To not get schools issue with dyed hair?

[fitforflighting]

I suspect I may get flamed for this but I genuinely do not get it.
They have a rule against earrings including sleepers. That I get especially with younger children or in sports were children can end up getting them at worst ripped out.

I can kind of even get extreme haircuts with big shaved stars or strange styles that look unprofessional and might not be allowed by adults in a professional work place.

But this week and last term several of senior age children who had dyed hair brown/red/dark purple etc were sent home from school to re dye or put in isolation by teachers with errr brown/red/purple dyed hair! One of the children's teacher has bright purple hair. It does not make her any less of a English teacher or lesson her professionalism in school I don't reckon so what is the problem for teens?

If you treat children with respect and empathy you get it back. No one took the piss with the open door we had

Dont be so patronising with your "once again"
You have no idea what I do for a living or who comes into my office.
Those of us who are not school teachers arent all sitting in an adult office all day.
And nobody has given a meaningful response to the last point / question.
Hey ho.
Off to play with the laundry.

Felicity I did reply to your question and it and it is you that said you would facilitate toilet breaks in your office. Sorry for making the assumption you work in an office

As for patronising - maybe it is because the same thing is being said but you don't seem to be getting it. Hair/uniform/toilet breaks etc are different at school and in the workplace because one is for children and one for adults. If there is a rule in both though they need to be upheld.

Quick example - let's say in your office there is a rule about not using the Internet for personal use and you fine that someone in work time has been amusing that - do you deal with it? Of course it is dealt with in the workplace. Just as a broken school rule is dealt with.

Time wasting is dealt with at work, just as it is at school - and toilet breaks are often about time wasting for kids - which is why I use the system I do and why posters in this thread have commented it is a good idea.

Grrr a using plus all other typos. Sleep deprived

Abusing

The toilet thing. Children in secondary schools move about the school passing toilets on the way to each lesson, they get about 20 minutes break in the morning and then about two hours later get another 40 to 50 minute break. Are those are you telling me that there is not enough time provided or that your average 11-18 year old doesn't know at these regular intervals that they need to go to the loo? If there are exceptions likw someone asking irregularly to go to the loo most teachers will let them go. On very rare occasions a poor decision can be made but as all the teachers have said on here in the majority of cases the same few kids ask to go to the loo during each lesson, it's not because they need the loo, they just want out of the lesson for 5-10 minutes. The school also don't want kids wandering the corridor during lesson as it provides an opportuinty to misbehave and also if something were to happen during that time parents would ask: "Well why was he/she out of class? Isn't it the teachers responsibility for their safety?" We can't win!

Math, you asked why the policy was "subtle" make up. Well I'll repeat what I said earlier, you can either ban it totally which produces unsatisfactory results, or you don't have any rules regarding make up which leads to students coming to school with a full face of make up which has taken an age to put on. As we all know maintaining a full face of make up takes time, so during the day and can distract the girls from learning because they're re-applying their lippy in class, or taking 10 minutes in the bathrooms between each lesson touch it up. Again not ideal, so schools go for "subtle" which is a good compromise.

Many parents actually rely on school rules to help them with their teeangers and like them: "You can't pierce your lip becasuse the school won't allow you to be in class with it", "Get up now or you'll be late and the school will give you a detention" etc etc. Of course all of you on MN are perfect parents and your DC are perfect children who are mature and make balanced descisions but in the real world the school rules help parents to get their children to toe a line that they would like. Even the make up thing can be part of this, you can get your daughter out of the door on time because she isn't in the bathroom for an hour making sure she looks immaculate, or she actually remembers to pack all of the correct books for the day because she isn't making the make up a priority because you can only wear a minumum amount.

Again we go back to stakeholder interests. So yes the public perception of the school is important, sorry Math but it is, it has an effect on the number of parents that come to look round the school on open evening, if the public perception is not good people won't even bother. The more students on roll the more funding is recieved which means that the school can afford to do more, hire better teachers, the economies of scale achieved can result in more facilities and resources being provided, which in turn provides better educational outcomes. As stated above there are many reasons why parents want uniforms too and when consulted (I'm not sure about others but my school runs consultation sessions with parents regularly) parents overwhelmingly say that they want schools to have uniform and rules about appearance, so schools have uniforms and rules about appearance.

