School Uniforms Yes or No

Thank You, I think he looks adorable




Just to even it out a bit... my special snowflake daughter an friends in their version of the school uniform :huh: (shes the one in the middle)

i am in UK, many schools have sales of clothing [uniforms] that have been grown out of & donated by parents, and it seems many parents just buy the hardly worn [you know how kids grow] and recycle, without any guilt feelings at all

iv never seen anythin like that in the articles/bullitins from the schools, cause if they are in good condition i dont see why not!

Lets face it, for the amount of time that they are in it before growing out of them.... they really arnt worth the money

Yes

That way it's harder to single out the poor and the kids can be accepted for their own merit instead of how nice their clothes are (how much money the family has).

Really? This is probably the number 1 reason I see parents defending them but it's simply not true. Our public schools that have uniforms just limit dress to non-denim pants (khakis, chinoes, etc) and polo/oxford shirts. You still have kids wearing the goodwill or off brand clothes and still have the kids who are wearing the Hollister brand pants and tops. Still have kids with trendy shoes and backpacks or kids will beat up shoes and backpacks... I have a really hard time seeing how this is a valid point...

Just having a dress code that doesn't allow jeans isn't a uniform. If everyone wore the SAME uniform, nobody would be able to show off their Holisters and there would be no Goodwill clothes either.

First off, you have to understand that there are differences between the public school uniform initiatives and the private school dress codes. Private schools are far more specific about uniforms with most requiring that the uniforms come from a very specific vendor. The clothes are all completely identical and the dress code is specific down to accessories, socks, and shoes. Public schools do not work the same way. They specify polo shirts and khakis. They do not specify where the uniform is purchased or any other specifics beyond that. So, basically, in a public school initiative, you are still going to have kids wearing different brands, different qualities of clothing, used clothing, and you will still have shoes as a status marker.

There is still division that exists among the students in uniformed public schools, and as someone pointed out earlier, the uniform initiative in public schools is primarily used to deter gang activity. Therefore, private schools with a regimented dress code are going to see the amazing benefits of uniforms, however, public schools are only going to use it as a last ditch (half-*kitten*) effort to improve district performance.

I attended a public school that made the switch to uniforms. I am not a fan. I think children worry about what they wear and look like regardless. Children will find away to make themselves standout or or show off through accessories, backpacks, coats etc, so the argument of it leveling the playing field between the haves and have nots is not accurate. Girls will still hike up, hem or roll up their skirts, so much for appearing conservative. Also, if you live in an urban area and your children have to travel a great distance to school like I did, then it could be a way other kids from other schools to identify you. I was in a gifted school, so when other schools saw the uniform, there was no way we could blend in. I know several kids who were beat up, robbed, bullied etc just because the uniform was like a walking billboard that they were one of the smart kids. Also, I believe uniforms promotes uniformity, when we should be teaching children how to be great individuals. I believe in dress codes, but I have yet to find any effective argument for uniforms.

uniforms-no no no!

if the kids have to wear uniforms, the teachers and principals should have to wear the same uniforms. why do they get to chose what clothes they can wear but the kids cant?

Because they are adults?

^^ this ^^

Yes

That way it's harder to single out the poor and the kids can be accepted for their own merit instead of how nice their clothes are (how much money the family has).

Really? This is probably the number 1 reason I see parents defending them but it's simply not true. Our public schools that have uniforms just limit dress to non-denim pants (khakis, chinoes, etc) and polo/oxford shirts. You still have kids wearing the goodwill or off brand clothes and still have the kids who are wearing the Hollister brand pants and tops. Still have kids with trendy shoes and backpacks or kids will beat up shoes and backpacks... I have a really hard time seeing how this is a valid point...

Just having a dress code that doesn't allow jeans isn't a uniform. If everyone wore the SAME uniform, nobody would be able to show off their Holisters and there would be no Goodwill clothes either.

First off, you have to understand that there are differences between the public school uniform initiatives and the private school dress codes. Private schools are far more specific about uniforms with most requiring that the uniforms come from a very specific vendor. The clothes are all completely identical and the dress code is specific down to accessories, socks, and shoes. Public schools do not work the same way. They specify polo shirts and khakis. They do not specify where the uniform is purchased or any other specifics beyond that. So, basically, in a public school initiative, you are still going to have kids wearing different brands, different qualities of clothing, used clothing, and you will still have shoes as a status marker.

There is still division that exists among the students in uniformed public schools, and as someone pointed out earlier, the uniform initiative in public schools is primarily used to deter gang activity. Therefore, private schools with a regimented dress code are going to see the amazing benefits of uniforms, however, public schools are only going to use it as a last ditch (half-*kitten*) effort to improve district performance.

