Some scholars
find
that only when attitude change is already underway is legal
reform
effective in reinforcing new norms (Shell-Duncan et al. 2103).
In contrast to the experience of challenging other harmful
traditional practices, this paper argues that legal reform, when
ac-
companied by public education, can be an effective strategy to
end
the corporal punishment of children. Evidence from multiple
coun-
tries has found that when corporal punishment is prohibited by
law,
changes in attitudes and practices follow. Nearly all the
countries that
have prohibited corporal punishment have done so ahead of
public
opinion (Global Initiative 2017, 12). Yet change in practice and
atti-
tudes following legal reform can be both swift and dramatic.
THE HARMS OF CORPORAL PUNISHMENT
Recent research finds that the effects of corporal punishment on
chil-
dren are overwhelmingly negative. Studies have found that
children
who experience corporal punishment are more aggressive
towards
others, and more likely to resort to violence to respond to
conflict
(Ani and Grantham-McGregor 1998). They are more likely to
engage in
delinquent or antisocial behavior, including bullying, lying,
cheating,
truancy, and criminal activity. A German study of more than
45,000
ninth graders, for example, found that children who were
subjected
to severe corporal punishment were five times more likely to
become
Corporal Punishment: Legal Reform as a Route to Changing
Norms 257
violent offenders (Pfeiffer 2013, 97). Corporal punishment may
damage children’s mental health, leading to greater anxiety,
depres-
sion, low self-esteem, and hopelessness. It is also linked to
lower IQ
scores and poor school performance (Gershoff 2002). The
damage
extends well into adulthood: adults who experienced corporal
punish-
ment as children are more likely to engage in aggression and
criminal
behavior, as well as domestic violence towards an intimate
partner
or child, and experience higher rates of depression, alcoholism,
and
suicidal tendencies (Afifi et al. 2012).
A meta-analysis of more than 250 published studies examin-
ing corporal punishment and its impacts found that not a single
one
demonstrated any benefits to the practice (Global Initiative
2016).
Contrary to popular belief, corporal punishment is not effective
as
a disciplinary measure. One US study, for example, found that
when
children between the ages of two and five were spanked by their
moth-
ers, 73 percent of the children repeated the same behavior for
which
they had been hit within the next 10 minutes (Holden,
Williamson,
and Holland 2014). Corporal punishment also damages parent-
child
relationships; children report that after being physically
punished,
they feel hurt, angry, and frightened of their parents (Dobbs
2005).
When parents physically punish their children, they are often
angry, making it easy for the level of punishment to escalate
beyond
what was intended and cause serious injury, or at times even
death.
Shaking babies or toddlers, for example, can lead to permanent
brain
injuries. In the United States alone, over 700 children die each
year
due to physical abuse by parents (US Department of Health and
Hu-
man Services 2017).
THE HUMAN RIGHTS IMPERATIVE
Regardless of the scientific evidence of harm, corporal
punishment
violates the human rights of children. Children, like adults,
have a
right to respect for their dignity and physical integrity and to
equal
protection under the law. Article 19 of the Convention on the
Rights of
the Child obligates governments to take all appropriate
measures “to
258 social research
protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence,
injury
or abuse … while in the care of parent(s), legal guardian(s) or
any
other person who has the care of that child.” The Committee on
the
Rights of the Child, which monitors compliance with the
Convention,
has stated that this obligation “does not leave room for any
level of
legalized violence against children. Corporal punishment and
other
cruel or degrading forms of punishment are forms of violence
and
States must take all appropriate legislative, administrative,
social and
educational measures to eliminate them” (CRC 2007).
The rationale for legal reform to end corporal punishment of
children is based on several key arguments. One is that children
are
entitled to equal protection under the law, including in the
home. If
hitting an adult is considered assault, hitting a child should not
be
legally permissible either. A second is that as long as corporal
punish-
ment is legal, parents and other caregivers are more likely to
believe
it is acceptable to hit children in their care. A third argument is
that
legal prohibition of corporal punishment—particularly when
accom-
panied by public education—will motivate parents to look into
al-
ternative forms of discipline and encourage governments to
provide
appropriate resources and education.
By early 2018, 53 countries had legally prohibited all corporal
punishment of children, including in the home, and 56 more had
stated a commitment to full prohibition (Global Initiative 2018).
Countries enacting bans included most European and Latin
American
countries, and a handful of others in Africa, the Middle East,
and Asia.
No states in the United States ban corporal punishment in the
home.
Studies comparing attitudes and practice related to corporal
punish-
ment before and after legal prohibition, however, are primarily
lim-
ited to Europe and New Zealand. The following case studies
explore
experiences in several countries.
Sweden
In 1979, Sweden became the first country in the world to
explicitly
prohibit by law all forms of corporal punishment of children,
including
Corporal Punishment: Legal Reform as a Route to Changing
Norms 259
in the home. When its parliament began to debate prohibition,
they
called it a “signal law,” i.e., a law that signaled an approach
primar-
ily for public education. Its intent was not to prosecute and
imprison
parents, except in the most extreme cases. After the law’s
adoption,
the Ministry of Justice ran a large-scale public education
campaign.
Brochures entitled “Can You Bring Up Children Successfully
without
Smacking and Spanking?” were distributed to all households
with
children, information on the issue was printed on milk cartons,
and
children’s and antenatal clinics provided support and
information to
parents. Within just a couple of years, over 90 percent of
Swedish
families were aware of the law (Global Initiative 2015b).
Several studies have found significant changes over time in
attitudes towards corporal punishment among Swedes. In 1965,
for
example, 53 percent of parents indicated support for corporal
pun-
ishment, but in 1999, only 10 percent did so (Janson 2000). A
2014
study on changes in parenting practices in Sweden used over 53
years
of data to compare three cohorts—1958, 1981, and 2011—of
young
to middle-aged adults and their self-reported experiences of
being
slapped during childhood. The study found almost no
differences be-
tween the 1958 and 1981 cohorts, but a significant drop between
1981
and 2011. Twenty percent of the 1958 cohort and 18 percent of
the
1981 cohort said they were often slapped by their parents, but
only
2 percent of the 2011 cohort said they were frequently slapped.
The
study concluded that over the 53 years, the likelihood of
participants
being slapped decreased by 93 percent, with almost the entire
de-
cline—92 percent—occurring from 1981 (two years after the
change
in the law) to 2011 (Trifan, Stattin, and Tilton-Weaver 2014).
New Zealand
New Zealand prohibited corporal punishment of children in
2007, after
nearly two years of fierce and acrimonious public debate.
Previously,
a law known as Section 592 explicitly permitted New Zealand
parents
to physically punish their children. In the 1980s, targeted
lobbying
led to a prohibition on corporal punishment in childcare centers,
260 social research
institutions, and schools, but there was little interest in banning
it in
the home.
In 1989, New Zealand appointed its first commissioner for chil-
dren, who began to advocate actively for repeal of Section 59
and a
full prohibition on all corporal punishment of children. In 1997,
the
Committee on the Rights of the Child conducted its first review
of
New Zealand’s compliance with the Convention on the Rights
of the
Child, and recommended that New Zealand review its law and
pro-
hibit all corporal punishment of children (CRC 1997).
In response to the Committee on the Rights of the Child’s ini-
tial recommendations, New Zealand’s cabinet instructed
government
officials to report on how other countries approached the issue
of
corporal punishment. The Ministry of Justice conducted
research on
public opinions regarding the law, and found that a strong
majority
—80 percent—of parents believed that it was acceptable to
smack a
child, though only 9 percent believed that it was an “effective”
strat-
egy in guiding a child towards better behavior. The Ministry
said pub-
licly that it supported alternative forms of discipline, but that
the
government had no plans to repeal Section 59 (Wood et al.
2008, 172).
In late 2003, the Committee on the Rights of the Child conclud-
ed its second review of New Zealand, criticizing its failure to
repeal
Section 59 and again recommending that the country prohibit
corpo-
ral punishment of children (CRC 2003). The same month,
UNICEF pub-
lished a report that placed New Zealand third among the world’s
rich-
est countries in its rate of child deaths from maltreatment. The
report
found that children in New Zealand were six times more likely
to die
from physical abuse as in the other countries surveyed (UNICEF
2003).
After a member of Parliament introduced a bill to repeal Sec-
tion 59, the issue became the focus of public debate. Groups
oppos-
ing the repeal of Section 59 bought full-page ads in newspapers
and
launched a petition campaign that garnered over 200,000
signatures.
Their opposition to the bill focused on three arguments: that
physi-
cal punishment was a necessary and positive aspect of parental
disci-
pline, that the proposed law unnecessarily intruded into family
life,
Corporal Punishment: Legal Reform as a Route to Changing
Norms 261
and that the repeal of Section 59 would result in criminal
prosecution
of parents for even minor cases of physical punishment (Wood
2015).
A small core of advocates for the prohibition of corporal pun-
ishment secured support from 140 organizations for abolition.
They
provided politicians in Wellington with briefing sheets and
other ar-
guments in support of repeal, and ensured a significant presence
in
the gallery every time Parliament debated the bill. The
campaign de-
veloped media kits addressing myths and misunderstandings
around
the proposed law, produced media releases, and presented
spokes-
people, including religious leaders, supporting prohibition to
news-
papers, radio, and television (Wood 2011).
Save the Children New Zealand commissioned research on
children’s experiences of corporal punishment, finding that 40
per-
cent of five- to seven-year-olds reported being smacked or hit
around
the face or head, and 25 percent had been hit with objects
including
belts, canes, tennis rackets, and spatulas (Dobbs 2005, 44). The
study
also found that many children believed that their parents beat
them
not to provide guidance, but out of anger.
Intense opposition to repeal of Section 59 continued up until
Parliament’s final vote in May 2007. Opponents of the “Anti-
Smacking
Law” organized rallies around the country, coordinated an
extensive
lobbying campaign, and brought international experts to New
Zea-
land to advocate in favor of physical punishment. The day
Parliament
voted to repeal Section 59, over a thousand protesters gathered
in
front of the parliament building, waving banners and chanting
slo-
gans opposing the proposed law (Wood 2011).
After the law changed, however, so did public attitudes. Public
opinion surveys over three decades found that in 1981, 89
percent of
the public approved of physical punishment of children. By
2008, a
year following legal reform, approval had dropped to 58
percent, and
after just five more years, to 40 percent. Analysis of the data
found
that the steepest declines occurred during the 1990s after
physical
punishment was banned in schools, and then following the 2007
ban
on corporal punishment in the home (D’Souza et al. 2016).
262 social research
Germany
Germany prohibited all corporal punishment of children in
2000,
accompanied by a 15-month awareness-raising campaign called
“More
Respect for Children.” The campaign included billboards,
lectures
and seminars that were covered by the media, and events
including
theater and street parties, emphasizing children’s right to a
nonvio-
lent upbringing (Global Initiative 2015b, 6).
A longitudinal study found that in 1996, 83 percent of Ger-
man parents believed that a “mild slap on the face” was
acceptable,
but by 2008, only 25 percent of parents thought so (Bussman
2009).
Self-reports of children themselves may be more significant. In
1992,
30 percent of young people over the age of 11 reported that they
had
been “thrashed,” while only 3 percent of young people reported
the
same in 2002 (Federal Ministries 2003).
In 1992, a representative survey of thousands of Germans be-
tween ages 16 and 40 found that 26 percent reported that they
had
not been physically punished in childhood. In 2011, a similar
sur-
vey found that the percentage had doubled to 52 percent.
Among the
youngest cohort, the percentage was even higher: 63 percent of
16- to
20-year-olds reported that they had never been physically
punished
(Pfeiffer 2013, 97).
COMPARATIVE RESEARCH
Two multicountry studies have looked at attitudes and practices
in countries that have banned corporal punishment of children
compared to those that have not. A 1999 study of 14 European
Union
countries, surveying over 10,000 adults in over 200 cities,
found
that people in countries that have banned corporal punishment
of
children were less likely to find corporal punishment acceptable
than people in countries where it was still legal (Gracia and
Herrero
2008). Another study conducted in 2007 interviewed 5,000
parents in
five European countries: Sweden, Austria, and Germany, which
had
prohibited corporal punishment; and Spain and France, which
had
not. It found that parents were significantly less likely to report
using
Corporal Punishment: Legal Reform as a Route to Changing
Norms 263
corporal punishment and less likely to find it acceptable in
countries
that had banned corporal punishment, compared to parents
living in
countries where it was still legal. For example, over half the
French
and Spanish parents reported spanking their children, while only
17 percent of those in Austria and Germany, and only 4 percent
of
Swedes, did so. The study concluded that “there can no longer
be any
doubt about the violence-reducing effect of a ban on
childrearing
violence” (Bussman 2009, 20).
PUBLIC EDUCATION VS LEGAL REFORM
Governments seeking to end corporal punishment of children
have
several possible avenues. They can rely primarily on public
education,
raising awareness among parents about nonviolent parenting
options
and the harms of corporal punishment. They can rely on legal
reform,
banning corporal punishment, including in the home. Or they
can
combine the two, prohibiting corporal punishment by law while
also
conducting public awareness campaigns.
There is little research that compares the outcomes of relying
solely on public education to the outcomes of legal reform
without pub-
lic education. What research exists suggests that combining the
two
creates the greatest changes in both attitudes and practice. A
2002 study
of 10 countries that had prohibited corporal punishment
concluded:
Unless public education is underpinned by legal reform it
can only ever be partially convincing, and limited in its
success. A retained defence of “reasonable chastisement”
serves to undermine professional arguments in favour of
“positive parenting” methods, and allows those wholly
or partly committed to physical punishment a powerful
reason not to adopt less harmful child-rearing practic-
es. Conversely, to introduce legal reform in the absence
of sustained programmes of public education and fam-
ily support for those in need of greater help would be
unacceptable. Removing a parental right “enjoyed” for
264 social research
centuries without helping parents to find effective and
reliable alternatives helps neither parents nor their chil-
dren; the evidence shows that attitudes and practices have
shifted most in countries which have invested in sustained
public education, such as Sweden. (Boyson 2002, 67)
ACCELERATING LEGAL REFORM
In 2001, when the Global Initiative to End All Corporal
Punishment
was launched, only 11 countries had legally prohibited all
corporal
punishment of children.3 Since then, the Global Initiative has
used a
range of strategies to accelerate prohibition of corporal
punishment,
working with national campaigns on legislative reform, and
system-
atically using the United Nations treaty bodies and Universal
Periodic
Review (UPR) of UN member countries to promote legal
reform. In
the 16 years following the Global Initiative’s founding, the
number
of states prohibiting all corporal punishment of children more
than
quadrupled, from 11 to 53 (Global Initiative 2018).
As the basis for its advocacy, the Global Initiative tracked the
status of national legislation and court cases regarding corporal
pun-
ishment in every country worldwide. This mapping examined all
relevant national legislation, including the settings where
corporal
punishment might be already illegal and what further changes
were
necessary to achieve a comprehensive ban. It also tracked
relevant
court decisions, recommendations from relevant UN bodies, any
com-
mitments that countries had made to ban corporal punishment,
and
new laws under consideration that could be used to prohibit the
prac-
tice (Newell 2015).
The Global Initiative used this information to systematically
brief UN treaty bodies, beginning with the Committee on the
Rights
of the Child. The Global Initiative submitted information for
every
country coming for review before the Committee, and by 2015,
had
submitted 258 briefings (Bower 2015, 21). Based on the Global
Ini-
tiative’s information, the Committee made recommendations to
188
states urging the complete prohibition of corporal punishment
of
Corporal Punishment: Legal Reform as a Route to Changing
Norms 265
children. In over a hundred of these cases, the Committee made
the
recommendation more than once, as states came under
subsequent
reviews. Every few years, representatives of the Global
Initiative met
with the full committee, in order to update it regarding progress
to-
wards global prohibition, and to highlight key issues (Newell
2015).
Encouraged by the Committee on the Rights of the Child’s will-
ingness to take up the issue, the Global Initiative widened its
focus
and began making regular submissions to committees
monitoring
compliance with other human rights treaties, which also began
rec-
ommending that states prohibit all corporal punishment of
children.4
In the case of the Committee against Torture, recommendations
to
prohibit corporal punishment increased six-fold after the Global
Ini-
tiative started submitting its briefings (Bower 2015, 54).
In 2008, the UN Human Rights Council initiated the process
of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), under which members
assess
the human rights record of every UN member state every four
years.
Beginning with the first UPR session, the Global Initiative
began sub-
mitting briefings on every state. During the first cycle (2008–
2011),
the Global Initiative submitted briefings on 175 states; in 96
cases,
other states made recommendations on corporal punishment to
the
country under review (Global Initiative 2015c).
The UPR requires states under review to respond to the rec-
ommendations they have received by indicating whether they
accept
the recommendation, reject it, or take note of it. Between 2008
and
2015, 129 states received at least one recommendation
regarding cor-
poral punishment. By 2015, 19 of these had banned all corporal
pun-
ishment of children, and an additional 38 had publicly
committed
to legal reform (Bower 2015, 33). An independent assessment of
the
Global Initiative concluded in 2015 that the strategy of utilizing
trea-
ty bodies and the UPR had been particularly influential, and
found a
clear correlation between the interventions of the Global
Initiative in
these venues and the countries that have prohibited corporal
punish-
ment (Bower 2015, 38).
266 social research
The Global Initiative has actively monitored new opportunities
for legal reform, supported national organizations in their
