en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_corporal_punishment_in_the_United_States
2 corrections found
Corporal punishment in school has been outlawed in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, Israel, and most developed countries in Europe, which makes the United States one of only two developed countries where corporal punishment in school is still allowed, the other being Singapore.
This overstates Australia’s legal status. Queensland government and child-rights sources say corporal punishment remains lawful in some Australian non-government schools, so it has not been fully outlawed across Australia.
Full reasoning
The sentence is incorrect because Australia has not fully outlawed school corporal punishment in all school settings.
Official Queensland and Queensland-government-linked sources indicate that corporal punishment still remains lawful in non-government schools in Queensland:
- The Queensland Child Rights Report 2025 states that although corporal punishment was banned in Queensland state schools, it "remains lawful in non-government schools".
- The Queensland Law Reform Commission explains that Queensland law still contains a defence for schoolteachers under Criminal Code s 280, and says that removing that defence would be necessary for Queensland education law to give effect to current policy across both State and non-State schools.
Because at least some Australian schools still operate in a jurisdiction where corporal punishment remains lawful, the article’s categorical statement that corporal punishment in school has been "outlawed in Australia" is false.
2 sources
- Queensland Child Rights Report 2025
Although corporal punishment was banned in Queensland state schools in 1989, it remains lawful in non-government schools, where staff may still rely on the same defence under section 280.
- Queensland Law Reform Commission Final Report, Volume 1
Consideration of an amendment to the Education (General Provisions) Act 2006 to reflect the contemporary policy and practice of the Queensland education schooling sectors is not possible while the Criminal Code section 280 allows for corporal punishment as a defence for schoolteachers and masters. Reform of the defence ... would allow Queensland education law, which applies to both State and non-State schools, to give legislative effect to current policy.
Some of the earliest parental opposition to corporal punishment in schools occurred in England in 1899 in the case Gardiner v. Bygrave
The article appears to date Gardiner v. Bygrave a decade late. Historical sources cite the case as 1889, not 1899.
Full reasoning
The year given for Gardiner v. Bygrave appears to be wrong.
A historical education journal article citing the case gives it as “Gardiner v. Bygrave, 6 T.L.R. (1889), 24.” A separate legal-history source likewise discusses Bygrave (1889) in its treatment of school corporal-punishment case law.
That means the article’s statement placing the case in 1899 is off by about ten years.
2 sources
- The Experience of Corporal Punishment in Schools, 1890–1940 (History of Education)
Gardiner v. Bygrave, 6 T.L.R. (1889), 24.
- The Teacher and Corporal Punishment: A Delicate Balance of Authority and Rights
Bygrave (1889), 53 J.P. 743, 'The master of a board school was charged with assaulting a pupil by caning him on the hand...'