Also to the people saying teachers don't have to wear a uniform, the vast majority of schools have a dress code for staff which they uphold. In any case its a really good example of a Tu Quoque which is a flawed argument because it doesn't disprove the argument for any less credible. Same goes for cats argument regarding teachers knowing they can't leave the classroom and students not having a choice about attending school

To conclude (and go back to marking year 12 exam scripts) schools are trying to meet every stakeholder need effectively. This involves a level of compromise on many people's part. Uniform and appearance rules are overwhelmingly stated as a preference by parents so schools have unform and appearance rules, exceptions are made where neccesary, but the lack of compromise by posters on here shows that we can't make everybody happy. Until we have a societal change that means that uniform is no longer regarded in the same way the rules will stay, we have to try to change that, but attacking those who have to implement the current system as part of their job is rather futile and shows a massive disregard for people who are delivering an important public service.

I use an office.
People come & see me.

Everyone understands that certain rules are neccessary for safety, performance or practical reasons.
Here we are talking about the colour of hair.
Not important.

The point I was making about a loo break was that if a student doesn't need to go during class time then neither does the teacher, so why be pissed off about it?
Anyway. really got to scoot.

Longtime lurker thank you

Internet access is often restricted to non-personal use because MNing or booking a holiday detracts from work time. Pretty obvious.
Clinicians are not supposed to wear nail varnish/ false nails because of perfectly understandable hygiene issues.
Scuba divers do not wear heels because they would affect the way they move through the water.
Sky divers don't wear brooches when they take people out on a tandem jump... Another obvious one.
If my employer implimented a rule stating staff must not shape their eyebrows I would find that odd and I would not enforce it

But it's a rule Felicity - encouraging pupils to break it does not bode well for the future as it leads to disregard of all other rules.

With the loo thing. Dc start school at 8.20. They are in form before the bell goes. The school is massive and there are often not toilets on the route to the next class and many are now locked and you have to find staff to open them. Break is at 10.50am were dc will get a big drink especially after doing pe. Their next break is 1.15. One of mine does have a medical pass often wets her tights trying to get to the toilets in time often three blocks away and is mortified about it.

As we all know maintaining a full face of make up takes time, so during the day and can distract the girls from learning because they're re-applying their lippy in class, or taking 10 minutes in the bathrooms between each lesson touch it up. Again not ideal, so schools go for "subtle" which is a good compromise.

This is a really questionable rationale for the rule. Maintaining subtle make-up takes time, too. If reapplying lipstick is a big issue time issue in the classroom, then forbid that. I seriously doubt that time is the real reason that schools ban non-subtle make-up.

The loo thing ...
I don't stick to the school rules on that and this is the reason why. I wear a colostomy bag and teach all day with it and currently a tumour. My students make allowances for me - sometimes it makes noises or fills up and I make allowances for them- sometimes they need the loo. I ask that they don't go in the first five minutes nor the last. It works for me.
We have a very short break at school lunch is 25 mins and the toilets open into large areas. I would rather wait too :)

But it's a rule Felicity - encouraging pupils to break it does not bode well for the future as it leads to disregard of all other rules.

I can't stand this attitude. Taking it to the logical extension following all rules without thinking critically is what leads people to commit atrocities when ordered to and such.

Now I'm not suggesting that school rules are human rights abuses but pointing out why just following the rules regardless of what it is is stupid

As we all know maintaining a full face of make up takes time, so during the day and can distract the girls from learning because they're re-applying their lippy in class, or taking 10 minutes in the bathrooms between each lesson touch it up. Again not ideal, so schools go for "subtle" which is a good compromise.

Ever heard of setting spray?

