Evidence Hub

The relationship between teacher punishment and student academic achievement: a meta-analysis

Li SY, Zhang JH, Wei JX, Zeng YL

Frontiers in psychology, 2026

6,052,011 participants

Abstract

Background: Teachers' use of "zero tolerance" policies in student discipline has attracted widespread social attention. However, due to the insufficient professional training and guidance, some teachers adopt unscientific punitive methods, such as corporal punishment, suspension, or expulsion, which may be associated with adverse outcomes in students' academic achievement, cognitive development, and physical and mental health.

Methods: This study conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis of empirical research conducted over the past two decades to examine the relationship between teacher punishment and secondary school student's academic achievement, with a focus on identifying moderating variables. A distinctive feature of this meta-analysis is its categorization of moderators into participant characteristics, study characteristics, and measurement characteristics, thereby clarifying the multifaceted factors associated with the relationship.

Results: The literature search identified 18 independent effect sizes involving 6,052,011 participants. The heterogeneity test supported the use of a random-effects model. The pooled effect size indicated a weak but statistically significant negative association between teacher punishment and student academic achievement (r = -0.183, 95% CI [-0.221, -0.145], p < 0.001). Moderator analyses showed that gender composition, achievement type, and punishment type contributed to variations in the association, whereas grade level and research…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 6,052,011 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free