School uniform policy changes

[NorthLondonNora]

Old headteacher retired in July and new head sent home a letter in the last week of term, banning certain kinds of school shoes from September onwards.
My 15yo DS's feet seem to have stopped growing and so when his most recent pair wore out in June, I happily bought him a new pair. Unfortunately, the style he chose, though acceptable at the time of purchase, no longer meet the requirements for the new academic year.
AIBU to send him back in them anyway (he's not bothered by doing this) - because I can't afford to throw away £50+ on nearly-new school shoes when he only has one year left in uniform anyway? Or is 6 weeks is enough notice of a change of policy?

School uniforms help to create a strong sense school ethos and a particular community. As such it promotes discipline and helps keep up academic standards, which is why a uniform is often adopted by schools. It acts as a social leveller, under which all students are equal in the eyes of the school and of each other.
Uniforms have practical benefits when students are outside the school building. Being readily indentified with a particular insititution may make students more aware of their behaviour while travelling to and from the school, leading them to act more considerately. On organised trips away from the school it is much easier for teachers to ensure they haven't lost anyone and to monitor behaviour, than if the students wore there own clothes and blended in with the crowds.
Uniforms prepare students for life after education, when most will be expected to dress smartly and appropriately for work, adhering to a corporate dress code.
Shoes were bought in June, do you have a receipt and can they be exchanged ?

ghanchi, I agree with everything you say about school uniform. I'm very pro school uniform. However, this isn't about whether a school should have a uniform, but rather the amount of notice given for a change of uniform (assuming this is a change, not just a clampdown on rules already in place).

IMO, 6 weeks notice is not a reasonable notice to give for a change to expensive items of uniform. Would people who think it is feel the same if the school changed the blazer at £50 for example?

Imagine if you'd just bought a blazer in June, worn it for a couple of weeks, only to be told you'd have to buy a different one for September. No refunds on the old, already worn blazer. Parents, I'm sure, would be angry about this (understandably IMO). Why is it any different for shoes?

Shoes were bought in June, do you have a receipt and can they be exchanged ?

OP won't be able to exchange them if they've been worn

Very good points budgiegirl.

I'm totally on board with uniform. Sense of belonging, change of attitude etc. I think what people object to is the details. Shoe is black, shoe looking rather than obvious trainer, practical. But the sole is a little to thick. Skirt is the right colour and length but lacks the embroidered logo that miraculously makes it £25 more expensive. Trousers are smart, the right length but have pockets on the side so a no no.

It's not uinform that's the problem it's the pretentious bollocks that's the problem and the fact that schools can spend countless hours on endless letters, meetings and excessive disciplinary measures but raise an issue with bullying and everyone is at a loss or mysteriously "busy".

As I say I am pro uniform but the time and energy wasted on enforcing this persnickety bollocks is an absolute insult to the children. To children in school who are failing educationally, being bullied, having issues at home, having issues with health, being diagnosed with learning difficulties etc. That's the bottom line.

Black shoes/certain colour trousers and skirts/tops/ way to keep warm/way to keep cool/certain logo somewhere - great. Plus no one ever bullied for keeping strictly to the uniform/dress code, no one bullied for deviating a bit.

Teachers and staff turning their attention to things of importance for the students not for the school!

I hated school and never found a uniform helped much with that.

I am supportive of my kids school but generally this topic drives me mad!

Out in the post-school real world it is very simply, there is a uniform, or a dress code (not a uniform requirement) or there is none, or there is a strictly adhered to requirement like scrubs. The penalty for not sticking to the uniform would be to lose their job (eventually) for some and for others it would be wear the right thing or you can't operate/whatever.

Yes, doctors and nurses wear a uniform for identification and hygiene. In most jobs like food service industry it saves your own clothes smelling of chips etc and identifies you to the customers, is hygienic (chefs' whites etc). But it seems most office or school jobs nowadays people wear what they like.

If uniform really was such an essential thing why do teachers not wear an alternative uniform?

If he's not bothered I would send him in them and I would make sure I emailed the head on the first day of term to complain. Six weeks is not enough notice bearing in mind that some kids can wear the same size for months. I think you should complain on principle. There will be some families who genuinely cannot afford to replace shoes every six weeks.

I personally think uniforms should be a polo shirt but bottoms / shoes etc be choice within reason (like not too short skirts/shorts or silly impractical shoes)

I'm pro uniform.
I'd send him in his current shoes and replace them with suitable shoes when necessary. Same with other "big" items like coats.
Sorry if I've missed it but how can shoes be that different?

