The Cassville school district’s revival of corporal punishment by paddle has sparked international reaction, but corporal punishment in Missouri — especially in Barry County and southern Lawrence County — is more often authorized than prohibited.

In the eight local districts covered by CherryRoad Media newspapers, five, now including Cassville, have policies that allow for corporal punishment.

Four schools with policies, most of which were adopted in the early 2000s, authorizing corporal punishment include Southwest, Exeter, Verona and Purdy, though only one of those districts has put the policy into practice.

Southwest’s policy states: “Corporal punishment can be administered by the building principal or district administrator with parent/legal guardian permission. When a student’s consequences for inappropriate actions results in out-of-school suspension, a parent may authorize for a student to receive corporal punishment in place of the original consequences.

“The administrator who is administering the corporal punishment is to: 1. Have permission from the parent or guardian prior to administering corporal punishment.

2. Have a witness who is a member of the Southwest R-V School District staff.

3. Explain thoroughly to the student how the corporal punishment is going to be administered.

4. Use extreme caution when administering corporal punishment.”

Tosha Tilford, Southwest superintendent, said the district tracks uses of the policy in its student information system.

She said in the 2021-2022 school year, corporal punishment was implemented 14 times, though she declined to specify grade levels or ages.

“One student received corporal punishment two times; the other 12 learned after one time,” Tilford said. “I will not disclose the specific grade level of the 14 incidents because of confidentiality. We have 3-year-olds in preschool. If a parent requests corporal punishment for a student Pre-K-12 at Southwest, the administrator will make the final decision on giving it.”

Exeter’s policy, which is identical to the one Cassville implemented this year, states: “Corporal punishment, as a measure of correction or of maintaining discipline and order in schools, is permitted. However, it shall be used only when all other alternative means of discipline have failed, and then only in reasonable form and upon the recommendation of the principal. It should never be inflicted in the presence of other students. Corporal punishment shall be administered only by certified personnel and in the presence of a witness who is also an employee of the district. When it becomes necessary to use corporal punishment, it shall be administered so that there can be no chance of bodily injury or harm. Striking a student on the head or face is not permitted.

“The teacher or principal shall submit a report to the superintendent, explaining the reason for the use of corporal punishment as well as the details of the administration of the same. A staff member may use reasonable physical force against a student for the protection of the student or other persons or to protect property. Restraint of students in accordance with the district’s policy on student seclusion and restraint is not a violation of this policy.”

Tim Jordan, Exeter superintendent, said the district had zero uses of the policy last school year.

“It would only be used as a very last resort and with direct parent communication, approval and support,” Jordan said.

Verona’s policy states: “Corporal punishment should be used only after other methods have failed and when there is reason to believe it will be helpful in maintaining discipline or in the development of the student’s character and power of self-control. No student will be administered corporal punishment without prior notification to and written permission of the student’s parents/guardians.

“All instances of corporal punishment shall be witnessed by at least one other adult member of the school staff and will only be administered by a principal or other district administrator.”

Tony Simmons, Verona superintendent, said the policy is in place should the district choose to use it, but corporal punishment has not been used in Verona for more than 25 years.

Purdy’s policy states: “Corporal punishment should be used only after other methods have failed and when there is reason to believe it will be helpful in maintaining discipline or in the development of the student’s character and power of self-control. All instances of corporal punishment shall be witnessed by at least one other adult member of the school staff and will only be administered by a principal or other district administrator.”

Travis Graham, in his second year as superintendent, said corporal punishment has not been administered under his tenure.

Cassville’s policy, which was discontinued in 2001, was re-instated this summer. It reads: “Corporal punishment is the use of physical force as a method of correcting student behavior. Corporal punishment, as a measure of correction or of maintaining discipline and order in schools, is permitted. However, it shall be used only when all other alternative means of discipline have failed, and then only in reasonable form and upon the recommendation of the principal. It should never be inflicted in the presence of other students. Corporal punishment shall be administered by only certified personnel and in the presence of a witness who is also an employee of the district. When it becomes necessary to use corporal punishment, it shall be administered so that there can be no chance of bodily injury or harm. Striking a student on the head or face is not permitted.

“The teacher or principal shall submit a report to the superintendent, explaining the reason for the use of corporal punishment, as well as the details of the administration of the same. A staff member may use seasonable physical force against a student for the protection of the student or other persons or to protect property. Restraint of students in accordance with the district’s policy on student seclusion and restraint is not a violation of this policy.”

Of the eight local districts queried, corporal punishment is prohibited at three — Monett, Wheaton and Pierce City — with all three schools using similar policy language. The overlapping portion reads: “No person employed by or volunteering for the school district shall administer or cause to be administered corporal punishment upon a student attending district schools.”

Monett’s adds that “a staff member may, however, use reasonable restraint against a student for the protection of the student or other persons or to protect property.”

Similarly, Wheaton’s specifies in the case of reasonable restraint, the principal does not require advance notice, if it is essential for self-defense, the preservation of order, or for the protection of other persons or the property of the school district.

Pierce City’s policy simply reads, “Corporal punishment is strictly prohibited as a method of discipline.”