advocacy,
and commented on bills and draft laws in dozens of countries.
In
collaboration with Save the Children Sweden, the Global
Initiative
conducted law reform workshops in several regions, and
published
a series of briefing papers on how to campaign for changes in
law. It
also worked with religious leaders to address faith-based
opposition
to abolition, by highlighting universal religious values of
compassion,
justice, equality, and nonviolence (Dodd 2015).
CONCLUSION
Legal reform to prohibit corporal punishment can accelerate
changes
in both attitudes and practice on the issue, even in countries
where
large majorities support corporal punishment. Individual
country
studies have found that public acceptance of corporal
punishment
drops—sometimes dramatically—after legal reform prohibiting
the
practice. Comparative studies have also found that parents are
signifi-
cantly less likely to report using corporal punishment and less
likely
to find it acceptable in countries that have banned corporal
punish-
ment, compared to parents living in countries where it was still
legal.
Change is most pronounced in countries that accompany legal
prohi-
bition with public education campaigns.
Could the same result be achieved solely with public education?
Little research is available, though the EU comparative study
found
drops in levels of acceptance of corporal punishment in all
countries
that had banned the practice, regardless of how much they
invested
in public education campaigns. Another question is whether
attitudes
towards corporal punishment change over time—even without
legal
action—as people become more aware of violence against
children.
The United States, where all states allow corporal punishment
in the
home, offers an interesting case. Public support for corporal
punish-
ment has remained consistently high in the United States,
despite ac-
tive media coverage of violence against children. In a 1995
survey, 87
percent of US adults said it was “sometimes appropriate” for
parents
Corporal Punishment: Legal Reform as a Route to Changing
Norms 267
to spank their children. In 2013, nearly 20 years later, the
percentage
who gave that response had only dropped a few points, to 81
percent
(Harris Poll 2013).
One limitation of many surveys on corporal punishment is that
they ask parents to self-report on their attitudes and whether or
not
they physically punish their children. In countries that have
prohib-
ited the practice, individuals may underreport their use of
corporal
punishment or misrepresent their attitudes, aware that the
practice
is now illegal. Self-reporting by children on their actual
treatment is
likely a better measure. Such studies are fewer in number, but
also
show that the practice of corporal punishment declines when it
is
prohibited by law.
Corporal punishment violates the rights of children, has long-
lasting negative impacts on children’s health and well-being,
and cre-
ates significant socioeconomic costs. Although the practice is
deeply
ingrained in many cultures, the available research shows that
legal
reform—particularly when coupled with public education—can
con-
tribute to rapid and lasting change in both attitudes and
practices.
The findings on legal reform and corporal punishment may
have useful implications for changing other social norms.
Factors
to be considered include the perceived benefits to individuals
and
families who continue a practice, perceived costs of abandoning
the
practice, and the degree to which the existing legal regime may
send
a signal that the practice is acceptable and not to be questioned.
An
interesting parallel, for example, may be child labor. Although
pov-
erty is the main driver for families who send their children into
the
workforce, the International Labor Organization has identified
legal
prohibition as a key factor in a significant reduction of global
child
labor rates. Since 2000, the number of children engaged in child
labor
has dropped by more than one-third, from 245 million to 152
million
(ILO 2017). In the United States, for example, child labor
persists pri-
marily in just one sector—agriculture—where an exemption in
labor
law allows children to work legally at much younger ages than
in
other sectors. Wages for adult farmworkers in the United States
are
268 social research
very low, creating undeniable pressure for children to work to
help
support the family. However, families may also calculate that
since
child labor in agriculture is legal, it is also acceptable. Changes
in the
law could persuade families to pursue other alternatives.
NOTES
1. E.g., “He that spareth his rod hateth his son; But he that
loveth him
chasteneth him betimes” (Proverbs 13:24); “Do not withhold
disci-
pline from a child; if you punish them with the rod, they will
not
die,” (Proverbs 23:13); “A rod and a reprimand impart wisdom,
but a
child left undisciplined disgraces its mother” (Proverbs 29:15).
2. New Zealand’s 1961 Crimes Act, section 59: “(1) Every
parent of a
child ... is justified in using force by way of correction towards
the
child, if the force used is reasonable in the circumstances.”
3. Sweden, Finland, Norway, Austria, Cyprus, Denmark, Latvia,
Croatia,
Bulgaria, Israel, and Germany.
4. These treaty bodies included the Human Rights Committee;
the
Committee against Torture; the Committee on Economic, Social
and Cultural Rights; the Committee on the Rights of Persons
with
Disabilities; and the Committee on the Elimination of
Discrimination
against Women.
REFERENCES
Afifi, Tracy O, Natalie P. Mota, Patricia Dasiewicz, Harriet L.
MacMillan,
and Jitender Sareen. 2012. “Physical Punishment and Mental
Disorders: Results from a Nationally Representative US
Sample.”
Pediatrics, 130 (2): 184–92.
Ani, C. C. and S. Grantham-McGregor. 1998. “Family and
Personal
Characteristics of Aggressive Nigerian Boys: Differences from
and
Similarities with Western Findings.” Journal of Adolescent
Health,
23(5): 311–17.
Bower, Carol. 2015. Evaluation of the Global Initiative to End
All Corporal
Punishment of Children. London: Global Initiative.
Corporal Punishment: Legal Reform as a Route to Changing
Norms 269
Boyson, Rowan. 2002. Equal Protection for Children: An
Overview of the
Experience of Countries that Accord Children Full Protection
from Physical
Punishment. National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to
Children.
Bussman, K. D. 2009. The Effect of Banning Corporal
Punishment in Europe: A Five-
Nation Comparison, Halle-Wittenberg: Martin-Luther-
Universitat.
Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC). 1997. Concluding
Observations:
New Zealand. CRC/C/15/Add.71.
———. 2003. Concluding Observations: New Zealand.
CRC/C/15/Add.216.
———. 2007. General Comment No. 8 (2006), The Right of the
Child to
Protection from Corporal Punishment and Other Cruel and
Degrading
Treatment. CRC/C/GC/8.
Dobbs, T. 2005. Insights: Children and Young People Speak Out
about Family
Discipline. Wellington: Save the Children New Zealand.
Dodd, Chris. 2015. Telephone interview by Jo Becker,
November 25.
D’Souza, Amanda J., Marie Russell, Beth Wood, Louise Signal,
and Dawn
Elder. 2016. “Attitudes to Physical Punishment of Children Are
Changing.” Archives of Diseases in Childhood 101: 690–93.
Federal Ministry of Justice and Federal Ministry for Family
Affairs,
Senior Citizens, Women and Youth (Germany). 2003. “Violence
in
Upbringing: An Assessment after the Introduction of the Right
to a
Non-violent Upbringing.”
Gershoff, Elizabeth. 2002. “Corporal Punishment by Parents and
Associated Child Behaviors and Experiences: A Meta-analytic
and
Theoretical Review.” Psychological Bulletin, 128 (4): 539–79.
Gillespie, Diane and Molly Melching. 2010. “The
Transformative Power of
Democracy and Human Rights in Nonformal Education: The
Case
of Tostan.” Adult Education Quarterly 60: 477–98.
Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children.
n.d.
Website. Accessed January 2, 2018.
http://www.endcorporalpunish
ment.org.
———. 2015a. Legal Defences for Corporal Punishment of
Children Derived from
English Law. London: Global Initiative.
270 social research
———. 2015b. The Positive Impact of Prohibition of Corporal
Punishment on
Children’s Lives: Messages from Research. London: Global
Initiative.
———. 2015c. “States Actively Pursuing the Issue of Corporal
Punishment
of Children in the Universal Periodic Review: Analysis of
Sessions
1–22 (2008–2015).” Paper provided to the author by the Global
Initiative.
———. 2016. Corporal Punishment of Children: Review of
Research on its Impact
and Associations. Working paper. London: Global Initiative.
———. 2017. Prohibiting all Corporal Punishment of Children:
Answers to
Frequently Asked Questions, London: Global Initiative.
Gracia, E. and Herrero, J. 2008. “Is It Considered Violence?
The
Acceptability of Physical Punishment of Children in Europe.”
Journal of Marriage and Family 70: 210–17.
Harris Poll. 2013. “Four in Five Americans Believe Parents
Spanking
Their Children Is Sometimes Appropriate.” Accessed October
22, 2017. http://www.theharrispoll.com/health-and-
life/Four_in_
Five_Americans_Believe_Parents_Spanking_Their_Children_is_
Sometimes_Appropriate.html.
Holden, G. W., P. A. Williamson, and G. W. Holland. 2014.
“Eavesdropping
on the Family: A Pilot Investigation of Corporal Punishment in
the
Home.” Journal of Family Psychology 28 (3): 401–6.
International Labour Organization (ILO). 2017. Ending Child
Labour by 2025:
A Review of Policies and Programmes. Geneva: ILO.
Janson, S. 2000. Children and Abuse—Corporal Punishment and
Other Forms
of Child Abuse in Sweden at the End of the Second Millennium:
A Scientific
Report Prepared for the Committee on Child Abuse and Related
Issues.
Stockholm: Swedish Ministry of Health and Social Affairs.
Mackie, Gerry and John LeJeune. 2009. “Social Dynamics of
Abandonment
of Harmful Practices: A New Look at the Theory.” Innocenti
Working
Paper. Florence: UNICEF.
Newell, Peter. 2015. Interview by Jo Becker, November 10.
Pfeiffer, Christian. 2013. “Parallel Justice—Why Do We Need
Stronger
Support for the Victim in Society?” Address at the 18th German
Congress on Crime Prevention, April 23. Accessed August 16,
Corporal Punishment: Legal Reform as a Route to Changing
Norms 271
2017. http://www.praeventionstag.de/dokumentation/download.
cms?id=1471.
Shell-Duncan, Bettina, Ylva Hernlaund, Katherine Wander, and
Amadou
Moreau. 2013. “Legislating Change? Responses to
Criminalization
of Female Genital Cutting in Senegal.” Law and Society Review
47:
803–35.
Trifan, Tatiana Alina, Hakan Stattin, and Lauree Tilton-Weaver.
2014.
“Have Authoritarian Parenting Practices and Roles Changed in
the
Last 50 Years?” Journal of Marriage and Family 76: 744–61.
UNICEF. 2003. A League Table of Child Maltreatment Deaths
in Rich Nations.
Florence: Innocenti Research Center.
———. 2014. Hidden in Plain Sight: A Statistical Analysis of
Violence against
Children. New York: UNICEF.
US Department of Health and Human Services. 2017. “Child
Abuse and
Neglect Fatalities 2015: Statistics and Interventions.”
Washington,
DC: HHS.
Wood, Beth. 2011. “A Report from New Zealand: Four Years
Post Law
Change.” Paper presented to the Global Summit on Ending
Corporal Punishment of Children, Dallas Texas. Accessed
October
22, 2017.
http://epochnz.org.nz/images/stories/pdfs/NZ_4_year_%20
post_law_change.pdf.
———. 2015. Telephone interview by Jo Becker, November 29.
Wood, Beth, Ian Hassall, George Hook, and Robert Ludbrook.
2008.
Unreasonable Force: New Zealand’s Journey towards Banning
the Physical
Punishment of Children. Wellington: Save the Children New
Zealand.
Copyright of Social Research is the property of Johns Hopkins
University Press and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted
to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users
may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.
Sanchez 2
Annotated Bibliography Instructions:
Your Annotated Bibliography assignment should consist of two
academic articles that you plan to use in your argument/research
essay. The AB should feature the following information:
1. A creative, original title that coordinates with the title of
your argument/research essay
2. Your thesis statement
3. An accurate MLA citation for the research article(s) you
found
4. An annotation (paragraph) that includes the following
information (think APP+R):
A. What’s the article about?
Give its title, the author’s name, and the article’s
main idea.
B. What’s the point of the article?
Give a brief 2-3 sentence summary of the entire article. In this
section, think about and discuss the kind of evidence that the
author uses to support his or her idea.
C. What’s the proof?
Give at least one quote from the article (with intext
citation) that is relevant to
your essay’s argument/sub-arguments.
And explain how that quote will function in your
essay in one sentence.
D. Reflect on the article and its credibility.
Options (choose two to assess the article’s credibility):
- Does the author have degree(s) in the article’s
subject matter?
- Is the author associated with a reputable
university or college?
- Is the article fairly new or was it published
many years ago?
- How long is the article?
- How many sources does the article cite? A few
or very many?
Student Sanchez
Professor Gallego
English 1302- 73010
10 April 2017
The Simplicity of Punishment:
An Annotated Bibliography
Thesis statement: Although giving children no punishment at all
may be a simple option for the parent, guardian, or teacher, I
argue that if you punish a child through verbal, corporal, and
withdrawing privileges they will be more responsible and
mature.
Dhaem, Jeanne. "Responding to Minor Misbehavior through
Verbal and Nonverbal Responses." Beyond Behavior, vol. 21,
no. 3, Spring2012, pp. 29-34. EBSCOhost,
dcccd.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.
aspx? direct=true&db=a9h&AN=83304857&site=ehost-live.
The article “Responding to Minor Misbehavior Through Verbal
and Nonverbal Responses” was written by Jeanne Dhae. The
article’s main purpose is to inform and show data on the effects
of two levels of intervention that will help address students’
behavior. The article goes into detail about the method,
participants, and procedures used in the tests. It provides
example of what is considered level one interventions and level
two interventions. Then, it lists results after the hypothesis are
tested for six weeks. I will use the quote "I am working out the
problem with you. We are a team and you are responsible for
your own behavior” as an example of verbalized communication
with a child (4). This supports the sub-argument that verbal
punishment can lead to a child being more responsible and
mature. The article is about 5 pages in length, and the author is
a current assistant professor of special education at the William
Patterson University which leads me to believe this is a credible
source and could be used effectively in my essay.
Gregory K, Fritz. "Discipline: A Guide for Parents." Brown
University Child & Adolescent Behavior Letter, vol.30,
Nov2014 Supplement, pp. 1-2. EBSCOhost,
dcccd.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.
aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=98856607&site=ehost-live.
The article “Discipline: A Guide for Parents” was written by
Gregory K. Fritz, M.D. The article’s main purpose is to give
guidance to parents on how to discipline their children. The
article explains how delaying children’s privilege can be an
effective way for a parent to discipline their child. The article
gives examples on physical punishment, taking away privileges,
and even positive reinforcement. The article gives a great
example of delaying a privilege as a form of punishment: “if a
child breaks the rule about where he or she can go on his or her
bike, take away the bike for a few days” (2). I will use this
article for this essay to explain how guidelines can help a parent
discipline their children in a better way. The article was
published out of Brown University (an IV league school), and
the author has an M.D. and is a doctor, so the article seems to
be credible enough to use as a support piece of research for my
essay.
2
Option #1: Critical Thinking: Quality at A1 Hotels
A1 Hotels operates luxury hotels throughout the world.
Recently, motivated by some incidents that appeared in the
news, they have been concerned about the quality of service.
The company has been giving the following survey to its clients
after their stay:
1. How would you rate the quality of your room? Select one.
Good(G), Poor(P)
2. How would you rate the quality of your food? Select one.
Good(G), Poor(P)
3. How would you rate the quality of your service? Select one.
Good (G), Poor(P)
Any customer who answered “Poor” to at least one of the three
questions up above is considered to be “dissatisfied.”
Traditionally, 40% of customers have been dissatisfied.
A1 Hotels would like to study customer satisfaction. Therefore,
200 survey responses were recently chosen at random for
analysis. The complete data set is in the file named Hotels.
Managerial Report
Prepare a report (see Module folder) for A1 Hotels that
summarizes your assessment of customer satisfaction. Be sure
to include the following seven items in your report.
1. To summarize the data, compute the proportion of all clients
that
a. Answered “Poor” to room quality.
b. Answered “Poor” to food quality.
c. Answered “Poor” to service quality.
2. Develop the 92% confidence interval for the proportion of all
recent clients that were “dissatisfied.” What is the margin of
error? What are the lower (or left) and upper (or right)
endpoints of the confidence interval? Interpret your results.
3. Develop the 92% confidence interval for the proportion of all
recent clients who answered “Poor” to room quality. What is the
margin of error? What are the lower (or left) and upper (or
right) endpoints of the confidence interval? Interpret your
results.
4. Develop the 92% confidence interval for the proportion of all
recent clients who answered “Poor” to food quality. What is the
margin of error? What are the lower (or left) and upper (or
right) endpoints of the confidence interval? Interpret your
results.
5. Develop the 92% confidence interval for the proportion of all
recent clients who answered “Poor” to service quality. What is
the margin of error? What are the lower (or left) and upper (or
right) endpoints of the confidence interval? Interpret your
results.
6. Conduct a hypothesis test (using either the p-Value Approach
or the Critical Value Approach) to determine if the proportion
of all recent clients is more dissatisfied than the traditional
level of dissatisfaction. Use α = 0.08. Do not forget to include
the correctly worded hypotheses and show all the steps required
to conduct the hypothesis test.
7. What advice would you give to A1 Hotels based upon your
analysis of the data? What is the magnitude of the issue? How
can this study be improved?
Write a report that adheres to the Written Assignment
Requirements under the heading “Expectations for CSU-Global
Written Assignments” found in the CSU-Global Guide to
Writing and APA Requirements (Links to an external site.)Links
to an external site.. As with all written assignments at CSU-
Global, you should have in-text citations and a reference page.
An example paper is provided in the MTH410 Guide to Writing
with Statistics. (link provided in the Modules tab)
Submit your Excel file in addition to your report.
Requirements:
1. Paper must be written in third person.
2. Your paper should be four to five pages in length (counting
the title page and references page) and cite and integrate at least
one credible outside source. The CSU-Global Library (Links to
an external site.)Links to an external site.is a great place to find
resources.
3. Include a title page, introduction, body, conclusion, and a
reference page.
4. The introduction should describe or summarize the topic or
problem. It might discuss the importance of the topic or how it
affects you or society as a whole, or it might discuss or describe
the unique terminology associated with the topic.
5. The body of your paper should answer the questions posed in
the problem. Explain how you approached and answered the
question or solved the problem, and, for each question, show all
steps involved. Be sure this is in paragraph format, not
numbered answers like a homework assignment.
6. The conclusion should summarize your thoughts about what
you have determined from the data and your analysis, often with
a broader personal or societal perspective in mind. Nothing new
should be introduced in the conclusion that was not previously
discussed in the body paragraphs.
7. Include any tables of data or calculations, calculated values,
and/or graphs associated with this problem in the body of your
assignment.
8. APA Format

