To ask what UK parents really think of school uniform

[longtimelurker101]

Relating to the thread on school uniform and hair dying. What do parents really think? Do you support the idea or would you prefer that schools across the U.K went non-uniform and had no rules regarding appearance?

No its not relevant, you need a better argument than that! Go look up flaws in arguments and then you'll understand my point.

As I said there was a ECHR rulling on schools making girls wear skirts back in the late 90s. I distinctly remember the case it was some girl and her mother from Yorkshire who won. Any school enforcing a rule is in contravention of that.

Keep it cheap and washable, and it's fab. Hike up the prices as some for of social cleansing/ money maker, and I start having a problem with it.

Love it for avoiding too many clothing dilemmas... But I wish there were more options - girls wearing trousers, less guidelines on shoes (ballet pump style must have a bar/elastic across them?!. These are teens!)
Anyway, I like it so much so I decided to make my own "uniform" for myself (a sahm). Basically lots of basics so I wear what looks to be pretty much the same thing every day. (I don't care about fashion, the pieces are "classic")

However, my DD loves experimenting with her hair and I wish there was more leniency with this sort of thing in her school. Roll on Easter!

My boys have been to two primary schools, one with a uniform and one without.

Absolutely no question we prefer no uniform. It's one set of clothes (jeans, shorts, T shirts, jumpers) that they can wear day in day out. It's a lot less hassle than maintaining two sets of clothing and far far cheaper.

Our current primary is the only school in the area without a uniform. Every so often they put together a uniform package (shorts, skirts, polo tops, hoodies etc) and ask the parents if they would like it introduced - and every time it's an overwhelming response from the parent body that they do not want a uniform.

We had far more problems with bullying in the uniform school than our current non uniform one. I think bullying is a red herring in this issue, there is always something that some children can find to make others' lives a misery. If it's not what you wear, it's what you read / which maths set you're in / what's in your lunchbox / whether you're sporty or not. If there's a bullying issue in the school then it's how this is managed which makes a difference not what the children wear.

Girls in ds's primary are allowed to wear trousers. Most wear a skirt, pinafore or summer dress, but a few do wear trousers and I think it's good they have the option.

I don't really mind uniform, provided it's practical, comfortable and there are no silly rules about what colour the child's coat should be or what colour hair bobbles/socks that are hidden under trousers are acceptable etc.

That said, don't see why primary or even secondary school kids should have to wear shirts and Blazers. A polo shirt and a jumper is far more comfortable and practical for children.

Hate school uniform. DD had issues with synthetic materials irritating her eczema, also really struggled to find clothes that fitted her well. She's now at a non - uniform school. She gets up, puts on comfortable, weather - appropriate clothes. It's a non - issue. They generally wear jeans, sweatshirts & trainers or boots. They're dressed appropriately. Can't say the same about uniform schools round here, wearing ill - fitting clothes, freezing/boiling and below DD's school for attainment. I didn't wear uniform for most of my education - combination of very rural schools and schools abroad, but for the short time I had to, I thought it was uncomfortable and I felt silly in it.

Interesting that its over whelmingly pro uniform on here, and that many of the reasons given are in contrast to those who back no uniform. Its also interesting that some who go to no uniform schools have come out as pro uniform and vice versa.

Your opinion, OP, is that it's not relevant. My opinion, based on my view of children's rights, is that it is relevant.

Trousers should be an option for boys and girls. The only argument needed to back this up is that of not discriminating based on sex. No other argument is needed.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/petitions_noticeboard/2483328-School-uniform-trousers-for-girls

There may have been a ruling in 1990, but it's still a battle being fought.

i agree that it's sexist. My point about relevance is a wider one; it's unfair and wrong to require children and teens to dress in ways that are radically different from what adults are allowed to wear, just because they are children. It's commonly used as the rationale for strict uniform when teachers are allowed to wear whatever they please.

I like it. Primary school here but it's easy. The uniform isn't enforced, just suggested, but the vast majority wear it - white polo shirt, school colour cardi/sweatshirt, grey trousers/shorts/skirt/pinafore or checked summer dress.

You can get a polo shirt & cardi/sweatshirt with the school badge if you want, or you can just wear Tesco etc without. There's no requirement for girls or boys to wear any particular item, or not wear any particular item.

I've no real opinion about uniform in secondary school. Our local school has a similar policy to the Primary and again most seem to wear some approximation of the uniform. At my secondary virtually no-one did - I could personally have done without the clothes angst, but that was partly down to my mum's very strict ideas about what was appropriate. School didn't much care outside no football colours.

