It is true that children at an early age distinct right and wrong with the help from qualified parenting. While I believe that punishment is inevitable in certain circumstances,  I see no point in introducing harsh discipline into every facet of education.

On the one hand, retribution is the predominant path for children to recognize their wrong behaviours. For immature kids with irrational minds, punishments, namely to ground at home or to curtail in allowance alike, are more effective and straightforward to correct themselves. Because when they are crying for wrong needs,  they incline not to listen to parents’ talking. Another argument is that discipline can lead kids to reconsider and apologize for their previous performances

On the other hand, alongside the punishment, enough communication is imperative through parenthood. Retribution may directly solve the present situation, nonetheless, puzzle kids without conversation. Mutual communication provides a platform for kids to consider. They could ask the reasons for the discipline and the expected action when facing identical cases. In this way, kids learn from the mistake, and parenting backs to its enlightened tracks.

When it comes to the sort of punishment, I entirely agree with deploying non-violence discipline. It is simplistic and no use slamming or applying other violent ways. It is always wise to let kids write down or talk about the specific reason for doing that wrong behaviour. Teachers should punish kids in a more moderate way and leave enough space for the kid’s parents. Also, parents should consider implications any severe retribution might leave.

In conclusion, punishment and communication are equally vital to compound a decent system of education. For me, non-violence punishment has its manifest reason to be allowed only.

P.S.  Is there any  logical problem in the essay? Thank you!