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.

People will switch off or be unable to keep up and give up trying even it becomes difficult to constantly comply with ever moving goal posts.
I think when your dc start secondary school you'll see that it's actually very easy for them to comply with uniform rules. Dd goes to school in the same thing each day and doesn't have any uniform problems. It's not hard since its the same uniform code every day. Dc school let children wear alternative shoes to school and wear them all day when it snowed, and they are normally strict about uniform. They also don't make them swelter in a blazer in warm weather.
If someone can't afford uniform or needs orthotics or has some other genuine issue, that needs to be dealt with sympathetically by the school, but I'm sure most uniform issues are teenagers rebelling and wanting to get into trouble and they'd find some other way if they didn't have uniform.

But you do have to punish the kids pen that's the point. When you attribute so much to clothing you forget theirs actualky a kid behind it making choices to he a pain in the arse and banning a bow doesn't change their behaviour.

If we are taking what kids dont need, they don't need to be harassed by kids in class, they don't need to be reading about themselves whilst they pee, and they don't need to get on that bus home wondering what's going to happen next. And they don't need to have to worry that should they go to the teacher to report a problem they are just going to end up in a black vs navy debate and a lanyard around their neck.

If these rules were actually working then the behaviour in schools these days woukd be getting better not worse

It wasn't great when I was at school. Lots of nonsense about skirt lengths and boys harassing girls and teachers more interested in your nail polish than the fact the kids were taking the piss out of you.

But there were no blazers and logos and regulation hairbands.

Schools are getting stricter and stricter about this stuff het behaviour is getting worse....

My high school uniform was brown and yellow and was disgusting, we were supposed to wear brown or yellow bobbles.

I was a rebel and wore every colour under the sun which were nearly always confiscated.

Parents evening- head of year comes to my parents and tips a whole bag of bobbles onto the table, dozens and dozens and said " say no more but please adhere to uniform in future " I was mortified.

I know at my dd's school there are parents who can't afford to feed their families properly and that is the bigger picture here.

Schools are getting stricter and stricter about this stuff het behaviour is getting worse
I don't agree.
I think you just like slagging off schools and arguing with teachers on mumsnet for some reason. Why not wait until your kids start secondary school before criticising secondary schools? You never know you might be pleasantly surprised. I was.

Pengggwyn, when a school can demonstrate that my daughter's vvvv boring plain flat black leather laceups are a distraction to anyone other than the style police (and possibly her own outraged self), I'll agree with your point.

They were allowed two years ago. This year they apparently 'resemble a trainer' (which, according to her physio, is a Good Thing for her feet).

Schools should only inflict their uniform rules on clothing that doesn't cause actual pain if badly fitted.

And I like our school, on the whole. I think it has hardworking, dedicated and humane teachers. But this pointless urge to tighten up the uniform rules is going to make us glad, in the end, to escape to a non-uniform sixth form elsewhere.

little

I have two kids in primary

Multiple friends with kids both in primary and secondary some of the things they tell me I'm shocked at. There really are more things they need to worry about than now shiny someone's shoes are or how long a skirt is or trying to decide of they are skinny trousers or not.

If there was anything in this uniform lark everywhere would be doing it. But they arent.

What is it about British kids or British teachers which somehow mean that they can't function without the uniform.

I thought strict uniform rules were petty and daft when I was at school, and 20 years later I still do. Some schools go ridiculously over the top with their attempts to insist children wear blazers in hot weather or their sending people home for wearing shoes that are perfectly sensible but don't quite conform to a very exact ideal. There is no way that this is about learning.

Why ban trainers in the first place?

And if they are sat begavjbg and doing their work and being kind to eachother why teach them that it doesn't matter how smart or well behaved you are or how hard you are trying, all that matters is your shoes.

Sat behaving

Shoes are easy. Our school rules say black, no coloured logos or other markings, no heels. Everything else is unspecified. So kids who need to wear trainers or orthotics can do so. It works. Why can't all schools do that? Fewer rules, keep it simple, focus on essentials like learning and behaviour.

But this is because it's a novelty. In places where non uniform is standard these things just don't happen

I agree with lots of what you say on MN, Penggwn, and you're clearly very highly skilled and committed, but we'll just have to disagree on uniform I guess.

Although exploring why we disagree could be very interesting, I suspect. But I'm meant to be working!

Ds2 is in a school that dishes our detentions for socks the wrong colour grey while ds3 is in a school with a really simple dress code (any blank shoes - even trainers, any black trousers (jeans okay) & then a choice of colours of plain t-shirt). It means they can spend the time cracking down on the behaviour that matters.

Guess which child loves school?

And I'm not aghast at ds3 wearing trainers. His shoes (socially acceptable) were cheaper than ds2's 'office shoes'.

He wears his trainers outside school as well. Ds2 has (obviously) insisted on pair of socially acceptable trainers for outside school.

Yesterday 18:55 Gileswithachainsaw

I've said it before and I'll say it again. When schools have no bullying issues, consistently good teachers, no drug , knife, victim blaming , slut shaming, sexual harassment problems then maybe then yet can start worrying about what shoes or hair bands the kids are wearing. Until then there are far more important things that require such dedicated attention.

This ^^

Also bullies bully regardless of what people wear. The issues are much deeper then minor uniform differences.

Lancelottie But do you see that if a school bans trainers, allowing shoes that look like trainers is just not very sensible? It means teachers at the school are obligated to engage in daily debates with students and parents about what constitutes a trainer shoe. It is a giant waste of time.

It certainly is. It wastes huge amounts of my time, trying, in good faith, to find something plain black leather in a G-fitting with full lace run and depth for orthotics that doesn't, in some way, 'resemble a trainer'. Leather Vans and leather Converse used to be allowed and now aren't. She doesn't fit any brogues we've tried, and believe me we try them every year. She can't wear slip-ons or Mary-Janes.

For two years, the poor kid has worn fucking Hotters, because they met the school guidelines. Now those are 'too like a trainer'. I think I'll just shoe-polish her toes and have done with it for next year.