Kalipa, Velelo Clifton2016-09-212016-09-212015http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11837/563Alternative to corporal punishment in schools is a worldwide practice. Most countries have banned the use of corporal punishment in schools and have promulgated laws and adopted policies aiming to enforce the practice of alternative to corporal punishment. South Africa is one of the countries that have introduced policy on alternatives to corporal punishment. However, this policy does not provide details on how School Management Teams (SMTs) and teachers should support the implementation of alternatives to corporal punishment; as a result, schools end up having different approaches in as far as implementing alternatives to corporal punishment is concerned. There is also a serious problem of indiscipline in schools and this has since attracted growing attention of researchers in South Africa and the whole world. There are serious offences by learners in schools which range from serious criminal ones such as drug abuse, assaults, theft, murders and rapes to less serious ones such as truancy, incomplete projects, absenteeism and lateness, dodging and bunking of classes in schools. This study therefore sought to investigate how SMT and teachers support the implementation of alternatives to corporal punishment in schools. This was a multi case study of four secondary schools in the King Williams Town Education District which was conducted through qualitative research approach. Interviews and documentary analysis were used to collect data and a total of 16 participants (four principals, four SMT members and eight teachers) were selected. From the data, it emerged that some teachers were fixed in using corporal punishment to discipline learners in schools. The data also showed that the alternatives to corporal punishment (ATCP) policies were inconsistently applied as schools had different approaches in as far as how ATCP is implemented and that some schools had no ATCP policies at all. It also emerged from the data that school leadership was a problem in as far as supporting the implementation of ATCP in schools as in some schools the issues of disciplining learners was centralised in the principal’s office. It also became clear that the majority of participants did not understand the national policy on ATCP. There were no indications of parental involvement in the implementation of ATCP in schools. It can be concluded that the channels of communication among principals, SMTs, teachers with regards to the implementation of ATCP was problematic as there were iv no clear roles as to how each of these officials should implement ATCP. Some teachers still perceived the ATCP as unsuitable for maintaining discipline in rural schools and their discipline strategies were still characterized by punitive measures which border on corporal punishment. School discipline was not seen as a societal matter where other relevant stakeholders could play a pivotal role in learner discipline. This had a negative impact on the school discipline. Learners had no responsibility on maintenance of positive school atmosphere as they were not in any way part taking in the maintenance of discipline in schools. This study therefore recommends a comprehensive framework for the implementation of ATCP that will give details on the roles of SMTs and teachers in the implementation of ATCP in schools. It is recommended that this framework be inclusive of parents and other community stakeholders who would give different perspectives on the implementation of ATCP in schools as education is a societal matter. It is also recommended that more research be conducted that will deal with urban schools and on the involvement of parents and other stakeholders in the implementation of ATCP.enimplementation, support, school discipline, fixation, transparency, inconsistency, corporal punishmentThesis