I like school uniform but I wish it were easier to buy correct teenage shoes for girls, had a nightmare trying to find them for dd. We searched high and low in terms of price range, but anything remotely suitable was seriously old fashioned. Got lucky in year 10 and 11 it was a nightmare. Think it was year 9 when we found a pair out of the blue in a supermarket that seemed to fit the bill. They only made it to October half term.
School skirt issue is a complete disgrace. Would not send my DD to a school that enforced a skirt without serious protest. Luckily for us this had been sorted before my DD was due to start by someone else.

Most,if not all, schools will have a dress code for staff, it's not a question of dressing as they please. But I accept that you feel strongly that adults shouldn't dictate what children wear.

I think uniform probably makes life simpler. Know what you are wearing in the morning so no arguing, no pressure to wear cool expensive clothes. I honestly can't tell at our school who is wearing an Asda trousers and shirt or a M&S set (and I've used both) - they all look close enough - sure young children have it no thought.

English schools are quite simple for primary - polo shirt and trousers or skirt, jumper. I've notices that primary kids at Scottish schools seem to wear shirts, ties and Blazers from Primary 1 (reception) - I think that's unneccessarily restrictive for young children.

Seneca, no it isn't an opinion, its an erroneous way to argue your point if you are going to have flaws in it.

For example, teachers are allowed to leave the school grounds at lunchtime, pupils are not, is that too "unfair", there are a host of other things too that teachers are allowed to do but not students, so "teachers do it" is a poor argument.

If you are going to argue a point well, don't have flaws in your arguments that mean that they can be dismantled easily.

You could for example raise the issue that some of the more religious girls could be made to feel uncomfortable as it isn't really within their dress code, or that restricting girls from wearing trousers is sexist. Now both of those have statutes protecting them (Sex Discrimination, Race Relations, ECHRA) and make specific referrences to public services within their text (can you tell I don't agree with forcing skirts) and so could be taken to court.

Saying: "teachers do it" makes you sound like a whiny child who can't think of anything better.

You really are being a trifle obtuse, OP. Of course rights and freedoms expand as children get older. Not leaving during lunch is a safety issue for young children; it's a reasonable rule for younger children. In some high schools, older pupils are allowed to leave for lunch.

Students should not be forced to wear hot uncomfortable clothing, especially when the adults standing in front of them in the classroom are wearing short-sleeved cotton shirts. It's unequal treatment when there is no defensible rationale for doing so.

I commend the example of Quaker schools to anyone interested in how it is possible to run schools in a less hierarchical manner.

I'm not being obtuse at all, I've pointed out that your argument is "teachers do it" and it doesn't stand up. The inequality can be defended by saying that teachers are adults, at work, and can be expected to make judgement calls on what to wear and its appropriateness, students can't always so the rules are put in place.

However if you were to argue that it is sexist, racist etc not to allow students to wear certain items you would be far more effective.

The thing shown by this thread too is that most parents back uniform, I conceed that sometimes some schools do get it wrong, but until we can change public perception on uniform it will continue to be a part of life in schools in the U.K.

My dc have been to both uniform and non-uniform schools and, to my surprise, I prefer the non uniform.

It's not a hassle at all them getting ready in the morning, I let them choose their own clothes, I've only ever vetoed one outfit when my youngest wanted to wear a sun dress in the middle of winter. There was a little boy in her reception class last year that wore a fancy dress costume everyday for the first half term. My dd has also worn her Anna dress to school before.

And there's no bother with finding their school shoes, they can just wear any, I don't have to worry if I hadn't done any laundry or ironing at the weekend. It's a brilliant school with an outstanding ofsted rating, they focus on growth mindset rather than what the kids are wearing.

I'm also not even remotely able to tell which kids come from poor or rich families. We're not poor but my dc live mostly in Primark, H&M and George at Asda.

My eldest is moving to secondary in September and will be going back to a uniform which she is ok with, but (if we get our first choice) it's not as strict as some of the examples on here, and blazers are optional.

I'm interested in the Quaker schools but all the ones I can find online are independent schools, most with uniforms and nothing that I can find that distinguishes them from other similar schools. What would be a good example of the kind of Quaker school you mean Seneca?

So here's a question.

Does the uniform, and how the students are when out and about in public shape your perception of the school?

I think all Quaker schools are independent; certainly they are in the US. Here is the one the Obama girls attend:

www.sidwell.edu/about-sfs/quaker-values/about-quaker-education/index.aspx

From the website: "Friends schools hope to create an environment within which students and staff alike can continue to mature as companions in a wide range of experiences."

This is an older article about the Bootham School in York.

www.theguardian.com/education/2009/mar/10/sasha-malia-obama-quaker-school

Bootham in York has a uniform.