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!!!!!!!!

Remember too that parents are employed in a variety of roles, including those hit by public sector cuts, they don't necessarily have any more time to spend than you on this. Yet school communication and implementation of school rules and sanctions is not actually part of our role. It is your's.

And if parents speak up about a genuine problem, why not join forces and support them, instead of moaning that you have too much to do to bother about it?

You're missing my point. Hair is not a genuine issue. Did you fight with teachers over all those real issues I spoke about?

In fact, did you even read my second post?

I voted Labour. I have fought over numerous other more specific issues too and been successful. Did you fight too? Over any of the other public sector cuts?

In fact, did you even read my second post?

Naturally.

Hair is not a genuine issue.

Badly implemented, badly administered, discriminatory rules, which detrimentally affect children's education and widen attainment gaps are a genuine issue.

Yes, I did. I fought the good fight over and over. And no hair is not an issue, having purple/short/long hair hurts no one in the same way that not having purple/short/long hair hurts no one. Now what does hurt is telling girls of colour that they have to have straight hair at school...that is a fight worth fighting. Badly implemented rules obviously worth fighting and more often than not it's an oversight that can be easily changed. Like stating no grade two or below. But actually taking the time to go to governors and all it entails to fight for the right for a grade one hair cut. Nope not my fight and if you're a super busy parent that doesn't have the time to fight it either then suck it up and stick to the rules. Want me to fight for your transgender sons right to wear a dress and I'm all over it with you.

.But actually taking the time to go to governors and all it entails to fight for the right for a grade one hair cut.

That is not what this thread was about. It was about a badly communicated, vague rule and a disproportionate, detrimental punishment, with no hope of swift resolution, for apparently breaking it.

I think you'll find it's been about both things actually. You'll also find that my posts have all been about the hair, not the (alleged) crap communication.

I was going from the Op's initial post, which outlined the subject of the thread. People always talk around a subject to give added context.

@FontSnob. I don't think that teachers should "be fighting over hair" but I would have thought that they would be willing and able to express reservations over a school policy which serves no useful purpose and takes up a lot of their valuable time - 45 minutes wasted according to you every time a child turns up with a hairstyle which doesn't accord with some arbitrary standard set by the school.

Out of curiosity - it seems that isolation is the go-to punishment for having the wrong hairstyle. What sanctions are available for behaviour which is actually disruptive - e.g., shouting and swearing in class?

People always talk around a subject to give added context.

Indeed they do.

Seeing I don't see anywhere that anyone has said that we don't speak up. Doesn't mean we are listened to though does it! The policy doesn't take up our time, people not following the policy takes up our time. Generally there is usually only a couple in each year group for whatever it is, hair, uniform etc. As I said we give a warning and if they grow it out all good and if they cut it back then really they're just taking the piss out of clear rules.

Isolation is hardly prison time. They get a break and lunch and they do school work. And there is usually more than one of them in the room and always a staff member. Depending on what they've done they'll have a couple of periods, afternoon, day. They just don't get to join in with their mates.

Ok. If there were no policy, there would be no need to enforce it though. It is a shame, and I'm not being at all sarky here, that teachers aren't listened to when policies like this are being formed or enforced. You are the ones who have to deal with it and are best placed to say what a waste of time it is for little to no benefit for anyone.

Thankfully, my DS's school isn't bothered about how the pupils style their hair.

Did you fight with teachers over all those real issues I spoke about?

Yes, on many but not all of them - issue by issue.

But I suspect many feel alienated disinclined to support teachers when the home/school partnership is stretched to breaking point by what can appear like petty non-issues and by approaches that treat all parents as if they were the worst.

They just don't get to join in with their mates.

Or classroom teaching.

Can anyone explain the difference in educational impact between missing classroom teaching because of a family wedding, and doing self-directed work, and being in isolation doing self-directed work? Honest question which I've not seen an answer to.

Tell me if I am being daft but can't he just shave it all off/to the same length to correct it. I can understand having a rule against the hairstyle in those pictures, v unprofessional, not a good habit for children to get into but you can't force them to be in isolation while it grows Vw k out again.