More Related Content

Similar to DataClientRoom QualityFood QualityService Quality1GPG2GGG3GGG4GPG5.docx

At the End of Their Rope: A Research Note on the Influence of Parental Low Se...
At the End of Their Rope: A Research Note on the Influence of Parental Low Se...At the End of Their Rope: A Research Note on the Influence of Parental Low Se...
At the End of Their Rope: A Research Note on the Influence of Parental Low Se...
George Connolly
 
Problem Evaluation Paper 1Problem Evaluation Paper .docx
Problem Evaluation Paper 1Problem Evaluation Paper    .docxProblem Evaluation Paper 1Problem Evaluation Paper    .docx
Problem Evaluation Paper 1Problem Evaluation Paper .docx
sleeperharwell
 
Running head THE RAMAYANA AND SEI SHONAGON .docx
Running head THE RAMAYANA AND SEI SHONAGON                       .docxRunning head THE RAMAYANA AND SEI SHONAGON                       .docx
Running head THE RAMAYANA AND SEI SHONAGON .docx
agnesdcarey33086
 
Health Program Review Research
Health Program Review ResearchHealth Program Review Research
Health Program Review ResearchChristian Monsalud
 
2Source Elrod, P., & R. Scott Ryder (2021). Juvenile justice.docx
2Source Elrod, P., & R. Scott Ryder (2021). Juvenile justice.docx2Source Elrod, P., & R. Scott Ryder (2021). Juvenile justice.docx
2Source Elrod, P., & R. Scott Ryder (2021). Juvenile justice.docx
BHANU281672
 
2Source Elrod, P., & R. Scott Ryder (2021). Juvenile justice.docx
2Source Elrod, P., & R. Scott Ryder (2021). Juvenile justice.docx2Source Elrod, P., & R. Scott Ryder (2021). Juvenile justice.docx
2Source Elrod, P., & R. Scott Ryder (2021). Juvenile justice.docx
lorainedeserre
 
Physical punishment and psychological treatment on students'
Physical punishment and psychological treatment on students'Physical punishment and psychological treatment on students'
Physical punishment and psychological treatment on students'
Alexander Decker
 
Perception of Child Abuse 2COLLEGE STUDENTS’ AND PROFESSIO.docx
Perception of Child Abuse     2COLLEGE STUDENTS’ AND PROFESSIO.docxPerception of Child Abuse     2COLLEGE STUDENTS’ AND PROFESSIO.docx
Perception of Child Abuse 2COLLEGE STUDENTS’ AND PROFESSIO.docx
herbertwilson5999
 

Similar to DataClientRoom QualityFood QualityService Quality1GPG2GGG3GGG4GPG5.docx (9)

At the End of Their Rope: A Research Note on the Influence of Parental Low Se...
At the End of Their Rope: A Research Note on the Influence of Parental Low Se...At the End of Their Rope: A Research Note on the Influence of Parental Low Se...
At the End of Their Rope: A Research Note on the Influence of Parental Low Se...
 
