AIBU to be fuming that DS has been sent home because of his hair???

[brodyblake]

DS had his haircut just before he started secondary school. In the uniform rules, it just saying no "extreme hairstyles" does not give any kind of description as to what those may be. Bugger me, he goes in with a perfect uniform, a nice smart haircut and is told it's a no!!! They have said that he is to be in isolation until it grows to an acceptable length they didn't say what would be classed as extreme!!!!!!!!

Jon officers and enlisted men tend to have subtly different haircuts though. The class thing is evident in the army too.

Flower and She teens in uniform schools spend more time trying to find ways to individualise or subverting the uniform than children in non uniform school spend on deciding what to wear imo.

Just the length at which a school child wears their tie puts them into a group with an identity.

My 2 get a no 1 on the back & sides - they need cuts every 4 weeks then.
If they had a no3 they'd need a haircut every week.

A fade or short back & sides is in no way extreme - I'd be raging too.

the tie thing

I knew it. Uncomfortable conformity and a skinhead cut is gateway for heroin

You'd think we'd all be doomed from our hair at school in the 80s then. Except we weren't. Although dyed and highlighted hair was pretty ubiquitous, teachers had it too, so we were conforming to an extent. Perhaps if teachers had similar haircuts there would be less of a problem?

Evelynismyspyname

The theme of your posts about the ties etc. is that you disagree with uniforms.

That is your choice. But parents need to realise that whilst they are moaning and undermining and sending their children to schools whose policies they do not agree with, they are responsible for any consequences: all the isolations, all the sending home, all the anguish, everything.

If you do not agree with an organisation's policies, do not join it. Do not send your child to a school whose values you do not agree with. Send them elsewhere. Because every single time you complain, you are undermining your child's sense of belonging and respect for that school.

It would be a cool experiment for the staff to parody the worse of uniform infractions for a week or so...

If you do not agree with an organisation's policies, do not join it. Do not send your child to a school whose values you do not agree with.

Ah, the illusion of choice....

they are responsible for any consequences: all the isolations, all the sending home, all the anguish, everything.

No they are not. The school and pupil are, unless the parent is actively being obstructive.

The school and pupil are, unless the parent is actively being obstructive.

How so?
School sets a rule.
Parent chooses to send child to that school.
Parent purchases uniform.
Parent sends child for haircut.
Parent wholly responsible for child.
Parent sends child to school in the morning.
Parent responsible for teaching child manners and respect.
Parent responsible for dealing with disobedience and poor behaviour.

If the child is undermining the authority of the parent and the school as soon as they are out of sight of the parent, I'd partially agree with you, the pupil is responsible, with the parent of course.

But Flower the theme of a lot of your posts on the thread is that uniform allows them to forget about fashion. It's absolutely untrue, it just intensifies the importance and significance of the little ways they can subvert uniform - the school uniform environment has its own fashions which are of greater importance within the pressure cooker of a closed community than high street fashion is to most outside of school.

I was a "good girl" at school, mostly, but still attached great significance to little uniform subversions, and even 30+ years ago everyone made a myriad tiny snap judgements about what "sort" of person a fellow pupil was by how they wore their uniform.

I went to school in the 1970s and remember those ties Evelyn. I also remember taking in my skirt on my mum's sewing machine one Sunday night. The next day I found I could move my legs only from the knee down, which obviously slowed me down a bit.

No teacher said anything. They probably laughed a lot though. This was because I and the boys with fat ties and all the other uniform miscreants were essentially well-behaved. I suppose the head and staff believed that it was better to let teenagers rebel in harmless ways and concentrated on the big stuff.

If the child is undermining the authority of the parent and the school as soon as they are out of sight of the parent, I'd partially agree with you, the pupil is responsible, with the parent of course.

I'd wager this is what happens with a lot of infractions, at secondary age. Schools do have to accept responsibility too though, with clear information and reasonable rules.

Parent responsible for dealing with disobedience and poor behaviour

Outside but not inside of school. The school is in 'loco parentis'. Parents don't parent by remote control!

Parent chooses to send child to that school

Not all areas offer a real choice.

Parent responsible for teaching child manners and respect.

Socialisation occurs outside as well as inside the nuclear family. Schools share the responsibility for this.

Yes limited that's why I got away with a lot too.

I've also been a teacher in the UK though (over a decade ago) and know there were well behaved uniform subverters who got pulled up by jobs worth career ladder climbing colleagues who didn't know the children personally. In a big secondary not everyone is known to everyone else.

