Just read the bloody uniform policy!!!

The school is correct on this one and the parents are either thick or just think their little twerp needs ballet flats or £100 Nike Air Max. The cost of living crisis might mean you would avoid Nike's .... but hey ho it's the dumb and dumber ones out in force again.

Can state schools in England legally refuse to educate pupils if they aren't wearing the "desirable" clothes? I find this preposterous! I thought the state had an obligation in law to provide education for everyone? Can anyone explain this to me?

There is no “good” reason for dictatorial school uniform policies. Not one.

^ protect kids from poorer backgrounds being bullied....by making parents pay £££ for logo uniforms. My sons primary school uniform all bought from Lidl special buy cost less than £40. If you could buy high school uniform in those price brackets I'd believe them, the school generates funds from sales of suppliers.

There is no “good” reason for dictatorial school uniform policies. Not one.

My DD's school uniform includes a kilt style skirt which can only be bought from the school and only comes in two lengths. They then joined an MAT and a new rule came in saying that skirts cannot be shorter than a certain length. All well and good, but this meant that any girl taller than about 5'8 was breaking the rules even if wearing the longest length skirt.
They also had a blouse with a logo that was so badly cut that it gaped at the bust for anyone who had gone through puberty. So as well as compulsory blazers, the girls had to keep their pullovers on for the whole year!

Frankly your reply shows a complete lack of awareness. For you its all about ‘your’ freedom. Give a thought to the good reasons for uniforms.

You clearly havent read the thread. Uniforms help children with poorer parents cope amongst kids who wear fashion labels daily. As a kid who had struggling parents I knew first hand the benefit of uniforms. You think the police, fire service, army, nurses etc are battling to wear fashion items? Apart from anything else fashion is one of the major industries causing damage to the planet. A uniform isnt replaced in the way fashion outfits are. Let kids learn that some rules have a good reason even if their parents dont get it.

Okay, that better than objecting to dental ones. But really what harm is there in a piercing retainers? It doesn't affect safety or ability to learn.

PP have said the school was terrible and is being improved. It looks like they are only suddenly enforcing the uniform policy which is why parents are caught out

@LadyBird1973
@enchantedsquirrelwood
they are referring to retainers for piercings.

No, it's directly comparable. You seem to think the fact that a rule exists means it should never be challenged, and anyone who does so must be "entitled". The fight for the vote is just one of hundreds if not thousands of examples of changes for the better in our society that have come about as a result of the actions of people who don't take that view.

It really is weird and incredibly old-fashioned that so many people just accept something as illogical as compulsory school uniform in the UK. The arguments that supporters put forward for it bear distinct echoes of the arguments put forward in favour of corporal punishment in the past. Let's hope it goes the same way, and soon.

What i think is ridiculous is parents that can't read a policy and adhere to it at a school they have chosen for their kids

Parents do not choose a school. They are allocated one.

And policies change, often when there is a new headteacher.

Seriously? That is a school senior leadership team gone mad!

(also how do they know, don't retainers sit at the back?)

The fact that there are schools out there, who think they can set rules which say no dental retainers (even if not legally enforceable), shows how power mad some school head teachers have become.
Personal preference of a headteacher should never be the primary criteria for rule making!

These ones aren't ... the VW ones, I assume these here, cost £100 and are made from .... rubber!! Lovely sweaty feet.

Ballet pumps are fairly rubbish shoes and I despair of seeing really little girls in primary playgrounds wearing them. You can't run in them, climb on playground equipment and they let too much rain/puddles in! They generally don't support the foot well and sometimes the foot ends up clenched because that's the only way to keep them on.

But this isn't about shite and inappropriate shoes, this is about no logos and trying to cut down on ostentatious competition. God those things are UGLY, too!
https://www.sportsdirect.com/vivienne-westwood-x-melissa-space-love-23-ballet-pumps-234109?cq_src=google_ads&cq_cmp=17597583573&cq_term=&cq_plac=&cq_net=g&cq_plt=gp&cq_con=139404206618&cq_med=pla&cq_pos=&gclid=CjwKCAjwjOunBhB4EiwA94JWsMhoRCFuo9_wdCPqLAZVy9TmXOLpwYuZPOeUED55rNJmDbCOHaEnpRoCpTwQAvD_BwE#colcode=23410903

I dont think you can compare suffragettes fighting for the vote to a very ‘special entitled ‘ mum thinking school rules are for others not her little fashionista daughter.