Problem Evaluation Paper 1Problem Evaluation Paper .docx
Problem Evaluation Paper 1Problem Evaluation Paper    .docxProblem Evaluation Paper 1Problem Evaluation Paper    .docx
Problem Evaluation Paper 1Problem Evaluation Paper .docx
 
Severe Child Physical Abuse acpo journal.final
Severe Child Physical Abuse acpo journal.finalSevere Child Physical Abuse acpo journal.final
Severe Child Physical Abuse acpo journal.final
 
Running head THE RAMAYANA AND SEI SHONAGON .docx
Running head THE RAMAYANA AND SEI SHONAGON                       .docxRunning head THE RAMAYANA AND SEI SHONAGON                       .docx
Running head THE RAMAYANA AND SEI SHONAGON .docx
 
Health Program Review Research
Health Program Review ResearchHealth Program Review Research
Health Program Review Research
 
2Source Elrod, P., & R. Scott Ryder (2021). Juvenile justice.docx
2Source Elrod, P., & R. Scott Ryder (2021). Juvenile justice.docx2Source Elrod, P., & R. Scott Ryder (2021). Juvenile justice.docx
2Source Elrod, P., & R. Scott Ryder (2021). Juvenile justice.docx
 
2Source Elrod, P., & R. Scott Ryder (2021). Juvenile justice.docx
2Source Elrod, P., & R. Scott Ryder (2021). Juvenile justice.docx2Source Elrod, P., & R. Scott Ryder (2021). Juvenile justice.docx
2Source Elrod, P., & R. Scott Ryder (2021). Juvenile justice.docx
 
Physical punishment and psychological treatment on students'
Physical punishment and psychological treatment on students'Physical punishment and psychological treatment on students'
Physical punishment and psychological treatment on students'
 
Perception of Child Abuse 2COLLEGE STUDENTS’ AND PROFESSIO.docx
Perception of Child Abuse     2COLLEGE STUDENTS’ AND PROFESSIO.docxPerception of Child Abuse     2COLLEGE STUDENTS’ AND PROFESSIO.docx
Perception of Child Abuse 2COLLEGE STUDENTS’ AND PROFESSIO.docx
 

More from whittemorelucilla

Database reports provide us with the ability to further analyze ou.docx
Database reports provide us with the ability to further analyze ou.docxDatabase reports provide us with the ability to further analyze ou.docx
Database reports provide us with the ability to further analyze ou.docx
whittemorelucilla
 
DataInformationKnowledge1.  Discuss the relationship between.docx
DataInformationKnowledge1.  Discuss the relationship between.docxDataInformationKnowledge1.  Discuss the relationship between.docx
DataInformationKnowledge1.  Discuss the relationship between.docx
whittemorelucilla
 
DataHole 12 Score6757555455555455575775655565656555655656556566643.docx
DataHole 12 Score6757555455555455575775655565656555655656556566643.docxDataHole 12 Score6757555455555455575775655565656555655656556566643.docx
DataHole 12 Score6757555455555455575775655565656555655656556566643.docx
whittemorelucilla
 
DataDestination PalletsTotal CasesCases redCases whiteCases organi.docx
DataDestination PalletsTotal CasesCases redCases whiteCases organi.docxDataDestination PalletsTotal CasesCases redCases whiteCases organi.docx
DataDestination PalletsTotal CasesCases redCases whiteCases organi.docx
whittemorelucilla
 
DataIllinois Tool WorksConsolidated Statement of Income($ in milli.docx
DataIllinois Tool WorksConsolidated Statement of Income($ in milli.docxDataIllinois Tool WorksConsolidated Statement of Income($ in milli.docx
DataIllinois Tool WorksConsolidated Statement of Income($ in milli.docx
whittemorelucilla
 
DataIDSalaryCompa-ratioMidpoint AgePerformance RatingServiceGender.docx
DataIDSalaryCompa-ratioMidpoint AgePerformance RatingServiceGender.docxDataIDSalaryCompa-ratioMidpoint AgePerformance RatingServiceGender.docx
DataIDSalaryCompa-ratioMidpoint AgePerformance RatingServiceGender.docx
whittemorelucilla
 
DataCity1997 Median Price1997 Change1998 Forecast1993-98 Annualize.docx
DataCity1997 Median Price1997 Change1998 Forecast1993-98 Annualize.docxDataCity1997 Median Price1997 Change1998 Forecast1993-98 Annualize.docx
DataCity1997 Median Price1997 Change1998 Forecast1993-98 Annualize.docx
whittemorelucilla
 
Database Project CharterBusiness CaseKhalia HartUnive.docx
Database Project CharterBusiness CaseKhalia HartUnive.docxDatabase Project CharterBusiness CaseKhalia HartUnive.docx
Database Project CharterBusiness CaseKhalia HartUnive.docx
whittemorelucilla
 
Databases selected Multiple databases...Full Text (1223 .docx
Databases selected Multiple databases...Full Text (1223  .docxDatabases selected Multiple databases...Full Text (1223  .docx
Databases selected Multiple databases...Full Text (1223 .docx
whittemorelucilla
 
Database SystemsDesign, Implementation, and ManagementCo.docx
Database SystemsDesign, Implementation, and ManagementCo.docxDatabase SystemsDesign, Implementation, and ManagementCo.docx
Database SystemsDesign, Implementation, and ManagementCo.docx
whittemorelucilla
 
DATABASE SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT & IMPLEMENTATION PLAN1DATABASE SYS.docx
DATABASE SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT & IMPLEMENTATION PLAN1DATABASE SYS.docxDATABASE SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT & IMPLEMENTATION PLAN1DATABASE SYS.docx
DATABASE SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT & IMPLEMENTATION PLAN1DATABASE SYS.docx
whittemorelucilla
 
Database Security Assessment Transcript You are a contracting office.docx
Database Security Assessment Transcript You are a contracting office.docxDatabase Security Assessment Transcript You are a contracting office.docx
Database Security Assessment Transcript You are a contracting office.docx
whittemorelucilla
 
Data.docx
Data.docxData.docx
Database Design Mid Term ExamSpring 2020Name ________________.docx
Database Design Mid Term ExamSpring 2020Name ________________.docxDatabase Design Mid Term ExamSpring 2020Name ________________.docx
Database Design Mid Term ExamSpring 2020Name ________________.docx
whittemorelucilla
 
Database Justification MemoCreate a 1-page memo for the .docx
Database Justification MemoCreate a 1-page memo for the .docxDatabase Justification MemoCreate a 1-page memo for the .docx
Database Justification MemoCreate a 1-page memo for the .docx
whittemorelucilla
 
Database Concept Maphttpwikieducator.orgCCNCCCN.docx
Database Concept Maphttpwikieducator.orgCCNCCCN.docxDatabase Concept Maphttpwikieducator.orgCCNCCCN.docx
Database Concept Maphttpwikieducator.orgCCNCCCN.docx
whittemorelucilla
 
Database Dump Script(Details of project in file)Mac1) O.docx
Database Dump Script(Details of project in file)Mac1) O.docxDatabase Dump Script(Details of project in file)Mac1) O.docx
Database Dump Script(Details of project in file)Mac1) O.docx
whittemorelucilla
 
Database Design 1. What is a data model A. method of sto.docx
Database Design 1.  What is a data model A. method of sto.docxDatabase Design 1.  What is a data model A. method of sto.docx
Database Design 1. What is a data model A. method of sto.docx
whittemorelucilla
 
DataAGEGENDERETHNICMAJORSEMHOUSEGPAHRSNEWSPAPTVHRSSLEEPWEIGHTHEIGH.docx
DataAGEGENDERETHNICMAJORSEMHOUSEGPAHRSNEWSPAPTVHRSSLEEPWEIGHTHEIGH.docxDataAGEGENDERETHNICMAJORSEMHOUSEGPAHRSNEWSPAPTVHRSSLEEPWEIGHTHEIGH.docx
DataAGEGENDERETHNICMAJORSEMHOUSEGPAHRSNEWSPAPTVHRSSLEEPWEIGHTHEIGH.docx
whittemorelucilla
 
Database AdministrationObjectivesDiscus.docx
Database AdministrationObjectivesDiscus.docxDatabase AdministrationObjectivesDiscus.docx
Database AdministrationObjectivesDiscus.docx
whittemorelucilla
 

More from whittemorelucilla (20)

Database reports provide us with the ability to further analyze ou.docx
Database reports provide us with the ability to further analyze ou.docxDatabase reports provide us with the ability to further analyze ou.docx
Database reports provide us with the ability to further analyze ou.docx
 
DataInformationKnowledge1.  Discuss the relationship between.docx
DataInformationKnowledge1.  Discuss the relationship between.docxDataInformationKnowledge1.  Discuss the relationship between.docx
DataInformationKnowledge1.  Discuss the relationship between.docx
 
DataHole 12 Score6757555455555455575775655565656555655656556566643.docx
DataHole 12 Score6757555455555455575775655565656555655656556566643.docxDataHole 12 Score6757555455555455575775655565656555655656556566643.docx
DataHole 12 Score6757555455555455575775655565656555655656556566643.docx
 
DataDestination PalletsTotal CasesCases redCases whiteCases organi.docx
DataDestination PalletsTotal CasesCases redCases whiteCases organi.docxDataDestination PalletsTotal CasesCases redCases whiteCases organi.docx
DataDestination PalletsTotal CasesCases redCases whiteCases organi.docx
 
DataIllinois Tool WorksConsolidated Statement of Income($ in milli.docx
DataIllinois Tool WorksConsolidated Statement of Income($ in milli.docxDataIllinois Tool WorksConsolidated Statement of Income($ in milli.docx
DataIllinois Tool WorksConsolidated Statement of Income($ in milli.docx
 
DataIDSalaryCompa-ratioMidpoint AgePerformance RatingServiceGender.docx
DataIDSalaryCompa-ratioMidpoint AgePerformance RatingServiceGender.docxDataIDSalaryCompa-ratioMidpoint AgePerformance RatingServiceGender.docx
DataIDSalaryCompa-ratioMidpoint AgePerformance RatingServiceGender.docx
 
DataCity1997 Median Price1997 Change1998 Forecast1993-98 Annualize.docx
DataCity1997 Median Price1997 Change1998 Forecast1993-98 Annualize.docxDataCity1997 Median Price1997 Change1998 Forecast1993-98 Annualize.docx
DataCity1997 Median Price1997 Change1998 Forecast1993-98 Annualize.docx
 
Database Project CharterBusiness CaseKhalia HartUnive.docx
Database Project CharterBusiness CaseKhalia HartUnive.docxDatabase Project CharterBusiness CaseKhalia HartUnive.docx
Database Project CharterBusiness CaseKhalia HartUnive.docx
 
Databases selected Multiple databases...Full Text (1223 .docx
Databases selected Multiple databases...Full Text (1223  .docxDatabases selected Multiple databases...Full Text (1223  .docx
Databases selected Multiple databases...Full Text (1223 .docx
 
Database SystemsDesign, Implementation, and ManagementCo.docx
Database SystemsDesign, Implementation, and ManagementCo.docxDatabase SystemsDesign, Implementation, and ManagementCo.docx
Database SystemsDesign, Implementation, and ManagementCo.docx
 
DATABASE SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT & IMPLEMENTATION PLAN1DATABASE SYS.docx
DATABASE SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT & IMPLEMENTATION PLAN1DATABASE SYS.docxDATABASE SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT & IMPLEMENTATION PLAN1DATABASE SYS.docx
DATABASE SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT & IMPLEMENTATION PLAN1DATABASE SYS.docx
 
Database Security Assessment Transcript You are a contracting office.docx
Database Security Assessment Transcript You are a contracting office.docxDatabase Security Assessment Transcript You are a contracting office.docx
Database Security Assessment Transcript You are a contracting office.docx
 
Data.docx
Data.docxData.docx
Data.docx
 
Database Design Mid Term ExamSpring 2020Name ________________.docx
Database Design Mid Term ExamSpring 2020Name ________________.docxDatabase Design Mid Term ExamSpring 2020Name ________________.docx
Database Design Mid Term ExamSpring 2020Name ________________.docx
 
