to be shocked that so may kids have returned to school with incorrect uniform?

[PerpetuallyAnnoyedByHeadlice]

Why? Why buy your kids what can only be termed "fashion" blouses and trousers rather than school uniform ones (and this is primary we are talking about). Why allow them to even say they wont wear the normal polo shirts like everyone else? why buy girls black trousers when the rule is grey - why a grey cardi when it should be green?

obviously if someone has moved into area, or has lost items towards the end of the year, things get a little lax and anything goes, but why buy a whole set of new stuff, that IS NOT the uniform - and its not as if its because its cheaper, its not

the trouble is the kids get used to this and parents pandering to them, but the local secondaries will not tolerate it - I await the annual series of front page stories about how petty schools are for sending kids home for having the wrong trousers, or wearing trainers

I can imagine some of these mums marching in and having a word with their DCs eventual employer about their "right" to be late once in a while, or to not want to wear the provided uniform!

What LeQueen said.

(tethersend - you're welcome...hope all okay)

tethers - had always believed the function of uniform was to give kids something safe to rebel against, it's nice to have that confirmed by a teacher.

edam - isn't that a case of mixing causes and effects?

You might as well argue that the function of clean school walls is to give vandals a surface on which to spray paint...or that the function of innocent passers-by is to give would-be muggers easy prey...

Well DS has to have zip up or lace up shoes for school. Clarks only do velcro for my DS' age, which I think is a bit silly cos some reception aged children do tie their own shoe laces. So we went to a different shoe shop who had some but only in navy or brown.

BA, it may not be the primary or intended function of a uniform, but it is a function nonetheless- in the same way as a function of a wall is for vandals to spray paint on, even though it is not the primary or intended function. The same for passers by- for the mugger they have the function of providing money or goods. For you and I, passers by have the function of making us feel that we are not alone.

Objects can have multiple functions, over and above those which they were designed to perform; school uniform certainly has this function, as well as others- for me, it is the only reason I am in favour of it.

(...and thanks for asking, they are out of hospital with broken bones but alive- I am so relieved )

tethersend - that's an interesting argument in support of something...to use a secondary/tertiary function for which said 'thing' was clearly not intended.

I grant that I would prefer children to mis-wear their uniform if the alternative way of rebelling was to film one another stamping on a tramp's head etc etc...but then I'd far prefer they did neither

Good

i think school uniform is useful - it can be easy to get dressed, kids look smart, you know which kids are yours when out on trips, everyone wears the same etc etc but the reality is that loads of kids circumvent the rules (you should see the yr 11s!) and many parents cannot afford the uniform that is specified. The cheap/affordable stuff isn't always suitable - ie my dd cannot wear manmade fibres and so she cannot wear the uniform set down by her school. I have to get approximations which have to be good enough. My complaint is that you can't even buy a badge to sew on, they uniform rubbish stuff which is hideous hard polyester costs fortune and my dd cannot wear it. Every term she gets told off and every term the headteacher apologises to me for the telling off, by which time dd is in tears. and oh so fed up with being different...

Nah not bothered about school uniforms either way.
(Really just seeing if my new nickname works, sorry to hijack for inane reason)

Actually I do have an opinion...at ourschool, they pretend they're hot on correct uniform but they're not really.

It's all a bit hippy/middle class scruffy and the school's outstanding.

The secondary dc will go to has no uniform and the kids look like a contemporary Les Miserables collective. And it is also outstanding.

So meh.

I agree with Bonsoir. I'm not sending my smallest daughter (ie at primary school) to school in horrible clothes. I think royal blue is quite hideous. Grey, however, is lovely.

Altinkum - what a ridiculous remark from the other poster. I think you were very restrained! Of course H fitting with high instep is murder. My dd takes H fitting (without high instep) and that alone is murder!

and I can't stop repeating 'murder'

I know in primary school there is no law about wearing school uniform and it is unenforceable but for some reason I thought it was in secondary. Is this correct?

