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!!!!!!!!

If the child had no part to play whatsoever in knowing this haircut was possibly/definite inappropriate, I'd agree, poor thing. Poor thing having to pay for the OP's parenting choice.

This is also not unimaginable, considering his age. Should schools discriminate against pupils whose parents make poor choices? Adding to their disadvantages and not attempting to 'close the gap', attainment wise, Flower?

limitedperiodonly We're getting off topic here but..

My forebears earned it

Rights don't work like that.

and I'm not going to give it up Flowers

Who said you should?

The OP and the child chose to put their child into this position, and this is the consequence. The child should quite correctly now have to handle the consequences of their choice and learn to make better choices in the future if they wish to fully be part of the school community.

So... fuck the kid's education for misinterpreting an unclear rule? Lovely.

In your helpful lists of what people can do if they disagree with a school rule, you keep leaving out 'constructively challenge the rule, its application or the sanction used, preferably using empirical evidence, recognising that schools are not infallible, immune to challenge, and can always improve.'

^Today 16:33 FlowerPot1234

limitedperiodonly

The state is not bestowing education upon us. It is our right.

Who gives you that right?
Today 16:33 FlowerPot1234

limitedperiodonly

Who gives you that right?

I'll give you a clue. It isn't schools.

God forbid that anyone should look like a working class northern teenager. Especially if that's what they are. Much better for them all to be in blazers and boaters.

ponderingprobably

Should schools discriminate against pupils whose parents make poor choices?

They're not discriminating are they? They are stating the rules for all to adhere to. The parent has utmost responsibility for ensuring the child follows those rules and leaves the house attired appropriately.

If they don't, one could argue that everybody in society is discriminated in one way or another through the poor choices of their parents!

Rights don't work like that.

Can you name a right, in this sense, that wasn't fought for, earned and since then maintained by the campaigning, hard work and ongoing vigilance of groups of citizens?

The right to an education isn't being maintained by schools, particularly those with policies (nb I'm not saying this policy is one, though I think it has some really unpleasant class undertones to it) that have an exclusionary effect. The right is maintained by groups of citizens who challenge those policies.

The parent has utmost responsibility for ensuring the child follows those rules and leaves the house attired appropriately.

So... it's ok to discriminate (by denying equal education) against kids whose parents are fuckwits, basically?

No wonder we have social mobility problems with attitudes like this....

It does seem like a bit of overkill by the school tbh, and the wording of the rules sound ambiguous.

To me, expecting children to look smart at school (including wearing correct uniform) is fine, but I don't think this would be a clear cut case of "extreme hair". I think that's an exaggeration, so isolation seems harsh.

Still giggling at the Kim Jong Un comments though!

Flower

If they don't, one could argue that everybody in society is discriminated in one way or another through the poor choices of their parents! 

What ever happened education 'being the great equaliser' in society? In order for schools to close any attainment gaps, schools need to be able to (or at least aim to) compensate for for poor parental choices.

How does the case in point contribute towards this requirement? This child's education is suffering because his mother permitted a bad haircut and there has been no suggestion of a resolution to this situation, isolation until the hair grows to the required length.

JassyRadlett

Let's say there is a school educational trip. Child takes home a consent form to her parent. Parent does not return it. Child tells parent to sign it, return it. Parent doesn't. School trip time comes. Child is not booked to go on the trip because parent has not returned the form. There is no room on the coach for the child. Child cannot go.

Do you think the school is unfairly discriminating against the child because of the parent's stupidity/forgetfulness?

it's ok to discriminate (by denying equal education) against kids whose parents are fuckwits, basically?

I think the OP has behaved poorly by sending their child to school with such an extreme haircut, but I think you calling them a fuckwit is out of order.

ponderingprobably

I have to smile at your last post, because all that you've written is precisely why uniforms are such a good idea and is a great part of what they hope to achieve. By its very nature, it is a great equaliser.

So why didn't this OP understand what all the other parents did...?

We don't know whether other kids were pulled up over the same hair cut or not.

Also laughing at the notion that this is an extreme hair cut. It really isn't.

I think the OP has behaved poorly by sending their child to school with such an extreme haircut, but I think you calling them a fuckwit is out of order.

Oh dear. If that's what you're resorting to - a clear safeguarding/consent issue, rather than something substantive related to classroom education and the daily life of the school - then you must be on pretty thin ice with your argument.

I think the OP has behaved poorly by sending their child to school with such an extreme haircut, but I think you calling them a fuckwit is out of order.

Given that there is dissent on this thread on whether that haircut is extreme full stop and that we haven't seen the child's haircut at all, and that 'extreme' without specifics is subjective and has huge class overtones, I wouldn't dream of doing so. But nice attempt at deflection! Points for effort if not for execution.

I'm taking about your words, and your position. That if parents make consistently bad decisions for their kids (the fuckwits of my post) or are poor (don't have a backup pair of trousers when the school pair rip, or can't afford new shoes or kit with logos all once it) it's fine to kick the kids out of the classroom. Because rules. And of course the sins of the father should be visited upon the child, because however else would we keep people in their place?

DeleteOrDecay

Also laughing at the notion that this is an extreme hair cut. It really isn't.

Yet posters here and I think it is. The school does. Other schools around the country do. The only people coming into the workplace with it, from my experience, are juniors who don't keep it for long when they realise nobody else has it and who are viewed as not being very professional nor aware. Funny that, isn't it?

I have to smile at your last post, because all that you've written is precisely why uniforms are such a good idea and is a great part of what they hope to achieve. By its very nature

Flower Perhaps, yes when uniform is reasonable, fair, clear to all, non discriminatory, and orchestrated with compassion, sensitivity and a certain amount of flexibility. Infractions need to be dealt with, in terms of aiming towards resolution, not dishing out inflexible, onerous and lengthy punishment, regardless of context. If the latter happens uniform is not achieving equality in education, quite the opposite.