So you think we do it to be draconian and enforce rules on the students that are pointless, that they aren't brought in for any reason? What other reason would you suggest that subtle make up is allowed? Even with the subtle rule you spend time telling girls to put their make up away, but as most parents back the school girls wear a minimum and aren't carting half of boots around in their bag instead of books. Do you think that if we had no rules on makeup that it wouldn't distract from the task in hand?

"Taking it to the logical extension following all rules without thinking critically is what leads people to commit atrocities when ordered to and such." That's a slippery slope argument right there, not really valid.

long no I don't think makeup distracts. I've said earlier that I went to sixth form with no uniform and makeup policy. Green hair, loads of piercings, tattoos, makeup, no makeup, high heels, trainers, you could see it all.

No one cared and it didn't interfere with lessons.

It is valid because you're saying teaching kids they don't have to follow rules is a slippery slope I'm offering the counter

Well as a teacher I can tell you it does. Even yesterday I was telling year 11 girls to put away the make up and the mirror mid lesson and to get on with the task in hand. At 6th form I think students are more likely to be engaged (note more likely not definately) and try to find ways to distract themselves in lessons because they have chosen to be there.

Our 6th formers have a dress code which is basically don't wear underwear as outerwear and dress appropriately for the classroom, as in don't come in dressed as if your going out on the town. Year 13 girls often laugh about the fact that the younger years all really make an effort and that they did too, when they now just come in jeans and baggy jumper and usually minimal make up.

That's 6th form. Not school. Different again - I had a 6th form with no uniform - blue and purple hair, dressed like Max wall with oversized jackets etc.
Didn't dress like that at school though as I knew the consequences.

Cats I don't think any of the (2 or 3) pupils who I have asked to take off their red lipstick have gone on to commit world atrocities - as a matter of fact one even teaches with me now and upholds the same rules I do ...

A lot of the arguments on here are from non teachers who 'think' and teachers who 'know'.

As said previously I wouldn't tell you how I 'think' you should do your job as I would assume you 'know' how to do it. (Generalisation as there are some in all jobs who do not know how to do their jobs).

I hate uniforms on children. It's preparing them for a life of corporate crap. Look like a drone, wear the "right" clothes, fit in...also most uniforms are impractical and uncomfortable.

If the schools want kids to look smart then that's fine. Why not make them comfortable too?

What would be wrong with plain sweatshirts, t shirts and jogging bottoms worn with unbranded trainers?

Nothing. They'd be warm and washable...any colour should be allowed. In summer they could wear shorts if they choose and a t shirt.

Agreed purple, but of course everyone can tell a teacher what their job is like or how to manage things because they were once a pupil!

Like I said on the make up rule, because parents mostly back us most of the girls wear minimal levels and it isn't an issue, there are still some that have it as a distraction. I definately think that for the lower years if we had no rules on it then it would become more of a distraction.

Oh and don't get me started on mobile fricking phones.

long those pupils would either be texting under the desk, doodling or daydreaming. The problem isn't the makeup it's that they're not interested.

piece you two don't represent all teachers and that doesn't make you right.

house that is how I feel about it too.

No cat, they wouldn't be, the make up is just another thing that can distract, they wouldn't dare be on their phone out because that leads to an automatic detention. I love how you just state their not interested, their children they want to do well but don't always

I agree with thehouse about uniform, it doesn't have to be expensive or uncomfortable, all of ours can be sourced from the local supermarket. But we also go back to the "perception" element don't we, its a fricking tightrope to walk and its no wonder sometimes schools get it wrong for some individuals.

As I've said before I'd quite happily use the Sutton Trust study as evidence and get rid of uniform, but we as a school are required to try to meet the needs and wants of all of our stakeholders. In the majority parents request uniform and appearance rules when consulted, so there are rules on appearance on uniform.

long if someone is getting distracted you teach them not to you don't remove the "distraction". The phones point is irrelevant, if phones weren't banned they'd use that. So the issue is the kids won't do it unless you ban things. Maybe a new approach is needed? Not from you personally just schools in general.

So effectively you're bullied into it by pushy parents,