Also I see nothing wrong with buying red tights if the uniform has red in. If the uniform has red in you'd think they would say red tights would be allowed as well as grey and black depending on whether either or both colours of trouser/skirt/pinafore are allowed.

A school by us has a uniform policy of dark trousers/skirt/pinafore, red jumper or cardigan, white shirt, tie and dark shoes. Why they need to go around specifying certain colours especially of socks, tights and hair accessories is beyond me.

Sorry it's marroon and marroon trousers/skirt/pinafore are also allowed.

I think schools should me more flexible with uniform. If they were more flexible people could make their choice and show their own bit of individuality whilst still adhering to the rules and everyone still co-ordinating and looking smart.

It's quite simple:

Dark or school colours trousers/skirt/shorts/pinafore
Dark or school colours trousers/skirt/shorts/pinafore
Dark or school colours jumper or cardigan
Dark or school colours shoes
Oh and it should all be unlogoed

I am against a uniform really.

It does not even out the differences between richer and poorer kids.

The kids hate it, so treat it badly, which means it often is not smart.

It is far more expensive than generic stuff.

It is a method of control as in "A girl in our school uniform was seen doing xxx on the bus/ street/ train"

I have identical twins. It is important to them that their teachers can tell them apart. Along with art work wrongly labelled from primary, one DS is left handed and his brother isn't. They were both slow to settle on handedness, but I was clear about this early on. Never quite worked out if the teacher did not believe me, or just could not tell them apart, but the upshot was that DS was forced to write with his right hand, which has had serious repercussions for the rest of his education. Not being in uniform would have helped prevent this.

And that is before I start on the fact that one DS was came home from his first day at primary school crying with hunger because his brother had eaten slightly earlier, been invited to go up for seconds which he did and the dinner lady decided that his twin was greedy for requesting thirds so no food.

yr4 in a thong ...

try a yr7 turning up to a school disco in

three inch high heels
black fish net tights
red velour thong backed body/leotard

nope, that's it ... full stop, nothing else!!

the staff were all so stunned that her father had turned and gone before anyone was able to pull themselves together and suggest that this might not be appropriate attire for an 11 yr old girl

Before we HE'd, our children went to two US schools. The schools had their own issues but worries over clothing didn't seem to one of them. It's hard to tell the difference between a $3 t-shirt from The Children's Place, a $8 shirt from Target or a $15 shirt from Gap. The kids wore whatever they found cute and I never spotted any unpleasantness over clothes, inappropriateness or divides between rich and poor or anything like that (plenty of the richest kids wore the $3 shirts!)

Being able to wear whatever was so, so much easier than the stress at their English school of massively expensive uniform (regulation summer dress, 50 pound jacket, white socks and so on) which had to be ironed nicely and all hell breaking lose if something got mislaid.

The only odd thing was both uniformless schools had rules against 'spaghetti straps' for some reason so no vest tops

at the thong leotard, Guinessgirl

Totally agree with all you say Perpetually Annoyed by Headlice. We decided to send our children to a traditional primary and that meant signing up to the uniform policy. It was all available through chain stores where it is the cheapest form of childrens' clothing. This is a no brainer. To really set this lot off I might start a thread about teachers setting an example in schools with strict uniform. For example, if children have to wear smart leather lace ups and a collar and tie, is it unreasonable to expect the staff to arrive for work properly presented rather than in tee shirts and flip flops.

How do you not sign up for a uniform policy if all the schools in your area have uniform?

I'm not sure how I feel about teachers having to wear suits etc. One one hand I think it makes them look like they should be respected, but on the other hand I think they would seem more approachable if they were dressed slightly more casual. Also if your child is in nursery or reception I'm not sure if very smart clothes are appropiate - it makes them look as though they aren't really prepared to get down and dirty with the kids so to speak. At DS' old nursery the teacher was of the suit brigade. At his new school it's combats, trackie bottoms and trainers.