Both the reading and the lecture talk about the effictiveness of spanking as a punishment way for parenting. While the author reasons that spanking is a very useful and accepted way which help children learn moral, the lecturer does not believe that spanking has a significant good result for children. Following that, she opposes the writer's theories one by one.
First, the professor mentions that spanking does not teach children moral. She believes spanking is an illogical way to teach children the good and the bad behavior in life. She posits that parents should not expect their children be able to associate the pain of spanking with the bad behavior they show. As a result, the professor refutes the writer's reason that spanking cause children avoid doing bad acts just by associating the painful experience of spanking with their behavoir.
Second, the speaker states that all scientific studis showed that spanking is not an effective way rather than other punishment tools like time-out. At least, in time-out kids have time to think about their behavior and understand the bad results of those actions, the lecturer says. On the other hand, kids forget the pain after five minutes, and just learn anger from their parents reaction to their behavior, which end up being an outragous person in future. Therefore, the professor repudiates the essay's justification that spanking is a very effective way of parenting in teac hing children what is good or bad.
Thrid, the lecturer avers that spanking is not an universal accepted way of punishment. She strongly believes that spanking cannot help children to make a connection between the awful experince of spanking with their bad behavior, in addition children just learn more bad reaction from their parents, since they use apnking as a accessible and easy way to deal with kids. Furthermore, spanking is an inaccurate way and not effective which led children have a troubled childhood.
Both the reading and the lecture talk about the
effictiveness
of spanking as a punishment way for parenting. While the author reasons that spanking is a
very
useful and
accepted
way which
help
children
learn moral, the lecturer does not believe that spanking has a significant
good
result for
children
. Following that, she opposes the writer's theories one by one.
First
, the professor mentions that spanking does not teach
children
moral. She believes spanking is an illogical way to teach
children
the
good
and the
bad
behavior
in life. She posits that parents should not
expect
their
children
be able to associate the pain of spanking with the
bad
behavior
they
show
.
As a result
, the professor refutes the writer's reason that spanking cause
children
avoid doing
bad
acts
just
by associating the painful experience of spanking with their
behavoir
.
Second, the speaker states that all scientific
studis
showed
that spanking is not an effective way
rather
than other punishment tools like time-out. At least, in time-out kids have time to
think
about their
behavior
and understand the
bad
results of those actions, the lecturer says.
On the other hand
, kids forget the pain after five minutes, and
just
learn anger from their parents reaction to their
behavior
, which
end
up being an
outragous
person
in future
.
Therefore
, the professor repudiates the essay's justification that spanking is a
very
effective way of parenting in teac
hing
children
what is
good
or
bad
.
Thrid
, the lecturer avers that spanking is not
an
universal
accepted
way of punishment. She
strongly
believes that spanking cannot
help
children
to
make
a
connection between
the awful
experince
of spanking with their
bad
behavior
,
in addition
children
just
learn more
bad
reaction from their parents, since they
use
apnking
as
a
accessible and easy way to deal with kids.
Furthermore
, spanking is an inaccurate way and not effective which led
children
have a troubled childhood.