Database Justification MemoCreate a 1-page memo for the .docx
Database Justification MemoCreate a 1-page memo for the .docxDatabase Justification MemoCreate a 1-page memo for the .docx
Database Justification MemoCreate a 1-page memo for the .docx
 
Database Concept Maphttpwikieducator.orgCCNCCCN.docx
Database Concept Maphttpwikieducator.orgCCNCCCN.docxDatabase Concept Maphttpwikieducator.orgCCNCCCN.docx
Database Concept Maphttpwikieducator.orgCCNCCCN.docx
 
Database Dump Script(Details of project in file)Mac1) O.docx
Database Dump Script(Details of project in file)Mac1) O.docxDatabase Dump Script(Details of project in file)Mac1) O.docx
Database Dump Script(Details of project in file)Mac1) O.docx
 
Database Design 1. What is a data model A. method of sto.docx
Database Design 1.  What is a data model A. method of sto.docxDatabase Design 1.  What is a data model A. method of sto.docx
Database Design 1. What is a data model A. method of sto.docx
 
DataAGEGENDERETHNICMAJORSEMHOUSEGPAHRSNEWSPAPTVHRSSLEEPWEIGHTHEIGH.docx
DataAGEGENDERETHNICMAJORSEMHOUSEGPAHRSNEWSPAPTVHRSSLEEPWEIGHTHEIGH.docxDataAGEGENDERETHNICMAJORSEMHOUSEGPAHRSNEWSPAPTVHRSSLEEPWEIGHTHEIGH.docx
DataAGEGENDERETHNICMAJORSEMHOUSEGPAHRSNEWSPAPTVHRSSLEEPWEIGHTHEIGH.docx
 
Database AdministrationObjectivesDiscus.docx
Database AdministrationObjectivesDiscus.docxDatabase AdministrationObjectivesDiscus.docx
Database AdministrationObjectivesDiscus.docx
 

Recently uploaded

Sectors of the Indian Economy - Class 10 Study Notes pdf
Sectors of the Indian Economy - Class 10 Study Notes pdfSectors of the Indian Economy - Class 10 Study Notes pdf
Sectors of the Indian Economy - Class 10 Study Notes pdf
Vivekanand Anglo Vedic Academy
 
Unit 2- Research Aptitude (UGC NET Paper I).pdf
Unit 2- Research Aptitude (UGC NET Paper I).pdfUnit 2- Research Aptitude (UGC NET Paper I).pdf
Unit 2- Research Aptitude (UGC NET Paper I).pdf
Thiyagu K
 
Palestine last event orientationfvgnh .pptx
Palestine last event orientationfvgnh .pptxPalestine last event orientationfvgnh .pptx
Palestine last event orientationfvgnh .pptx
RaedMohamed3
 
The French Revolution Class 9 Study Material pdf free download
The French Revolution Class 9 Study Material pdf free downloadThe French Revolution Class 9 Study Material pdf free download
The French Revolution Class 9 Study Material pdf free download
Vivekanand Anglo Vedic Academy
 
The geography of Taylor Swift - some ideas
The geography of Taylor Swift - some ideasThe geography of Taylor Swift - some ideas
The geography of Taylor Swift - some ideas
GeoBlogs
 
Supporting (UKRI) OA monographs at Salford.pptx
Supporting (UKRI) OA monographs at Salford.pptxSupporting (UKRI) OA monographs at Salford.pptx
Supporting (UKRI) OA monographs at Salford.pptx
Jisc
 
The Roman Empire A Historical Colossus.pdf
The Roman Empire A Historical Colossus.pdfThe Roman Empire A Historical Colossus.pdf
The Roman Empire A Historical Colossus.pdf
kaushalkr1407
 
Template Jadual Bertugas Kelas (Boleh Edit)
Template Jadual Bertugas Kelas (Boleh Edit)Template Jadual Bertugas Kelas (Boleh Edit)
Template Jadual Bertugas Kelas (Boleh Edit)
rosedainty
 
Operation Blue Star - Saka Neela Tara
Operation Blue Star   -  Saka Neela TaraOperation Blue Star   -  Saka Neela Tara
Operation Blue Star - Saka Neela Tara
Balvir Singh
 
Ethnobotany and Ethnopharmacology ......
Ethnobotany and Ethnopharmacology ......Ethnobotany and Ethnopharmacology ......
Ethnobotany and Ethnopharmacology ......
Ashokrao Mane college of Pharmacy Peth-Vadgaon
 
How to Split Bills in the Odoo 17 POS Module
How to Split Bills in the Odoo 17 POS ModuleHow to Split Bills in the Odoo 17 POS Module
How to Split Bills in the Odoo 17 POS Module
Celine George
 
Cambridge International AS A Level Biology Coursebook - EBook (MaryFosbery J...
Cambridge International AS  A Level Biology Coursebook - EBook (MaryFosbery J...Cambridge International AS  A Level Biology Coursebook - EBook (MaryFosbery J...
Cambridge International AS A Level Biology Coursebook - EBook (MaryFosbery J...
AzmatAli747758
 
Students, digital devices and success - Andreas Schleicher - 27 May 2024..pptx
Students, digital devices and success - Andreas Schleicher - 27 May 2024..pptxStudents, digital devices and success - Andreas Schleicher - 27 May 2024..pptx
Students, digital devices and success - Andreas Schleicher - 27 May 2024..pptx
EduSkills OECD
 
TESDA TM1 REVIEWER FOR NATIONAL ASSESSMENT WRITTEN AND ORAL QUESTIONS WITH A...
TESDA TM1 REVIEWER  FOR NATIONAL ASSESSMENT WRITTEN AND ORAL QUESTIONS WITH A...TESDA TM1 REVIEWER  FOR NATIONAL ASSESSMENT WRITTEN AND ORAL QUESTIONS WITH A...
TESDA TM1 REVIEWER FOR NATIONAL ASSESSMENT WRITTEN AND ORAL QUESTIONS WITH A...
EugeneSaldivar
 
Thesis Statement for students diagnonsed withADHD.ppt
Thesis Statement for students diagnonsed withADHD.pptThesis Statement for students diagnonsed withADHD.ppt
Thesis Statement for students diagnonsed withADHD.ppt
EverAndrsGuerraGuerr
 
Polish students' mobility in the Czech Republic
Polish students' mobility in the Czech RepublicPolish students' mobility in the Czech Republic
Polish students' mobility in the Czech Republic
Anna Sz.
 
Unit 8 - Information and Communication Technology (Paper I).pdf
Unit 8 - Information and Communication Technology (Paper I).pdfUnit 8 - Information and Communication Technology (Paper I).pdf
Unit 8 - Information and Communication Technology (Paper I).pdf
Thiyagu K
 
2024.06.01 Introducing a competency framework for languag learning materials ...
2024.06.01 Introducing a competency framework for languag learning materials ...2024.06.01 Introducing a competency framework for languag learning materials ...
2024.06.01 Introducing a competency framework for languag learning materials ...
Sandy Millin
 
Home assignment II on Spectroscopy 2024 Answers.pdf
Home assignment II on Spectroscopy 2024 Answers.pdfHome assignment II on Spectroscopy 2024 Answers.pdf
Home assignment II on Spectroscopy 2024 Answers.pdf
Tamralipta Mahavidyalaya
 
Sha'Carri Richardson Presentation 202345
Sha'Carri Richardson Presentation 202345Sha'Carri Richardson Presentation 202345
Sha'Carri Richardson Presentation 202345
beazzy04
 

Recently uploaded (20)

Sectors of the Indian Economy - Class 10 Study Notes pdf
Sectors of the Indian Economy - Class 10 Study Notes pdfSectors of the Indian Economy - Class 10 Study Notes pdf
Sectors of the Indian Economy - Class 10 Study Notes pdf
 
Unit 2- Research Aptitude (UGC NET Paper I).pdf
Unit 2- Research Aptitude (UGC NET Paper I).pdfUnit 2- Research Aptitude (UGC NET Paper I).pdf
Unit 2- Research Aptitude (UGC NET Paper I).pdf
 
Palestine last event orientationfvgnh .pptx
Palestine last event orientationfvgnh .pptxPalestine last event orientationfvgnh .pptx
Palestine last event orientationfvgnh .pptx
 
The French Revolution Class 9 Study Material pdf free download
The French Revolution Class 9 Study Material pdf free downloadThe French Revolution Class 9 Study Material pdf free download
The French Revolution Class 9 Study Material pdf free download
 
The geography of Taylor Swift - some ideas
The geography of Taylor Swift - some ideasThe geography of Taylor Swift - some ideas
The geography of Taylor Swift - some ideas
 
Supporting (UKRI) OA monographs at Salford.pptx
Supporting (UKRI) OA monographs at Salford.pptxSupporting (UKRI) OA monographs at Salford.pptx
Supporting (UKRI) OA monographs at Salford.pptx
 
The Roman Empire A Historical Colossus.pdf
The Roman Empire A Historical Colossus.pdfThe Roman Empire A Historical Colossus.pdf
The Roman Empire A Historical Colossus.pdf
 
Template Jadual Bertugas Kelas (Boleh Edit)
Template Jadual Bertugas Kelas (Boleh Edit)Template Jadual Bertugas Kelas (Boleh Edit)
Template Jadual Bertugas Kelas (Boleh Edit)
 
Operation Blue Star - Saka Neela Tara
Operation Blue Star   -  Saka Neela TaraOperation Blue Star   -  Saka Neela Tara
Operation Blue Star - Saka Neela Tara
 
Ethnobotany and Ethnopharmacology ......
Ethnobotany and Ethnopharmacology ......Ethnobotany and Ethnopharmacology ......
Ethnobotany and Ethnopharmacology ......
 
How to Split Bills in the Odoo 17 POS Module
How to Split Bills in the Odoo 17 POS ModuleHow to Split Bills in the Odoo 17 POS Module
How to Split Bills in the Odoo 17 POS Module
 
Cambridge International AS A Level Biology Coursebook - EBook (MaryFosbery J...
Cambridge International AS  A Level Biology Coursebook - EBook (MaryFosbery J...Cambridge International AS  A Level Biology Coursebook - EBook (MaryFosbery J...
Cambridge International AS A Level Biology Coursebook - EBook (MaryFosbery J...
 
Students, digital devices and success - Andreas Schleicher - 27 May 2024..pptx
Students, digital devices and success - Andreas Schleicher - 27 May 2024..pptxStudents, digital devices and success - Andreas Schleicher - 27 May 2024..pptx
Students, digital devices and success - Andreas Schleicher - 27 May 2024..pptx
 
TESDA TM1 REVIEWER FOR NATIONAL ASSESSMENT WRITTEN AND ORAL QUESTIONS WITH A...
TESDA TM1 REVIEWER  FOR NATIONAL ASSESSMENT WRITTEN AND ORAL QUESTIONS WITH A...TESDA TM1 REVIEWER  FOR NATIONAL ASSESSMENT WRITTEN AND ORAL QUESTIONS WITH A...
TESDA TM1 REVIEWER FOR NATIONAL ASSESSMENT WRITTEN AND ORAL QUESTIONS WITH A...
 
Thesis Statement for students diagnonsed withADHD.ppt
Thesis Statement for students diagnonsed withADHD.pptThesis Statement for students diagnonsed withADHD.ppt
Thesis Statement for students diagnonsed withADHD.ppt
 
Polish students' mobility in the Czech Republic
Polish students' mobility in the Czech RepublicPolish students' mobility in the Czech Republic
Polish students' mobility in the Czech Republic
 
Unit 8 - Information and Communication Technology (Paper I).pdf
Unit 8 - Information and Communication Technology (Paper I).pdfUnit 8 - Information and Communication Technology (Paper I).pdf
Unit 8 - Information and Communication Technology (Paper I).pdf
 
2024.06.01 Introducing a competency framework for languag learning materials ...
2024.06.01 Introducing a competency framework for languag learning materials ...2024.06.01 Introducing a competency framework for languag learning materials ...
2024.06.01 Introducing a competency framework for languag learning materials ...
 
