Girls school uniform - skirt length, make up etc

[Emmaheather]

Interested to hear people's views on this. I don't have any direct experience as a mother of boys who are at a school with a very relaxed attitude to school uniform. I don't understand why it's viewed as so important by some and why schools would send children home rather than let them attend school in a short skirt/make up. I worry about the messages being given by these attitudes.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3gg178850xo

Yes - that's what she's doing now. But I stand by my point that if they weren't wearing dresses, this wouldn't be a problem. And as far as I can tell, at high school, the girls don't seem to want to wear the cycling shorts - possibly because they DO want their skirts to be a bit shorter?

I work in a senior school and am female. Going up the stairs behind some of the girls who have skirts that barely cover their bum is awful. The blazer is longer. Are their arses not freezing.
I've never seen a member of staff wear a skirt so short so why should the pupils be allowed. I wish it was just trousers tbh, the boys have to wear trousers all year round, so makes it all very equal, and less time would be wasted asking girls to put their arse cheeks away.
Make up/hair etc I'm not actually fussed about along as it isn't affecting their learning. Have had one student with eyelashes, so thick, I'm surprised she could see.

I think it's about following rules. A lot of girls have very short skirts and a lot of make up. Some of the Year 11 has given up on school uniforms because the school can no longer give detention and is unlikely to bar them from sitting GCSE.

If they don't enforce school uniform policies, you might as well have none.

DD goes to a girls' school. At the start of the school year they send out loads of emails about maintaining uniform standards, piercings, false eyelashes, nails etc. Then by Christmas I think they give up. Sometimes they give out consequence points but I think they turn a blind eye to most of it. What's ridiculous is the skirt length thing. Since covid, two days each week the girls have to attend school already in their PE kits.... the tiniest skorts you've ever seen 😆. So it's ridiculous to then impose a suitable length of normal uniform skirt on the other days. I don't think they thought it through properly.

Exactly was a PP says. The skirts I see walking to my DC1 school. A lot of them barely cover their bums.

I was shocked to see a Year 6 at DC2 school with nipple on her gingham dress. In her case, I wonder if she got a dress from 2 years ago and was too tight, or the parents neglected to buy her new uniform. But the buttons nearly bursting open without a bra isn't a good look. (I don't think it's in the school uniform regulations though)!

For me biggest issue was (DD is now in Sixth Form) that the uniform is extremely formal, very expensive and uncomfortable to wear.

The skirt was £35, the jumper £35, the blazer £90. All from two specific suppliers and unable to get anything from the high street.
Blazer (dry clean only) was mandatory until Y10 and you had to had permission to take it off. DD commented that the only benefit was that it had pockets.
The skirt was a pleated kilt, the jumper thick polycotton over polyester shirts and if you had the blazer on it as well you smelt like a skunk by March/April.

Why not a uniform (if really needed) of simple black trousers or skirt, white shirts or tops and a plain jumper. Why the need for badges and eleborate piping?

Don't start on the PE kit.

The issue is not with following rules, it's normal to try to bend them. DD managed to get away with foundation and concealer in Y11, I can't see Make up hindering the way you learn.

And uniform does not stop bullying, the subject just moves from clothes to trainers, shoes (Doc Martens was a popular issue in one school I know), phones and bags.

if they work it will be from home

The problem is that it's become a culture of as short as possible
The girls who walk past our house in the morning often have skirts so short that their jumpers almost cover them. And that's not because the jumpers are long.
My girls chose to wear trousers/shorts because they didn't want to wear skirts that short and they got comments for having "long " skirts -they were still half way up their legs above their knees.

I don't think there's anything wrong with having rules or uniform or enforcing them. Plenty of work places do have uniform, including ones like McDonald's.

As a huge 6th firm concession, we're allowed to wear a cardigan instead of a jumper.

My DC and their friends were fairly compliant regarding uniform. It didn't seem to be much of an issue.

When I had small children, 25 years ago, I thought uniform was important. As I have matured I think it's less so. Two things really:

1. French children, in their jeans and casual tops and trainers look so much better than English children.

1. UK school uniform is utterly vile. Polyester, badly cut, ghastly checked kilts, clumpy shoes, ankle socks and acres of leg. Often in hues of Maroon, Marine Blue and bottle green.

One thing that really pissed me off when my dc were at primary was that every 4 year old to wear a collar and tiel. When temperatures hit 75+, male teachers wore tee shirts and women teachers spaghetti straps and flip flops. In the real world, leadership is usually by example.

Perhaps fairness, style and making the best not oneself should be incorporated into teacher training.

My DC's uniform at indys was OK. The blazers were nice and well cut. At DS's school only the jumpers were logoed. At DD's the blouses were as well. It wasn't particularly abused and never an issue. The price was fairly ouchy though although I could never understand the complaints as it was miniscule compared to the fees.

At state schools, even with expensive blazers the emphasis and outrage at cost always confounds me. It is still pretty reasonable and young people need clothes for Monday to Friday anyway. I'm not persuaded jeans, a tops, a casual jacket and trainers would be any cheaper and there probably would be more emphasis on "designer" which could be humiliating for some children/young people.

All that matters is that a child shows up ready to learn.

These kinds of crackdowns always interfere with the education of girls more than boys. The sexism at the heart of the policies is highly disturbing.

"Why not a uniform (if really needed) of simple black trousers or skirt, white shirts or tops and a plain jumper. Why the need for badges and eleborate piping?"

I don't think I know anyone who works and has such a strict uniform.

Most people I know have a work uniform that's simple like you described - trousers or skirt and a shirt or polo shirt and jumper.

@Ponderingwindow to be fair boys are often affected by uniform rules too - not being about to wear shorts in a heatwave for example.

