to think that schoolchildren should not have to wear a sign saying they have 24hrs to get their uniform sorted?

[orlantina]

www.theguardian.com/education/2017/jul/17/school-makes-pupils-wear-signs-if-uniform-doesnt-meet-standards

The idea being that by wearing a sign, it makes teachers aware that the pupil is aware of the issue and is going to get it sorted.

But I think that wearing a sign just also highlights issues and makes the pupils a potential target.

There are loads of reasons why a uniform might not be up to scratch in the morning. Not all of them are under the pupils' control.

If a child was being picked on, the opportunity for that is there when their uniform is challenged in class. I just don't agree that the wearing of a lanyard is more visible than being asked repeatedly about the uniform. As I said, the uniform itself is a different discussion.

The lanyard is public but so are the trainers or the jeans the pupil is wearing..

Maybe I am right in thinking that a lanyard is more discreet than frequent questioning.

John Hattie conducted a 15 year worldwide meta analysis on over quarter of a billion pupils, and concluded "Conversations about school uniform are distracting; it doesn't matter if uniform is compulsory or not as it makes no difference whatsoever to student achievement. Your school should decide whether or not you want to enforce a uniform, but waste no further time debating it."

Other studies have shown no effect on behaviour of wearing uniforms, and a negative effect on learning outcomes. It all seems pretty pointless for the hassle it causes.

If you're not going to be happy until there is no uniform or no enforcement of uniform, why not look for a school with no uniform to start with

Like most European countries...but that's a different thread.

its just a uniform
glad i didnt have to put up with that crap

I know the school in question. It's a bizarre place. They've always been obsessed with uniform.

While my school had strict uniform standards, they would be upheld by teachers to different degrees. My sister (who was an overachiever at maths) got a detention for wearing socks with a logo on from her maths teacher.

There was a home clothes day at my school, to raise money for -Coldplay- Make Poverty History. We had to wear something white, like the wristbands. I lived in the middle of nowhere, so couldn't just go out and buy a white item of clothing which I'd unlikely wear again. I got a massive bollocking for that. "You could have just worn your school shirt" she said, like any self-respecting teenager would turn up to school in any item of uniform voluntarily.

I agree that a lanyard that you are allowed to tuck into your clothes would probably be quite a good solution: save you from some tellings-off and not draw needless attention. As long as staff are happy for you to do that: in some school I suspect hiding your lanyard could simply become another offence.

Don't agree that uniform infringements are necessarily a target for pupil bullying: some of them can be very tiny, like wearing shoes that aren't quite the right shade of black because local shops didn't have a pair that fitted your feet; other students might not really notice or care. But some staff can be very eagle eyed.

Can't say my dc have ever had much of a problem with uniform or that I really care that much, but I do know that the advice to look for a school that doesn't do uniform would be pretty useless around here- there isn't one.

Pengggwn how many schools are there in your area that don't have a uniform? There are none in my area, or for miles around, and none in the previous areas I have lived in. I couldn't find a school without a uniform policy that my DD could go to however hard I tried.

A kid walking around in trainers is going to get stopped multiple times a day by teachers spotting said trainers and querying their acceptability. Kid then has to produce note to say they've been to admin, explained the sad story of their broken shoes and that it's being dealt with.

A kid walking around in trainers and a lanyard doesn't get stopped by teachers because they clock the trainers, then they clock the lanyard and know that it's already being dealt with. So much time and hassle saved.

Kids can see trainers and a lanyard just as well as they can see trainers and a kid being stopped by teachers and asked to explain their uniform.

I think that generally parents like uniforms, and other things that Hattie found a small effect size for, like ability groupings and small class sizes.

Yes why would you be upset that the lanyard can be seen? Do you think the incorrect uniform is invisible?

Hattie reporting a small effect size for small classes is how I know Hattie is wrong. The effect of a small class is huge.

noblegiraffe has it summed up well there, as usual.

I'm not endorsing it. Hattie was brought up further down the thread.

I get that it saves time, repeated being called out by teachers. And that pupils can see uniform infringements.

But....I still think that other pupils who see such a lanyard on someone might still say something unkind to a pupil who's wearing one - a kind of "ha, ha" (channels inner Nelson)

And they wouldn't do that if they saw the child being challenged on it by a teacher?

Oh well better to be embarrassed when they are young and learn the consequences of rule breaking than go through the mortifying exercise of being courtmarched out of work to go home and get the correct uniform as an adult in the workplace