Home assignment II on Spectroscopy 2024 Answers.pdf
Home assignment II on Spectroscopy 2024 Answers.pdfHome assignment II on Spectroscopy 2024 Answers.pdf
Home assignment II on Spectroscopy 2024 Answers.pdf
 
Sha'Carri Richardson Presentation 202345
Sha'Carri Richardson Presentation 202345Sha'Carri Richardson Presentation 202345
Sha'Carri Richardson Presentation 202345
 

DataClientRoom QualityFood QualityService Quality1GPG2GGG3GGG4GPG5.docx

  • 1. DataClientRoom QualityFood QualityService Quality1GPG2GGG3GGG4GPG5GGG6PGG7GGG8GPG9PGP10 GGG11GGG12PPP13GGG14GGG15GGP16PPP17GGG18GGG1 9PGP20PGP21GGG22PGP23PPP24GGG25GGG26GPP27GPG28 GGG29PPP30PGG31GGG32PPP33PGG34PGP35GGG36PGP37 GGG38PGP39GGG40GPG41GPG42GGG43GGP44PGP45PGG4 6PGG47GPP48GGG49GPP50PPP51GGG52PPG53PPP54GGG55 GGG56GGG57GGP58GGG59GPP60PGP61GPP62GGG63GPG6 4GGG65PPP66GPG67GGG68GGG69GGG70GGP71GGG72GG G73GGG74GGP75GGP76PPP77GGG78GGG79GGP80GGG81G GG82GGG83PGG84GGG85GGG86GPP87GGG88PPP89GGG90 PGP91GGG92GGG93GPG94GGG95GPP96PPP97PPP98GPG99 PGG100PPP101GPP102PGP103PPG104GPG105GPG106GGG10 7PGG108PPP109GGG110GGG111GGG112GGG113GGG114GG G115GGG116GGG117GGG118PPP119PPG120GGG121GGG12 2PPP123GGG124GGG125GGG126GGG127GGG128GGG129PP P130GGG131GGP132PPP133GGG134GGG135GGG136GGG13 7GGG138GPG139PPP140GGG141PPP142GGG143GGG144PPP 145GGG146GGG147GGG148GGG149GGG150GGP151GGG152 GGG153GGG154GGG155GGG156GGG157PPP158GPG159GG G160GGG161GGG162PPG163GGP164GGG165PGP166GPG167 GGP168PGG169GGG170GGP171GGG172PPP173GGG174GGG 175GPG176GGG177GGG178PPG179GGG180GGP181GGG182 GGG183GGG184GGG185GPP186GGG187GGG188GGG189GG G190GGG191GGG192GGG193GGG194GGG195GGP196GGG1 97GGG198GGG199GPP200GGG Sheet1Room QualityFood QualityService QualityMeanMedianRangeSTDCoefficientVariationComparision Corporal Punishment: Legal Reform as a Route to Changing Norms Jo Becker
  • 2. Social Research: An International Quarterly, Volume 85, Number 1, Spring 2018, pp. 255-271 (Article) Published by Johns Hopkins University Press For additional information about this article Access provided by Ebsco Publishing (8 May 2018 07:55 GMT) https://muse.jhu.edu/article/692752 https://muse.jhu.edu/article/692752 social research Vol. 85 : No. 1 : Spring 2018 255 Jo Becker Corporal Punishment: Legal Reform as a Route to Changing Norms THE TERM “HARMFUL TRADITIONAL PRACTICES” TYPICALLY BRINGS TO MIND CHILD marriage, female genital mutilation/cutting, and so-called “honor kill- ings,” but rarely corporal punishment. Yet corporal punishment is arguably the most pervasive harmful traditional practice children expe- rience today. In nearly every part of the world, parents use
  • 3. physical punishment to “discipline” their children. Such corporal punishment typically takes the form of hitting a child with a bare hand or an object such as a stick or paddle. A 2014 survey found that four of every five children between the ages of two and 14—an estimated 1 billion glob- ally—experience physical punishment in their home on a regular basis (UNICEF 2014, 96). The practice of corporal punishment is rooted in both cultural norms and religious belief. Parents often believe that corporal pun- ishment will teach children good behavior. They hit their children be- cause it is socially accepted and because they themselves often were hit growing up. Some religious teachings appear to justify the prac- tice.1 The adage “spare the rod, spoil the child,” rooted in the Old Tes-
  • 4. tament Book of Proverbs, suggests not only that corporal punishment of children is permitted, but also that it is expected of good parents. Influenced by English common law, during the twentieth century, more than 70 countries enshrined the rights of parents to “reason- able chastisement” in their legal codes (Global Initiative 2015a). 256 social research Social norm theory suggests that ending harmful practices depends on changing collective beliefs about the acceptability and efficacy of the practice, and that legal reform is of limited utility, or even counterproductive (Mackie and LeJeune 2009). Experience around female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C), for example, has found that extended local dialogue about community values can lead
  • 5. to voluntary abandonment of FGM/C (Gillespie and Melching 2010). Legal reform as a strategy to end FGM/C has generally been ineffective or simply driven the practice underground. As long as FGM/C remains the norm for most families, individual parents will continue to have their daughters cut, perceiving the social inclusion that FGM/C offers to outweigh the risks of potential prosecution. Some scholars find that only when attitude change is already underway is legal reform effective in reinforcing new norms (Shell-Duncan et al. 2103). In contrast to the experience of challenging other harmful traditional practices, this paper argues that legal reform, when ac- companied by public education, can be an effective strategy to end the corporal punishment of children. Evidence from multiple coun- tries has found that when corporal punishment is prohibited by law,
  • 6. changes in attitudes and practices follow. Nearly all the countries that have prohibited corporal punishment have done so ahead of public opinion (Global Initiative 2017, 12). Yet change in practice and atti- tudes following legal reform can be both swift and dramatic. THE HARMS OF CORPORAL PUNISHMENT Recent research finds that the effects of corporal punishment on chil- dren are overwhelmingly negative. Studies have found that children who experience corporal punishment are more aggressive towards others, and more likely to resort to violence to respond to conflict (Ani and Grantham-McGregor 1998). They are more likely to engage in delinquent or antisocial behavior, including bullying, lying, cheating, truancy, and criminal activity. A German study of more than 45,000 ninth graders, for example, found that children who were subjected
  • 7. to severe corporal punishment were five times more likely to become Corporal Punishment: Legal Reform as a Route to Changing Norms 257 violent offenders (Pfeiffer 2013, 97). Corporal punishment may damage children’s mental health, leading to greater anxiety, depres- sion, low self-esteem, and hopelessness. It is also linked to lower IQ scores and poor school performance (Gershoff 2002). The damage extends well into adulthood: adults who experienced corporal punish- ment as children are more likely to engage in aggression and criminal behavior, as well as domestic violence towards an intimate partner or child, and experience higher rates of depression, alcoholism, and suicidal tendencies (Afifi et al. 2012). A meta-analysis of more than 250 published studies examin-
  • 8. ing corporal punishment and its impacts found that not a single one demonstrated any benefits to the practice (Global Initiative 2016). Contrary to popular belief, corporal punishment is not effective as a disciplinary measure. One US study, for example, found that when children between the ages of two and five were spanked by their moth- ers, 73 percent of the children repeated the same behavior for which they had been hit within the next 10 minutes (Holden, Williamson, and Holland 2014). Corporal punishment also damages parent- child relationships; children report that after being physically punished, they feel hurt, angry, and frightened of their parents (Dobbs 2005). When parents physically punish their children, they are often angry, making it easy for the level of punishment to escalate beyond what was intended and cause serious injury, or at times even
  • 9. death. Shaking babies or toddlers, for example, can lead to permanent brain injuries. In the United States alone, over 700 children die each year due to physical abuse by parents (US Department of Health and Hu- man Services 2017). THE HUMAN RIGHTS IMPERATIVE Regardless of the scientific evidence of harm, corporal punishment violates the human rights of children. Children, like adults, have a right to respect for their dignity and physical integrity and to equal protection under the law. Article 19 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child obligates governments to take all appropriate measures “to 258 social research protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury
  • 10. or abuse … while in the care of parent(s), legal guardian(s) or any other person who has the care of that child.” The Committee on the Rights of the Child, which monitors compliance with the Convention, has stated that this obligation “does not leave room for any level of legalized violence against children. Corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms of punishment are forms of violence and States must take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to eliminate them” (CRC 2007). The rationale for legal reform to end corporal punishment of children is based on several key arguments. One is that children are entitled to equal protection under the law, including in the home. If hitting an adult is considered assault, hitting a child should not be legally permissible either. A second is that as long as corporal punish-
  • 11. ment is legal, parents and other caregivers are more likely to believe it is acceptable to hit children in their care. A third argument is that legal prohibition of corporal punishment—particularly when accom- panied by public education—will motivate parents to look into al- ternative forms of discipline and encourage governments to provide appropriate resources and education. By early 2018, 53 countries had legally prohibited all corporal punishment of children, including in the home, and 56 more had stated a commitment to full prohibition (Global Initiative 2018). Countries enacting bans included most European and Latin American countries, and a handful of others in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. No states in the United States ban corporal punishment in the home. Studies comparing attitudes and practice related to corporal punish-
  • 12. ment before and after legal prohibition, however, are primarily lim- ited to Europe and New Zealand. The following case studies explore experiences in several countries. Sweden In 1979, Sweden became the first country in the world to explicitly prohibit by law all forms of corporal punishment of children, including Corporal Punishment: Legal Reform as a Route to Changing Norms 259 in the home. When its parliament began to debate prohibition, they called it a “signal law,” i.e., a law that signaled an approach primar- ily for public education. Its intent was not to prosecute and imprison parents, except in the most extreme cases. After the law’s adoption, the Ministry of Justice ran a large-scale public education campaign.
  • 13. Brochures entitled “Can You Bring Up Children Successfully without Smacking and Spanking?” were distributed to all households with children, information on the issue was printed on milk cartons, and children’s and antenatal clinics provided support and information to parents. Within just a couple of years, over 90 percent of Swedish families were aware of the law (Global Initiative 2015b). Several studies have found significant changes over time in attitudes towards corporal punishment among Swedes. In 1965, for example, 53 percent of parents indicated support for corporal pun- ishment, but in 1999, only 10 percent did so (Janson 2000). A 2014 study on changes in parenting practices in Sweden used over 53 years of data to compare three cohorts—1958, 1981, and 2011—of young to middle-aged adults and their self-reported experiences of being
  • 14. slapped during childhood. The study found almost no differences be- tween the 1958 and 1981 cohorts, but a significant drop between 1981 and 2011. Twenty percent of the 1958 cohort and 18 percent of the 1981 cohort said they were often slapped by their parents, but only 2 percent of the 2011 cohort said they were frequently slapped. The study concluded that over the 53 years, the likelihood of participants being slapped decreased by 93 percent, with almost the entire de- cline—92 percent—occurring from 1981 (two years after the change in the law) to 2011 (Trifan, Stattin, and Tilton-Weaver 2014). New Zealand New Zealand prohibited corporal punishment of children in 2007, after nearly two years of fierce and acrimonious public debate. Previously, a law known as Section 592 explicitly permitted New Zealand
  • 15. parents to physically punish their children. In the 1980s, targeted lobbying led to a prohibition on corporal punishment in childcare centers, 260 social research institutions, and schools, but there was little interest in banning it in the home. In 1989, New Zealand appointed its first commissioner for chil- dren, who began to advocate actively for repeal of Section 59 and a full prohibition on all corporal punishment of children. In 1997, the Committee on the Rights of the Child conducted its first review of New Zealand’s compliance with the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and recommended that New Zealand review its law and pro- hibit all corporal punishment of children (CRC 1997). In response to the Committee on the Rights of the Child’s ini-
  • 16. tial recommendations, New Zealand’s cabinet instructed government officials to report on how other countries approached the issue of corporal punishment. The Ministry of Justice conducted research on public opinions regarding the law, and found that a strong majority —80 percent—of parents believed that it was acceptable to smack a child, though only 9 percent believed that it was an “effective” strat- egy in guiding a child towards better behavior. The Ministry said pub- licly that it supported alternative forms of discipline, but that the government had no plans to repeal Section 59 (Wood et al. 2008, 172). In late 2003, the Committee on the Rights of the Child conclud- ed its second review of New Zealand, criticizing its failure to repeal Section 59 and again recommending that the country prohibit corpo-
  • 17. ral punishment of children (CRC 2003). The same month, UNICEF pub- lished a report that placed New Zealand third among the world’s rich- est countries in its rate of child deaths from maltreatment. The report found that children in New Zealand were six times more likely to die from physical abuse as in the other countries surveyed (UNICEF 2003). After a member of Parliament introduced a bill to repeal Sec- tion 59, the issue became the focus of public debate. Groups oppos- ing the repeal of Section 59 bought full-page ads in newspapers and launched a petition campaign that garnered over 200,000 signatures. Their opposition to the bill focused on three arguments: that physi- cal punishment was a necessary and positive aspect of parental disci- pline, that the proposed law unnecessarily intruded into family life,
  • 18. Corporal Punishment: Legal Reform as a Route to Changing Norms 261 and that the repeal of Section 59 would result in criminal prosecution of parents for even minor cases of physical punishment (Wood 2015). A small core of advocates for the prohibition of corporal pun- ishment secured support from 140 organizations for abolition. They provided politicians in Wellington with briefing sheets and other ar- guments in support of repeal, and ensured a significant presence in the gallery every time Parliament debated the bill. The campaign de- veloped media kits addressing myths and misunderstandings around the proposed law, produced media releases, and presented spokes- people, including religious leaders, supporting prohibition to news- papers, radio, and television (Wood 2011). Save the Children New Zealand commissioned research on