I went to a public school that required uniform and it was a real uniform from a specific vendor. I had to wear a plaid kick pleat skirt, a white button down shirt, navy sweater vest and/or red and navy sweater with school seal on the chest. I was already a student there when they implemented the uniform, so it was a tough transition. Initially they cut us slack about some things. Boys would wear any pants as long as they were navy blue and girls work any white shirt, especially since the one's from the uniform store were such poor quality. As years progressed, there was less deviation. 20 years late the school is one of the few public schools in NYC that requires uniform. I get that private schools require uniform and that is their choice and a parent that doesn't want their child to wear one doesn't have to send their child to that school. I can't get behind uniforms in public schools. I have never seen any argument used to promote uniforms validated. I do support dress codes, but uniforms is one of those things that sound like a good idea, but do little to promote a better environment for education.

Oh... I absolutely agree. I do think perharps the school system that my kids were in would have gotten more strict with the uniforms over time. As you mentioned, uniform initiatives have to be phased in. But I didn't really see where adding a uniform initiative benefitted the kids or the parents in any way. Like I said, I found that my kids just abused their clothes more because they cared far less about them.

Yes

That way it's harder to single out the poor and the kids can be accepted for their own merit instead of how nice their clothes are (how much money the family has).

Really? This is probably the number 1 reason I see parents defending them but it's simply not true. Our public schools that have uniforms just limit dress to non-denim pants (khakis, chinoes, etc) and polo/oxford shirts. You still have kids wearing the goodwill or off brand clothes and still have the kids who are wearing the Hollister brand pants and tops. Still have kids with trendy shoes and backpacks or kids will beat up shoes and backpacks... I have a really hard time seeing how this is a valid point...

Just having a dress code that doesn't allow jeans isn't a uniform. If everyone wore the SAME uniform, nobody would be able to show off their Holisters and there would be no Goodwill clothes either.

First off, you have to understand that there are differences between the public school uniform initiatives and the private school dress codes. Private schools are far more specific about uniforms with most requiring that the uniforms come from a very specific vendor. The clothes are all completely identical and the dress code is specific down to accessories, socks, and shoes. Public schools do not work the same way. They specify polo shirts and khakis. They do not specify where the uniform is purchased or any other specifics beyond that. So, basically, in a public school initiative, you are still going to have kids wearing different brands, different qualities of clothing, used clothing, and you will still have shoes as a status marker.

There is still division that exists among the students in uniformed public schools, and as someone pointed out earlier, the uniform initiative in public schools is primarily used to deter gang activity. Therefore, private schools with a regimented dress code are going to see the amazing benefits of uniforms, however, public schools are only going to use it as a last ditch (half-*kitten*) effort to improve district performance.

I went to a public school that required uniform and it was a real uniform from a specific vendor. I had to wear a plaid kick pleat skirt, a white button down shirt, navy sweater vest and/or red and navy sweater with school seal on the chest. I was already a student there when they implemented the uniform, so it was a tough transition. Initially they cut us slack about some things. Boys would wear any pants as long as they were navy blue and girls work any white shirt, especially since the one's from the uniform store were such poor quality. As years progressed, there was less deviation. 20 years late the school is one of the few public schools in NYC that requires uniform. I get that private schools require uniform and that is their choice and a parent that doesn't want their child to wear one doesn't have to send their child to that school. I can't get behind uniforms in public schools. I have never seen any argument used to promote uniforms validated. I do support dress codes, but uniforms is one of those things that sound like a good idea, but do little to promote a better environment for education.

Oh... I absolutely agree. I do think perharps the school system that my kids were in would have gotten more strict with the uniforms over time. As you mentioned, uniform initiatives have to be phased in. But I didn't really see where adding a uniform initiative benefitted the kids or the parents in any way. Like I said, I found that my kids just abused their clothes more because they cared far less about them.

Exactly, I took no pride in my uniform. I didn't care if I got stains on it, if it was ripped. I cut all the skirts up the day I graduated. In my case this was middle school, so a time when you are figuring out who you are. I may not have started every morning worrying about what to wear, but I certainly started every morning worrying about what I couldn't wear. I felt so constricted. This was a gifted school. I had to travel an hour on public transportation through some of the city's' worst neighborhoods to get there. Since many of us came from all over the city, some students would wait until they got to school to change into their uniform, because they didn't want to worry about being bullied by the kids from other schools who could identify us by our uniforms.

I'm not in favor of school uniforms. Let the kids wear what they want as long as it's appropriate. I really don't blame school officials for looking at some students that want to wear baggy jeans and ladies wearing wayyyy too short skirts. I think they're in the minority.