There were also the classes (middle and bottom sets in years 8 and 10 especially) where children would try to derail lessons demanding peers be pulled up on uniform infringements - and when it's been explicitly pointed out teachers aren't "allowed" to bluntly state that they don't care, but have to deal with it and waste time.

My head of department regularly wasted a good 1/4 of a lesson standing in the corridor with classes whom he wouldn't let in until they all had top buttons done up, ties properly tied, shirts tucked in, blazers on, those with non uniform shoes or jumpers or trousers sent to isolation... Of course if the class didn't particularly want to get settled and down to work they could drag the time in the corridor out...

I'm a great believer in luck your battles and the more 'rules' you impose the more there is to fight against.

I can see why secondary pupils do revolt and ignore some rules. We are meant to live in a country of free speech - we are not in a dictatorship.

My school managed to maintain high standards when I attended because rules allowed for plain nail varnish, minimal mascara and a plain pair of studs and simple chain and a reasonably sized watch. Therefore we could chose all or some of the above to have some level of ownership over our own personal appearance.

Skirts had to be of a certain length but style was totally free choice.
Trousers had to be boot leg but again the style was free choice.

It was the 2nd best school in the local area and the only one better was an indi. It remained an ofsted outstanding school throughout my attendance.

It had high expectations but didn't need to rule by punishment and isolation.

Ds secondary are the same. And I love the fact PE uniform is school polo t shirt and then navy shorts or tracksuit bottoms with a navy jumper or zip up. Trainers are whatever you chose (neon colours seem to be the fashion item of choice ATM!) and they allow girls to wear Lycra sports leggings. They have the best sports teams locally and I believe it's because they focus on teaching the subject - not on clothing! Skirts aren't generally a problem length wise (a few try it on!) but then they can have any skirt as long as it's Cotton and knee length. (Think they can have so much above the knee?).

They allow some jewellery and reasonable make up.

Most of the pupils carry backpacks and wear brogues type shoes for girls and the standard one strap Velcro (kicker style shoe) for the boys.

Boys must wear black/grey socks with mid grey straight leg trousers. They allow them to choose which style.

Everyday I take ds to and from school and I can honestly say the kids look individual yet like a school with good uniform standards. Gcse results are extremely good and pastoral care at the school is amazing.

I believe the pupils respect the rules that exist because the school respects them and puts their emotional well being at the core of everything they do. The pupils want to represent the school because they are proud of it not because someone tells them exactly how to dress regardless of their build or height.

I'm an advocate of uniform but I think it's gone too far in many schools. Even our local independents (quite a lot around here!) are less dictatorial over uniform than the local academy.
Ironically the academy is the school is the greatest uniform issue and worst results! (And it's gone downhill since they started this so it isn't 'why' they are doing it iyswim?)

Your head of department reminds me of a particular teacher who I know realise wasn't strict but fair as the legend went those days; he was a stupid bully. One of the favourite tricks of bullies was to wait until he was on dinner patrol and push someone out of the queue. He'd order you to the back for disruption while the others laughed.

A better way to deal with it would be to order you to the back and the five people nearest you. An even better way to knock unruliness on the head would be to put the victim back in the queue and send the five nearest people to the back. But he never did that because he was unpleasant and didn't seem to notice or care that he was being used. Like you said, some teenagers will take advantage of those teachers who follow rules blindly.

dd's school is very strict with uniform, yet they are still different due to the different combinations of trousers, skirts, socks, tights etc.

Look at how much debate and exclusions and nonsense caused by forcing kids to wear uniforms though, and then remember that there is no proven positive effect.

So is it really worth it?

I am very amused by the mental gymnastics by some on this thread to maintain that missing a day's classroom teaching by being on holiday or at a relative's wedding is unacceptable, irreplaceable and certainly can't be replicated by any form of out-of-class learning, but it's fine and absolutely not detrimental to a child's education to miss a week of classroom teaching, and the kid can absolutely catch up by themselves, because a teacher has made the decision that they should miss it.

Which apparently gives it magical properties.

I'm with Jessy...

Jassy!!

Not everyone chooses the school. Unless you make a placing request into a non catchment school up here (Scotland), they go to the catchment school which is obliged to take them.

Jassy yes .

Just for the record dreadlocks are not an extreme hairstyle.

These files are racist and don't help poor people at all. If you can't afford the latest hairstyle trend you definitely can't afford regular number 2s and 3s

This whole thread is spectacular but shows how insular so many on MN are.

No wonder the OP didn't come back.