@ghanchi
It acts as a social leveller, under which all students are equal in the eyes of the school and of each other.

It really doesn't. At least it didn't in my secondary school where teachers openly had lower expectations of pupils from certain areas and you could tell the poorer pupils or those who had a difficult home life - hand-me-downs are very obvious, especially when full of holes and rarely washed.

Although as someone else said: is it a NEW uniform code or are they just now enforcing the uniform code that was already in place? Two different things and if they are asking people to abide by the uniform code that already existed, then it isn't anything new and his shoes should alreafy have been in line with that.

You can bet this sort of change wouldn't happen if the cost came out of the school's budget. Studies have already shown how inefficient uniform is at improving school performance, but because schools can outsource the whole cost of it onto parents, their decision making is rarely in the children's best interests.

If uniform really was such an essential thing why do teachers not wear an alternative uniform?

See you lost me when you came onto this. Because students are students and staff are staff.
So staff can wear nail varnish, use their phones in the staff room, go off site at lunch to the shop. Students can't. Staff can park in the school car park and 6th formers can't. Plus, as I say to students, I can't wear what I want. I have a dress code to follow. I don't go around life in heels, pencil skirt, blazer etc.

I don't have strong feelings either way on uniform. I find in schools where people support the school there's no need to be picky about whether trousers do/don't have pockets etc and as a result we can all get on with teaching, learning and pastoral care.
Almost all the schools near me where they've had to go very draconian are the ines where there's a long standing history if poor behaviour, limited parental support and they've just been taken over to try and improve the school.

Although as someone else said: is it a NEW uniform code or are they just now enforcing the uniform code that was already in place?
I don't think we are going to get this answered.
The fact that we aren't going to get this answered makes me lean towards the fact that this letter was probably a reminder of unifrom requirements that already existed.

Having RTFT I'm very pleased that there is no nonsense like this at the academy that my two go to. They haven't changed the uniform in the last 8 years and when they did they did it for the new starters only.

indulgentberries
Ours phased it in and so did other local ones.
It was somethibf like 7-9 needed the new uniform, 10s it was optional but as and when they needed new items only the new uniform was available and 11s didn't have to change at all.

It acts as a social leveller, under which all students are equal in the eyes of the school and of each other

Nothing that costs the best part of 4/500 quid can possibly be considered a leveller.

I could buy far more in the way of clothes for my child without this cost to worry about.

Don't pretend it's for the kids benefit when they are forced to buy clothing that several times the prices of items that are virtually the same for sake of a logo.

14 pounds a cardigan at my kids school and that's just primary. Yeah I cab buy shirts skirts and unserwearbat a supermarket however i have to spend nore on cardigans and book bags and or bags and ties and shoes than.i do on the rest of the uniform put together.

And secondary is worse
A shirt is not a shirt. A skirt is not a skirt etc parents are forced to pay so much nore on things no one even sees like the bloody or kit worn in school where moon but teachers and kids even sees it.

When that matters more than anything else you cannot claim any bolkocks like "levelling"

Think you can't tell some poor kid is in their big sisters blazer that's several sizes to big? Don't pretend for a secind if you can slot a kickers logo on the bottom of a show, you aren't noticing kids in faded old tents

Pe kit

I can't stand parents who don't follow school rules but in this case you made an expensive purchase before the rules changed. I'd certably need more than six weeks to pay a similar amount.

#certainly

And the teachers sending kids home over stuff they arent even responsible for or suddenly decide after 4 years are no longer acceptable despite still being on the website, or deciding that someone gaining a couple of pounds changes the style of trousers they are wearing, knowing full well parents work and uniform shops aren't exactly open long hours and ordering takes time, well you are no better than the bullies you claim the uniform.is protecting against

School uniform acts as a "social leveller" and "protects against bullying", so if your shoes aren't good enough we're going to disrupt your education, make you feel self conscious and cause your family financial hardship.

Gileswithachainsaw
And the teachers sending kids home

Teachers don't send kids home, they don't have that power in schools.

Head, janitor, class hamster...whoever sends them home is no better...

More expense people can ill afford. Time off work to pick them up or more bus/taxi fares. What if the kid has no money on them?

Gileswithachainsaw

As you are going to make points about this you could at least get the facts correct.

Otherwise you might as well go get a job at the daily mail writing one of their many blame the teachers articles

Just send them, they may not notice.