  • 19. children’s experiences of corporal punishment, finding that 40 per- cent of five- to seven-year-olds reported being smacked or hit around the face or head, and 25 percent had been hit with objects including belts, canes, tennis rackets, and spatulas (Dobbs 2005, 44). The study also found that many children believed that their parents beat them not to provide guidance, but out of anger. Intense opposition to repeal of Section 59 continued up until Parliament’s final vote in May 2007. Opponents of the “Anti- Smacking Law” organized rallies around the country, coordinated an extensive lobbying campaign, and brought international experts to New Zea- land to advocate in favor of physical punishment. The day Parliament voted to repeal Section 59, over a thousand protesters gathered in front of the parliament building, waving banners and chanting
  • 20. slo- gans opposing the proposed law (Wood 2011). After the law changed, however, so did public attitudes. Public opinion surveys over three decades found that in 1981, 89 percent of the public approved of physical punishment of children. By 2008, a year following legal reform, approval had dropped to 58 percent, and after just five more years, to 40 percent. Analysis of the data found that the steepest declines occurred during the 1990s after physical punishment was banned in schools, and then following the 2007 ban on corporal punishment in the home (D’Souza et al. 2016). 262 social research Germany Germany prohibited all corporal punishment of children in 2000, accompanied by a 15-month awareness-raising campaign called
  • 21. “More Respect for Children.” The campaign included billboards, lectures and seminars that were covered by the media, and events including theater and street parties, emphasizing children’s right to a nonvio- lent upbringing (Global Initiative 2015b, 6). A longitudinal study found that in 1996, 83 percent of Ger- man parents believed that a “mild slap on the face” was acceptable, but by 2008, only 25 percent of parents thought so (Bussman 2009). Self-reports of children themselves may be more significant. In 1992, 30 percent of young people over the age of 11 reported that they had been “thrashed,” while only 3 percent of young people reported the same in 2002 (Federal Ministries 2003). In 1992, a representative survey of thousands of Germans be- tween ages 16 and 40 found that 26 percent reported that they had
  • 22. not been physically punished in childhood. In 2011, a similar sur- vey found that the percentage had doubled to 52 percent. Among the youngest cohort, the percentage was even higher: 63 percent of 16- to 20-year-olds reported that they had never been physically punished (Pfeiffer 2013, 97). COMPARATIVE RESEARCH Two multicountry studies have looked at attitudes and practices in countries that have banned corporal punishment of children compared to those that have not. A 1999 study of 14 European Union countries, surveying over 10,000 adults in over 200 cities, found that people in countries that have banned corporal punishment of children were less likely to find corporal punishment acceptable than people in countries where it was still legal (Gracia and Herrero 2008). Another study conducted in 2007 interviewed 5,000 parents in
  • 23. five European countries: Sweden, Austria, and Germany, which had prohibited corporal punishment; and Spain and France, which had not. It found that parents were significantly less likely to report using Corporal Punishment: Legal Reform as a Route to Changing Norms 263 corporal punishment and less likely to find it acceptable in countries that had banned corporal punishment, compared to parents living in countries where it was still legal. For example, over half the French and Spanish parents reported spanking their children, while only 17 percent of those in Austria and Germany, and only 4 percent of Swedes, did so. The study concluded that “there can no longer be any doubt about the violence-reducing effect of a ban on childrearing violence” (Bussman 2009, 20).
  • 24. PUBLIC EDUCATION VS LEGAL REFORM Governments seeking to end corporal punishment of children have several possible avenues. They can rely primarily on public education, raising awareness among parents about nonviolent parenting options and the harms of corporal punishment. They can rely on legal reform, banning corporal punishment, including in the home. Or they can combine the two, prohibiting corporal punishment by law while also conducting public awareness campaigns. There is little research that compares the outcomes of relying solely on public education to the outcomes of legal reform without pub- lic education. What research exists suggests that combining the two creates the greatest changes in both attitudes and practice. A 2002 study of 10 countries that had prohibited corporal punishment concluded:
  • 25. Unless public education is underpinned by legal reform it can only ever be partially convincing, and limited in its success. A retained defence of “reasonable chastisement” serves to undermine professional arguments in favour of “positive parenting” methods, and allows those wholly or partly committed to physical punishment a powerful reason not to adopt less harmful child-rearing practic- es. Conversely, to introduce legal reform in the absence of sustained programmes of public education and fam- ily support for those in need of greater help would be unacceptable. Removing a parental right “enjoyed” for 264 social research centuries without helping parents to find effective and reliable alternatives helps neither parents nor their chil- dren; the evidence shows that attitudes and practices have shifted most in countries which have invested in sustained public education, such as Sweden. (Boyson 2002, 67)
  • 26. ACCELERATING LEGAL REFORM In 2001, when the Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment was launched, only 11 countries had legally prohibited all corporal punishment of children.3 Since then, the Global Initiative has used a range of strategies to accelerate prohibition of corporal punishment, working with national campaigns on legislative reform, and system- atically using the United Nations treaty bodies and Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of UN member countries to promote legal reform. In the 16 years following the Global Initiative’s founding, the number of states prohibiting all corporal punishment of children more than quadrupled, from 11 to 53 (Global Initiative 2018). As the basis for its advocacy, the Global Initiative tracked the status of national legislation and court cases regarding corporal pun- ishment in every country worldwide. This mapping examined all
  • 27. relevant national legislation, including the settings where corporal punishment might be already illegal and what further changes were necessary to achieve a comprehensive ban. It also tracked relevant court decisions, recommendations from relevant UN bodies, any com- mitments that countries had made to ban corporal punishment, and new laws under consideration that could be used to prohibit the prac- tice (Newell 2015). The Global Initiative used this information to systematically brief UN treaty bodies, beginning with the Committee on the Rights of the Child. The Global Initiative submitted information for every country coming for review before the Committee, and by 2015, had submitted 258 briefings (Bower 2015, 21). Based on the Global Ini- tiative’s information, the Committee made recommendations to
  • 28. 188 states urging the complete prohibition of corporal punishment of Corporal Punishment: Legal Reform as a Route to Changing Norms 265 children. In over a hundred of these cases, the Committee made the recommendation more than once, as states came under subsequent reviews. Every few years, representatives of the Global Initiative met with the full committee, in order to update it regarding progress to- wards global prohibition, and to highlight key issues (Newell 2015). Encouraged by the Committee on the Rights of the Child’s will- ingness to take up the issue, the Global Initiative widened its focus and began making regular submissions to committees monitoring compliance with other human rights treaties, which also began rec-
  • 29. ommending that states prohibit all corporal punishment of children.4 In the case of the Committee against Torture, recommendations to prohibit corporal punishment increased six-fold after the Global Ini- tiative started submitting its briefings (Bower 2015, 54). In 2008, the UN Human Rights Council initiated the process of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), under which members assess the human rights record of every UN member state every four years. Beginning with the first UPR session, the Global Initiative began sub- mitting briefings on every state. During the first cycle (2008– 2011), the Global Initiative submitted briefings on 175 states; in 96 cases, other states made recommendations on corporal punishment to the country under review (Global Initiative 2015c). The UPR requires states under review to respond to the rec- ommendations they have received by indicating whether they
  • 30. accept the recommendation, reject it, or take note of it. Between 2008 and 2015, 129 states received at least one recommendation regarding cor- poral punishment. By 2015, 19 of these had banned all corporal pun- ishment of children, and an additional 38 had publicly committed to legal reform (Bower 2015, 33). An independent assessment of the Global Initiative concluded in 2015 that the strategy of utilizing trea- ty bodies and the UPR had been particularly influential, and found a clear correlation between the interventions of the Global Initiative in these venues and the countries that have prohibited corporal punish- ment (Bower 2015, 38). 266 social research The Global Initiative has actively monitored new opportunities
  • 31. for legal reform, supported national organizations in their advocacy, and commented on bills and draft laws in dozens of countries. In collaboration with Save the Children Sweden, the Global Initiative conducted law reform workshops in several regions, and published a series of briefing papers on how to campaign for changes in law. It also worked with religious leaders to address faith-based opposition to abolition, by highlighting universal religious values of compassion, justice, equality, and nonviolence (Dodd 2015). CONCLUSION Legal reform to prohibit corporal punishment can accelerate changes in both attitudes and practice on the issue, even in countries where large majorities support corporal punishment. Individual country studies have found that public acceptance of corporal punishment
  • 32. drops—sometimes dramatically—after legal reform prohibiting the practice. Comparative studies have also found that parents are signifi- cantly less likely to report using corporal punishment and less likely to find it acceptable in countries that have banned corporal punish- ment, compared to parents living in countries where it was still legal. Change is most pronounced in countries that accompany legal prohi- bition with public education campaigns. Could the same result be achieved solely with public education? Little research is available, though the EU comparative study found drops in levels of acceptance of corporal punishment in all countries that had banned the practice, regardless of how much they invested in public education campaigns. Another question is whether attitudes towards corporal punishment change over time—even without
  • 33. legal action—as people become more aware of violence against children. The United States, where all states allow corporal punishment in the home, offers an interesting case. Public support for corporal punish- ment has remained consistently high in the United States, despite ac- tive media coverage of violence against children. In a 1995 survey, 87 percent of US adults said it was “sometimes appropriate” for parents Corporal Punishment: Legal Reform as a Route to Changing Norms 267 to spank their children. In 2013, nearly 20 years later, the percentage who gave that response had only dropped a few points, to 81 percent (Harris Poll 2013). One limitation of many surveys on corporal punishment is that they ask parents to self-report on their attitudes and whether or
  • 34. not they physically punish their children. In countries that have prohib- ited the practice, individuals may underreport their use of corporal punishment or misrepresent their attitudes, aware that the practice is now illegal. Self-reporting by children on their actual treatment is likely a better measure. Such studies are fewer in number, but also show that the practice of corporal punishment declines when it is prohibited by law. Corporal punishment violates the rights of children, has long- lasting negative impacts on children’s health and well-being, and cre- ates significant socioeconomic costs. Although the practice is deeply ingrained in many cultures, the available research shows that legal reform—particularly when coupled with public education—can con-
  • 35. tribute to rapid and lasting change in both attitudes and practices. The findings on legal reform and corporal punishment may have useful implications for changing other social norms. Factors to be considered include the perceived benefits to individuals and families who continue a practice, perceived costs of abandoning the practice, and the degree to which the existing legal regime may send a signal that the practice is acceptable and not to be questioned. An interesting parallel, for example, may be child labor. Although pov- erty is the main driver for families who send their children into the workforce, the International Labor Organization has identified legal prohibition as a key factor in a significant reduction of global child labor rates. Since 2000, the number of children engaged in child labor has dropped by more than one-third, from 245 million to 152
  • 36. million (ILO 2017). In the United States, for example, child labor persists pri- marily in just one sector—agriculture—where an exemption in labor law allows children to work legally at much younger ages than in other sectors. Wages for adult farmworkers in the United States are 268 social research very low, creating undeniable pressure for children to work to help support the family. However, families may also calculate that since child labor in agriculture is legal, it is also acceptable. Changes in the law could persuade families to pursue other alternatives. NOTES 1. E.g., “He that spareth his rod hateth his son; But he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes” (Proverbs 13:24); “Do not withhold disci-
  • 37. pline from a child; if you punish them with the rod, they will not die,” (Proverbs 23:13); “A rod and a reprimand impart wisdom, but a child left undisciplined disgraces its mother” (Proverbs 29:15). 2. New Zealand’s 1961 Crimes Act, section 59: “(1) Every parent of a child ... is justified in using force by way of correction towards the child, if the force used is reasonable in the circumstances.” 3. Sweden, Finland, Norway, Austria, Cyprus, Denmark, Latvia, Croatia, Bulgaria, Israel, and Germany. 4. These treaty bodies included the Human Rights Committee; the Committee against Torture; the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities; and the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. REFERENCES Afifi, Tracy O, Natalie P. Mota, Patricia Dasiewicz, Harriet L.
