Examining Punishment & Discipline: Defending the Use of Punishment by Coaches
I've been practicing my research skills using ERIC. While searching for journal articles related to the effectiveness of stretching prior to activity (in minimizing injury) in young athletes, I located this article. I thought some of the coaches who have commented on discipline of athletes may find this recent Quest article informative:
ERIC #: EJ803619
Title: Examining Punishment and Discipline: Defending the Use of Punishment by Coaches
Author(s): Seifred, Chad
Source: Quest, v60 n3 p370-386 Aug 2008
Pub Date: 2008-08-00
Peer-Reviewed: Yes
Descriptors: Discipline; Child Rearing; Punishment; Anxiety; Athletic Coaches; Behavior Change; Athletics; Team Sports; Athletes
Abstract: Confusion, uncertainty, and debate often surround the terms "discipline" and "punishment" because scholars fail to publicize that they possess distinctive meanings. This article differentiates punishment from discipline and attempts to present some rationale supporting its use, especially corporal punishment, in a sport setting from a coaching perspective. Punishment and discipline appear appropriate to study in the sporting environment because coaches must work with their players and actions affecting one player often impact the others. Thus, a wrongful behavior committed by one frequently extends consequences on teammates. Overall, this work proposes that punishment serves as an effective treatment when a coach intends to instruct, train, drill, and cultivate behavior and learning from those mentally capable of appreciating its objective. Punishment arguably appears most appropriate when a coach believes there is no other alternative for censuring and deterring behaviors and restoring the balance between victims, offenders, and the team or organization. It also appears to be an appropriate method to help perpetrators alleviate a sense of guilt or shame because punishment motivates offenders to demonstrate their repentance, a requirement for reentering society as a whole person in the eyes of others and oneself. Support for punishment also focuses on its unique ability to maintain or create order and stability, while also satiating negative feelings associated with victimization. Finally, this work argues we must recognize conventional punishment is age appropriate and proportional to the violation. Overall, punishment is acceptable because when properly measured, it supports the intrinsic worth of people as moral agents.
NOTE: The work presented on this page was produced as part of a learning exercise. While the content was reviewed and controls were in place to improve accuracy and quality, it may contain gross inaccuracy or poor quality. The emphasis was on the learning process and the sharing of information. Furthermore, this content may still be under revision. For more information about the process, see About UniCommons.com. For more accurate subject content related to this work, see Subjects.
Comments
I understand the point of the article and while we are probably arguing over semantics, I much prefer the use of the word consequences to punishment. I feel that "punishing" players implies a level of lack of ownership whereas coming from a point of this is your behavior and this is the "consequence" of that behavior, helps the player to accept responsibility. Just my thought.
What caught my eye was the title of this article. I teach in an elem. school environment where the term "punishment" is never used. We always talk in terms of choices and consequences (good and bad) our choices bring about. I always prefer to reinforce positive behavior in managing my teams/classes which usually is very effective.
Also I agree with this article in that behavior needs to be addressed; however, I find focusing on discipline seems to breed more discipline problems. My philosophy to focus on the positive as it keeps the learning environment positive for everyone.