Should schools discriminate against pupils whose parents make poor choices?

That's an extremely valid poiint pondering . My parents wanted me to get a good little office job. They didn't think I was stupid. They just didn't want me to work on a cold factory floor or dockside like they did because it was bloody hard and frequently lethal.

It took a teacher to say that their clever daughter could achieve much more than they hoped and they shouldn't worry that I was doing A levels in English, History and Economics with no practical application. They still made me do shorthand and typing as a back stop which was hard work. I could have done a fourth A level. But shorthand is a mystery to most people, so I'm sort of glad I have it as a party trick.

My teacher who said that was probably only 30 but miles away from me at 16. I am forever grateful to her for opening my parents' eyes. They weren't bad people. They were fantastic. They were from the 1920s when working class people worked hard and died in misery. They wanted the best for me and wanted me to have an easier life. But they still argued against petty rules because that is who they were and that is how they brought me up.

My mum and dad were 'those people'

Yet posters here and I think it is.

And others think it's not. Gosh, it's almost like 'extreme' is incredibly subjective and pointless as part of a uniform policy, and students shouldn't be excluded from class if they or their parents misinterpret it.

For the record, I think such haircuts look awful but I'm not sure I'd have put them in the 'extreme' box. But I can also realise that my own prejudices are probably a factor there.

What's the evidence for not allowing haircuts like this, again?

JassyRadlett

Oh dear. If that's what you're resorting to - a clear safeguarding/consent issue...

Gosh. What safeguarding/consent issue? Because in my scenario to you I mentioned a consent form? OK, change that form's name. Make it a permission form. Make it a "I know about this educational trip" form. Make it any form you want JassyRadlett, but the point being a form is required to be returned by the parent.

Now, I repeat:

Child is not booked to go on the trip because parent has not returned the form. There is no room on the coach for the child. Child cannot go.

Do you think the school is unfairly discriminating against the child because of the parent's stupidity/forgetfulness?

What do you say JassyRadlett?

I don't agree with isolation they are there to learn but rules are rules and I think it's about time that discipline was tightened up, generally our standards are dropping in this country and our respect for each other and rules and authority is having an awful impact. We as parents need to lead by example so just comply

Flower re all this talk of 'you knew what you were signing up to' - what quite often happens is that a school gets turned into an academy and they get a new HT who wants to 'turn the school around' and starts by bringing in a Draconian uniform policy (despite there being no evidence that this works).
So, in many cases, parents haven't 'signed up' for this. Say you have a child going into Y10 i.e. just starting GCSEs and a new HT comes along and says that all pupils have to have black hair to match their blazer, would you just happily go along with that?
Would you be happy for your child to spend months in isolation if they refused to dye their hair black?
And don't say, 'well, I'd just move schools' because, as PPs keep pointing out, that often isn't an option and, even if it was, moving schools at that point in a child's school career is pretty shit.
As I said earlier, there has to be a valid reason for any rule. If a 12 year old boy asked you, 'Why am I not allowed to have that haircut?' what would you say? Would you have any answer that doesn't boil down to 'Those are the rules?'
In my job, I see a lot of women who have had FGM. Please note that I am categorically not equating FGM with haircuts but I have had heart rending conversations with many women who questioned their mother about why this had to be done and were basically told,'it's our culture' which basically equates to 'Those are the rules'.

generally our standards are dropping in this country and our respect for each other and rules and authority is having an awful impact.

You cannot have true authority, without accepting responsibility.

When schools do not communicate rules clearly or effectively engage and understand the community they are amongst, the rules become discriminatory, unfair and unworkable. This causes resentment.

Rules should encourage respect and not rebellion. To do this they need to be mutually agreed upon and discussed not doled out arbitrarily, without discussion amongst true representatives from all parties, and not orchestrated without sensitivity for context or possibility of swift resolution.

Since there is effectively no choice to attend a school without a uniform (I just tried to Google mine, it's impossible to find) and the best research suggest having a school uniform has no impact on results then actually subversive behaviour by parents who disagree with school uniforms is indeed the best way to teach our children that it's important to stand up and fight against rules that are wrong. There's a long history of people fighting over much more important issues doing the same thing (see Emily Davison, for example.

my closest non-uniform school that should say

Personally I love the skin fade, maybe not a short as in the pictures but with a longer Top and side part I think it's very groomed & smart. I wanted my sons done like this for school & the hairdresser told me schools don't allow the fade I do think it's rather extreme of a punishment a personalised letter home warning against a repeat cut would be more than sufficient

The problem seems to be flowers that you think parents should decide to forgo respect for their kids to respect schools or find a way to create a job and affordable housing elsewhere. The reality is different.

As I've stated all over MN I am a fan and supporter of uniform. But I am not a fan of dictatorship and rules for the sake of rules - especially rules that don't reflect the reality of society.

Rules about skirt length, bootleg trousers, a set colour of shirt etc are fair enough. They are uniform 'standards'.

But when it comes to dictating a style of skirt for everyone regardless of their natural body shape at a cost 3 x as high as a high street uniform skirt and refusing to allow hairstyles that are fashionable and in the case of skin fades once classed as the functional and practical style and refusing to allow a stud eating or small chain or anything else that will be dictated by someone's personal style and choices it ceases to be a uniform (an item of clothing indicating the group you belong to) and starts becoming a dictatorship and creating more rules to be fought against.

It is ridiculous that schools think a haircut will affect the education of a child more than an education in isolation will.

And I work in education!