  • 38. MacMillan, and Jitender Sareen. 2012. “Physical Punishment and Mental Disorders: Results from a Nationally Representative US Sample.” Pediatrics, 130 (2): 184–92. Ani, C. C. and S. Grantham-McGregor. 1998. “Family and Personal Characteristics of Aggressive Nigerian Boys: Differences from and Similarities with Western Findings.” Journal of Adolescent Health, 23(5): 311–17. Bower, Carol. 2015. Evaluation of the Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children. London: Global Initiative. Corporal Punishment: Legal Reform as a Route to Changing Norms 269 Boyson, Rowan. 2002. Equal Protection for Children: An Overview of the Experience of Countries that Accord Children Full Protection from Physical
  • 39. Punishment. National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children. Bussman, K. D. 2009. The Effect of Banning Corporal Punishment in Europe: A Five- Nation Comparison, Halle-Wittenberg: Martin-Luther- Universitat. Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC). 1997. Concluding Observations: New Zealand. CRC/C/15/Add.71. ———. 2003. Concluding Observations: New Zealand. CRC/C/15/Add.216. ———. 2007. General Comment No. 8 (2006), The Right of the Child to Protection from Corporal Punishment and Other Cruel and Degrading Treatment. CRC/C/GC/8. Dobbs, T. 2005. Insights: Children and Young People Speak Out about Family Discipline. Wellington: Save the Children New Zealand. Dodd, Chris. 2015. Telephone interview by Jo Becker, November 25. D’Souza, Amanda J., Marie Russell, Beth Wood, Louise Signal, and Dawn
  • 40. Elder. 2016. “Attitudes to Physical Punishment of Children Are Changing.” Archives of Diseases in Childhood 101: 690–93. Federal Ministry of Justice and Federal Ministry for Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth (Germany). 2003. “Violence in Upbringing: An Assessment after the Introduction of the Right to a Non-violent Upbringing.” Gershoff, Elizabeth. 2002. “Corporal Punishment by Parents and Associated Child Behaviors and Experiences: A Meta-analytic and Theoretical Review.” Psychological Bulletin, 128 (4): 539–79. Gillespie, Diane and Molly Melching. 2010. “The Transformative Power of Democracy and Human Rights in Nonformal Education: The Case of Tostan.” Adult Education Quarterly 60: 477–98. Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children. n.d. Website. Accessed January 2, 2018. http://www.endcorporalpunish
  • 41. ment.org. ———. 2015a. Legal Defences for Corporal Punishment of Children Derived from English Law. London: Global Initiative. 270 social research ———. 2015b. The Positive Impact of Prohibition of Corporal Punishment on Children’s Lives: Messages from Research. London: Global Initiative. ———. 2015c. “States Actively Pursuing the Issue of Corporal Punishment of Children in the Universal Periodic Review: Analysis of Sessions 1–22 (2008–2015).” Paper provided to the author by the Global Initiative. ———. 2016. Corporal Punishment of Children: Review of Research on its Impact and Associations. Working paper. London: Global Initiative. ———. 2017. Prohibiting all Corporal Punishment of Children: Answers to
  • 42. Frequently Asked Questions, London: Global Initiative. Gracia, E. and Herrero, J. 2008. “Is It Considered Violence? The Acceptability of Physical Punishment of Children in Europe.” Journal of Marriage and Family 70: 210–17. Harris Poll. 2013. “Four in Five Americans Believe Parents Spanking Their Children Is Sometimes Appropriate.” Accessed October 22, 2017. http://www.theharrispoll.com/health-and- life/Four_in_ Five_Americans_Believe_Parents_Spanking_Their_Children_is_ Sometimes_Appropriate.html. Holden, G. W., P. A. Williamson, and G. W. Holland. 2014. “Eavesdropping on the Family: A Pilot Investigation of Corporal Punishment in the Home.” Journal of Family Psychology 28 (3): 401–6. International Labour Organization (ILO). 2017. Ending Child Labour by 2025: A Review of Policies and Programmes. Geneva: ILO. Janson, S. 2000. Children and Abuse—Corporal Punishment and Other Forms
  • 43. of Child Abuse in Sweden at the End of the Second Millennium: A Scientific Report Prepared for the Committee on Child Abuse and Related Issues. Stockholm: Swedish Ministry of Health and Social Affairs. Mackie, Gerry and John LeJeune. 2009. “Social Dynamics of Abandonment of Harmful Practices: A New Look at the Theory.” Innocenti Working Paper. Florence: UNICEF. Newell, Peter. 2015. Interview by Jo Becker, November 10. Pfeiffer, Christian. 2013. “Parallel Justice—Why Do We Need Stronger Support for the Victim in Society?” Address at the 18th German Congress on Crime Prevention, April 23. Accessed August 16, Corporal Punishment: Legal Reform as a Route to Changing Norms 271 2017. http://www.praeventionstag.de/dokumentation/download. cms?id=1471. Shell-Duncan, Bettina, Ylva Hernlaund, Katherine Wander, and
  • 44. Amadou Moreau. 2013. “Legislating Change? Responses to Criminalization of Female Genital Cutting in Senegal.” Law and Society Review 47: 803–35. Trifan, Tatiana Alina, Hakan Stattin, and Lauree Tilton-Weaver. 2014. “Have Authoritarian Parenting Practices and Roles Changed in the Last 50 Years?” Journal of Marriage and Family 76: 744–61. UNICEF. 2003. A League Table of Child Maltreatment Deaths in Rich Nations. Florence: Innocenti Research Center. ———. 2014. Hidden in Plain Sight: A Statistical Analysis of Violence against Children. New York: UNICEF. US Department of Health and Human Services. 2017. “Child Abuse and Neglect Fatalities 2015: Statistics and Interventions.” Washington, DC: HHS.
  • 45. Wood, Beth. 2011. “A Report from New Zealand: Four Years Post Law Change.” Paper presented to the Global Summit on Ending Corporal Punishment of Children, Dallas Texas. Accessed October 22, 2017. http://epochnz.org.nz/images/stories/pdfs/NZ_4_year_%20 post_law_change.pdf. ———. 2015. Telephone interview by Jo Becker, November 29. Wood, Beth, Ian Hassall, George Hook, and Robert Ludbrook. 2008. Unreasonable Force: New Zealand’s Journey towards Banning the Physical Punishment of Children. Wellington: Save the Children New Zealand. Copyright of Social Research is the property of Johns Hopkins University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. Sanchez 2
  • 46. Annotated Bibliography Instructions: Your Annotated Bibliography assignment should consist of two academic articles that you plan to use in your argument/research essay. The AB should feature the following information: 1. A creative, original title that coordinates with the title of your argument/research essay 2. Your thesis statement 3. An accurate MLA citation for the research article(s) you found 4. An annotation (paragraph) that includes the following information (think APP+R): A. What’s the article about? Give its title, the author’s name, and the article’s main idea. B. What’s the point of the article? Give a brief 2-3 sentence summary of the entire article. In this section, think about and discuss the kind of evidence that the author uses to support his or her idea. C. What’s the proof? Give at least one quote from the article (with intext citation) that is relevant to your essay’s argument/sub-arguments. And explain how that quote will function in your essay in one sentence. D. Reflect on the article and its credibility. Options (choose two to assess the article’s credibility): - Does the author have degree(s) in the article’s subject matter? - Is the author associated with a reputable university or college? - Is the article fairly new or was it published many years ago? - How long is the article?
  • 47. - How many sources does the article cite? A few or very many? Student Sanchez Professor Gallego English 1302- 73010 10 April 2017 The Simplicity of Punishment: An Annotated Bibliography Thesis statement: Although giving children no punishment at all may be a simple option for the parent, guardian, or teacher, I argue that if you punish a child through verbal, corporal, and withdrawing privileges they will be more responsible and mature. Dhaem, Jeanne. "Responding to Minor Misbehavior through Verbal and Nonverbal Responses." Beyond Behavior, vol. 21, no. 3, Spring2012, pp. 29-34. EBSCOhost, dcccd.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login. aspx? direct=true&db=a9h&AN=83304857&site=ehost-live. The article “Responding to Minor Misbehavior Through Verbal and Nonverbal Responses” was written by Jeanne Dhae. The article’s main purpose is to inform and show data on the effects of two levels of intervention that will help address students’ behavior. The article goes into detail about the method,
  • 48. participants, and procedures used in the tests. It provides example of what is considered level one interventions and level two interventions. Then, it lists results after the hypothesis are tested for six weeks. I will use the quote "I am working out the problem with you. We are a team and you are responsible for your own behavior” as an example of verbalized communication with a child (4). This supports the sub-argument that verbal punishment can lead to a child being more responsible and mature. The article is about 5 pages in length, and the author is a current assistant professor of special education at the William Patterson University which leads me to believe this is a credible source and could be used effectively in my essay. Gregory K, Fritz. "Discipline: A Guide for Parents." Brown University Child & Adolescent Behavior Letter, vol.30, Nov2014 Supplement, pp. 1-2. EBSCOhost, dcccd.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login. aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=98856607&site=ehost-live. The article “Discipline: A Guide for Parents” was written by Gregory K. Fritz, M.D. The article’s main purpose is to give guidance to parents on how to discipline their children. The article explains how delaying children’s privilege can be an effective way for a parent to discipline their child. The article gives examples on physical punishment, taking away privileges, and even positive reinforcement. The article gives a great example of delaying a privilege as a form of punishment: “if a child breaks the rule about where he or she can go on his or her bike, take away the bike for a few days” (2). I will use this article for this essay to explain how guidelines can help a parent discipline their children in a better way. The article was published out of Brown University (an IV league school), and the author has an M.D. and is a doctor, so the article seems to be credible enough to use as a support piece of research for my essay.
  • 49. 2 Option #1: Critical Thinking: Quality at A1 Hotels A1 Hotels operates luxury hotels throughout the world. Recently, motivated by some incidents that appeared in the news, they have been concerned about the quality of service. The company has been giving the following survey to its clients after their stay: 1. How would you rate the quality of your room? Select one. Good(G), Poor(P) 2. How would you rate the quality of your food? Select one. Good(G), Poor(P) 3. How would you rate the quality of your service? Select one. Good (G), Poor(P) Any customer who answered “Poor” to at least one of the three questions up above is considered to be “dissatisfied.” Traditionally, 40% of customers have been dissatisfied. A1 Hotels would like to study customer satisfaction. Therefore, 200 survey responses were recently chosen at random for analysis. The complete data set is in the file named Hotels. Managerial Report Prepare a report (see Module folder) for A1 Hotels that summarizes your assessment of customer satisfaction. Be sure to include the following seven items in your report. 1. To summarize the data, compute the proportion of all clients that a. Answered “Poor” to room quality. b. Answered “Poor” to food quality. c. Answered “Poor” to service quality. 2. Develop the 92% confidence interval for the proportion of all recent clients that were “dissatisfied.” What is the margin of error? What are the lower (or left) and upper (or right) endpoints of the confidence interval? Interpret your results.
  • 50. 3. Develop the 92% confidence interval for the proportion of all recent clients who answered “Poor” to room quality. What is the margin of error? What are the lower (or left) and upper (or right) endpoints of the confidence interval? Interpret your results. 4. Develop the 92% confidence interval for the proportion of all recent clients who answered “Poor” to food quality. What is the margin of error? What are the lower (or left) and upper (or right) endpoints of the confidence interval? Interpret your results. 5. Develop the 92% confidence interval for the proportion of all recent clients who answered “Poor” to service quality. What is the margin of error? What are the lower (or left) and upper (or right) endpoints of the confidence interval? Interpret your results. 6. Conduct a hypothesis test (using either the p-Value Approach or the Critical Value Approach) to determine if the proportion of all recent clients is more dissatisfied than the traditional level of dissatisfaction. Use α = 0.08. Do not forget to include the correctly worded hypotheses and show all the steps required to conduct the hypothesis test. 7. What advice would you give to A1 Hotels based upon your analysis of the data? What is the magnitude of the issue? How can this study be improved? Write a report that adheres to the Written Assignment Requirements under the heading “Expectations for CSU-Global Written Assignments” found in the CSU-Global Guide to Writing and APA Requirements (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.. As with all written assignments at CSU- Global, you should have in-text citations and a reference page. An example paper is provided in the MTH410 Guide to Writing with Statistics. (link provided in the Modules tab) Submit your Excel file in addition to your report. Requirements: 1. Paper must be written in third person. 2. Your paper should be four to five pages in length (counting
  • 51. the title page and references page) and cite and integrate at least one credible outside source. The CSU-Global Library (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.is a great place to find resources. 3. Include a title page, introduction, body, conclusion, and a reference page. 4. The introduction should describe or summarize the topic or problem. It might discuss the importance of the topic or how it affects you or society as a whole, or it might discuss or describe the unique terminology associated with the topic. 5. The body of your paper should answer the questions posed in the problem. Explain how you approached and answered the question or solved the problem, and, for each question, show all steps involved. Be sure this is in paragraph format, not numbered answers like a homework assignment. 6. The conclusion should summarize your thoughts about what you have determined from the data and your analysis, often with a broader personal or societal perspective in mind. Nothing new should be introduced in the conclusion that was not previously discussed in the body paragraphs. 7. Include any tables of data or calculations, calculated values, and/or graphs associated with this problem in the body of your assignment. 8. APA Format