There’s a lot to be gained from encouraging students to take some care in their appearance. I work in an office and were expected not look smart and tidy, but there’s a huge variation in what that means. The basics of wearing a reasonably priced and non restrictive uniform are fine.

School uniform should be practical, comfortable and unisex. I don't understand the obsession of dressing our kids like men in the 1940s.

If we are preparing our kids for working lives then polo shirt are fine as they are widely worn. Only a small selection of men wear ties.

Have skirts as part of a uniform they’re going to be shortened. Has been thus since the 60s. If you’re going to have uniform make it trousers for everyone.
As for blue hair/ black lipstick/ false eyelashes as long as they’re attending , working and not disturbing others what does it matter? Teenage years are for experimenting.

Eh? The workforce, depends if you work somewhere with a uniform. I suppose. They were measuring the Girl’s skirts at DD’s school but people complained about it and they don’t measure them anymore. DD wears her skirt quite short but she is skinny and no hips etc, she and it is no shorter than a mini skirt which women do wear especially with tights in the workplace. She is wearing flat trainer style shoes. They even reversed their decision on laddered tights as too many complaints about sanctions for it. I think it is completely unnecessary to send the girls home, mind you I think uniforms are unnecessary. I am currently hunting for 5.5 regulation shoes for the last few weeks of term and massively resent it as my DD is wearing Black converse boot style trainers which ok have some stars on them but does it matter? Ironically, DD would probably be more covered up if they had no uniform as she wears baggy jeans and hoodies, in the summer occasional flowery skirts but they are longer than her school kilt which she folds over!

I agree. I even think it's okay to say that for super formal occassions, there is a tie and a white shirt required (neither are super expensive, especially if you go for generic "blue" tie or whatever) because that's what it is like in the real world. Even in investment banking/law firms these days most men are wearing open necked shirts with a tie only for formal client meetings. Occasional tie/jacket wearing according to need would more accurately reflect the way in which the workplace actually operates these days.

Similarly, with skirts, in most workplaces (not all) super short skirts would be considered inappropriate and/or impractical. So I have no issue with saying girls shouldn't wear them (and don't even get me started on our local high schools who have "business casual" as their dress code for 6th formers and all the girls are wearing super tight, super short pencil skirts). But to insist on pleated skirt in shitty materials to knee length is ridiculous as no one wears those either in real life.

We live across the road from a co-ed high school. I know that girls are allowed to wear trousers. They all wear skirts. To be fair, length is usualy okayish - not a lot of super super short ones. But i find it so odd because these same girls, when I see them on the weekend or when I'm dropping DS at parties etc, are all wearing trousers (okay, at parties they're often wearing bodycon dresses but the rest of the time it's trousers). So I don't understand why they all insist on wearing skirts for school.

The boys can wear skirts at my DD’s school but my DS who left for 6th form college last year said that even at their school (which is pretty liberal) it wasn’t something he saw any boy do.

The skirts in the photo of the article are pretty long and old fashioned style/cut. They got rid of black skirts at DD’s school as many older girls were wearing tight Lycra ones. They brought in the Kilts thinking this would solve he problem but all that’s happened is the they have increased cost for parents as the skirts are 35 and they roll over the top anyway. In DD’s case she asked for it to be altered as so embarrassing at the knee the alterations were another £20 so really expensive skirt in the end! That said we are lucky as they have polo T-shirts for the top half.

At DDs school, if they stay for the extra hour for sport, they come home in PE kit and blazer.
The PE kit looks smarter randomly... navy sports leggings, Navy polo shirt and Navy blazer.

I agree with pp that they should just do away with skirts and have trousers for everyone. So much more practical.

I don’t get the fuss over hair and make up. Some girls might feel self conscious of their skin and want to hide it with foundation. It might well be caked on because they’re 13 and new to make up but it might make them feel better in themselves.

skirts barely covering the arses though is a different ball game- I had the misfortune of walking behind some teenage girls on the stairs and I could see their arses. I didn’t want to but there they were. I also saw a girl running with her tiny skirt blowing in the wind to reveal her entire arse. It’s not appropriate. I do not want to see other people arses. Save them for the beach if you really want them on show. Schools should just say the uniform is blazer, shirt and tie (or polo neck and jumper if it’s a more relaxed school) and trousers for all kids. No skirts or shorts as an option.

I went to an all girls school with a very strict uniform policy. Skirts had to be a certain length, heels a certain height, white shirts under a blazer and absolutely not allowed to wear a vest, t-shirt or jumper underneath, but also couldn't have bra showing so they essentially dictated the colour of our underwear. No socks, grey tights only all year round. No jewellery, no hair dye, ponytails only, no makeup, just nothing.
It was awful.
Obviously we'd rebel, start with a bit of tinted moisturizer and gradually try and build up. Deliberately wearing white or black bras, slightly different tights colour etc.
But being locked up in isolation for not looking identical to everyone else was so depressing. I vowed to never send my child to a school like that.

I remember girls rolling their skirts up in secondary school, but it was nothing like what I see daily around here for the local secondary girls. The vast majority literally have their arses peeking out from their skirts - that's just not needed at any age (or from any sex whilst we're at it!). I can well believe this is the issue in Caldicot too which is why the head is cracking down on it.

The BBC are being disingenuous by using that stock photo...but then eyebrows would be on the ceiling if they used an actual photo of the problematic skirts in question.

I'd fully support skirts being taken from the options as uniform. They aren't practical at all. Both my daughters agree too.

The length of skirts in my daughter's school was measured by the tips of the fingers when straightened arms were put down along the sides. Longer yes, shorter no.
No fire engine red lipstick or nails, only neutrals (more or less). Stud earrings, which I guess is all right. Very colourful hair would probably also be frowned upon, but nobody had that.
No detentions or yelling, just a quiet word.