Yes but seeing that could be any policy and again it's back to the argument about hair. As I've said I really don't mind either way about hair but my school has a policy that I'll enforce because I don't have any strong feeling against it but I do believe that in a school, if a rule is there I'll enforce it as it generally helps to stop the big issues arising (in my classroom). I'm also in a school that has reasonable expectations of fixing the solution so it's not on my radar to challenge it.

Jassy Personally I don't see the difference between an isolation and wedding in terms of work achieved. I guess a staff member is there to help in isolation and usually they will chat with them about what they've done and what they could have done differently in terms of behaviour. I'd give permission for a child to attend a family wedding and to be honest when parents ask usually the answer is yes but it will be unauthorised. It's the government that sets attendance targets that schools have to meet. Not the schools themselves so I understand why schools feel they have to follow the guidelines when they are penalised for not doing so.

Apologies, my grammar is dreadful this evening.

Jassy There are loads of reasons why parents don't support teachers. Some may be a breakdown in relationships on a personal level but to say that "all parents get treated like they are the worse" is a generalisation thats not really based in truth but perpetuates the myth that schools hate parents. You only need to read the threads on hear to see what people think of teachers and schools. It's nice when people support us and stick up for us. But you only need to read a thread on here about teacher training days, snow days or strike days to see the contempt that a lot of people hold for the profession.

*here not hear!

It's the government that sets attendance targets that schools have to meet. Not the schools themselves so I understand why schools feel they have to follow the guidelines when they are penalised for not doing so.

I get that - but when schools themselves are putting very heavy, inflexible messages to parents about absence/attendance, liberal isolation for seemingly small infractions like hair makes a school seem hypocritical.

Some may be a breakdown in relationships on a personal level but to say that "all parents get treated like they are the worse" is a generalisation thats not really based in truth but perpetuates the myth that schools hate parents.

I don't know, I try to see both sides but honestly the way some teachers speak about parents on Mumsnet - and how they have to take a certain approach because of the minority and the reasonable majority have to accept that treatment too - undermines that. In many cases the contempt appears to be mutual and I think it can be terribly difficult to break that cycle.

As I've said here and elsewhere, our (primary) school is pretty good but not great (understatement) at communicating and appears to hold working parents in some disdain. I've decided to step back from trying to get further involved to support the school after I was told to politely fuck off if I couldn't make meetings during school hours.

The tone is relentlessly dismissive from the school as an institution though one to one interactions with the teachers are fine (the little I see of them).

So, you know, I'm not sure schools are blameless in difficult relationships and lack of wholehearted support from parents for their policies and processes.

I agree that Schools aren't blameless. There are some schools (mostly MATs) that I simply wouldn't work for or send my children to.

But you only need to read a thread on here about teacher training days, snow days or strike days to see the contempt that a lot of people hold for the profession.

Really? All I ever seem to read is that children are liars and teachers are the paragons of virtue.

Perceptions eh?

I can understand having a rule against the hairstyle in those pictures, v unprofessional

See I cannot make myself understand this. I work in a professional environment, and I see people out and about and at meetings and associations, and it is very common to see these sorts of haircuts. I look at style guides and things.

There is just more going on here.

Now admittedly I am not native-born, and even though I have lived here for two decades, I don't understand really what the word "chav" means. I also don't understand why "sorry" seems to mean "fuck you". Or why "you look well" means "fat".

I looks like what is happening here is that when a kid turns up with a variation of this cut, which would seem to be in any sane world a neat, even conservative cut, that they are categorised as "chav".

So the cut itself seems unimportant. It is just anything that they feel is "chavy" isn't it?

And furthermore, it would seem that this indicates that those who are in charge of these things think that the problem with the education system (and perhaps society), is that this nonconformist "chavness" makes kids unemployable when they try to enter the "professional" workforce.

I think we could discuss this situation for days, but having looked into it, I don't think this haircut has anything remotely to do with why kids from non-wealthy families don't end up as doctors or lawyers.

And I think that also this idea shows a stunning misunderstanding about how the business world and society works today. Eton graduates don't succeed because of their haircut. Apple doesn't have more cash than Switzerland because of a haircut.