If I felt strongly I would move. I don't tbf.

The rule that always makes me scoff is the "boys cannot have their hair too short".

If a short back and sides is good enough for the military, it's good enough for a secondary school in Stockport.

Once over a tidy short back and sides was the standard haircut for young men - anything else would be frowned upon!

@Lolasmiles I mostly agree with you, but we should also remember:

1. There is no clear evidence that uniforms have any impact on behaviour or performance. The Sutton trust is very clear about this (look it up)

2. Enforcing uniforms which can be bought only from one supplier is petty and unnecessary. Ordinary items of clothing which can be bought anywhere should suffice. There is no need to force parents to buy blazers only from one supplier because there must be a logo which cannot be sewn on.

3. Daily inspections and capricious rules on the exact shade of grey or the exact number of millimetres for a skirt, or insistence on clothing inadequate for the weather (like refusal to allow heavier coats in the winter or lighter clothes in the summer) are silly and counter-productive. They just instil a sense that rules and their enforcements are capricious and not logical.

4. Punishments must be proportionate.

5. Like I said, why do we tolerate stuff which we wouldn't tolerate for adults? Would you ever work for a boss who tells you that you can only wear short sleeves when HE tells you so, and that you cannot wear a heavier coat in the winter even if you feel cold???

So can they ignore it if their children are allocated a school they haven't chosen?

So everyone on this thread with actual experience who has said it is true is lying?

ParentOfOne
That makes a bit more sense.

It's about clear piercing retainers, not dental ones.

I was thinking that it would be a brave school that tries to enforce no clear dental retainers.

CecilyP
I'm not on about the rules in a specific school.
My point is that there's two groups of parents who'd choose a non uniform school:

1. Reasonable parents who prefer a non-uniform school.

1. The same weak and permissive parents who will whine that their child has to follow a dress code and rules (eg. The non-uniform school could specify close toe or closed shoe and the sort of idiot parents who sad face about school uniform, would equally defend their child's right to wear flip flops because their child doesn't like the rules).

Group 2 parents will be a pain in the arse and encourage their children to ignore any rule they don't like because they're either immature as adults, or they're ineffective parents who'll do whatever their kid tells them. It's these sorts of parents who are in the press with their sad faces.

A non uniform school won't solve the problems of group 2 parents. They'll find another thing to moan about.

@hellswelshy Exactly! Imagine this happening in the workplace.
Imagine a boss who requires that everyone come to the office with blazers and ties, and that, only when Da Boss, from his infinite wisdom, so decrees, can the minions remove the blazer. The boss would rightly be ridiculed and criticised as an out of touch, abusive authoritarian. If we don't tolerate it with adults, why do we tolerate it with kids?

The article said no dental retainers.

But the press, especially tabloids, are unreliable. The official source is: https://www.gracecollege.org.uk/student-and-parent-hub/academy-uniform/year-7-11-day-wear-uniform/

which states

Items of jewellery, including body piercings, are not permitted, clear retainers can also not be worn.

Arguably it's unclear. It doesn't say dental retainers but nor does it say piercing retainers - not clearly at least.

@Parker231 " No sympathy for punishments by a school in these circumstances. "

No sympathy regardless of the punishment and the proportionality (or lack thereof) between offence and punishment? Shall we whip the kids who come with the wrong shoe? Stone them? Give them a public beating?

Like I said, it was very clear from the policy that ballerinas and logos were not allowed. But, if the article is to be believed, one kid was kept in detention the whole day, while another was made to wear smaller shoes which then gave her blisters. Do you find this sensible?

I find that punishing kids in a way which is not proportionate is counter-productive: it instils fear and resentment, and a general feeling that rules and punishment are arbitrary. Do you not?

What do you do if your children don't want to eat broccoli? Lock them in a room with no food for 2 days?

It's right there in the article under other:

No dental retainers, even clear ones

I suspect they'd struggle to enforce that one of a child has an orthodontist stipulating they need to wear a retainer. This policy would also forbid a child from having aligner treatment such as Invisalign, but would allow train track braces. I'm not sure any school can prevent a child having dental treatment or have a veto over their treatment plan.