Help me word an email to the school that isn't full of expletives please.

[ReanimatedSGB]

I know I can do better that 'For fuck's sake, you petty-minded bunch of cunts', of course...

DS got a day in inclusion (ie isolation) because of his shoes. They are, admittedly, not quite regulation shoes, though they are plain black - but he was wearing them because his normal school shoes were discovered to have a fucking great hole in on Sunday evening. He wore the not-quite-right shoes yesterday and there was no problem - I got home from work too late to take him shoe-shopping as my shift overran - but I got a phone call at work this morning saying they were 'unacceptable' and he would either be sent home or have to spend the day in inclusion. I was halfway up the M4 at the time. I explained the reason and that we were going to buy a new pair tomorrow (because I wouldn't be home till 7pm), but they said if he didn't have proper shoes in the morning it would be the same thing again.
Mercifully our nearest Sainsburys is open till 10pm and is one of those big enough to have a clothing and footwear department, so we have actually got new shoes, but what the fuck is the point of taking a well-behaved kid out of class for the day when he's only wearing not-quite-right shoes for a perfectly good reason.

I would like you to do it, and do what I can to support.

It sounds like teachers can't get on with teaching any more but are required to waste their time policing petty rule infractions to please people like RangeRider and Jaxhog and other blind fans of academies.

I love the Orwellian double-speak. When ‘inclusion’ means ‘isolation’, it should really ring alarm-bells!

@TooStressy you're welcome to go ahead

Yes, inclusion on the school register as present, just excluded from normal timetable, break and lunch time. I wonder what happens about PE if they're in the sin-bin for a week, as I think that's a statutory lesson. Is there an isolation exercise yard?

Maybe a bit of marketing would help this school. Instead of labelling it inclusion, the sign on the door should say "nice children dealing with wardrobe malfunction". Which of course is NOT a punishment.

But I do wonder if so many parents are against uniform policies that a school hasn't thought to abolish the school uniform. Surely if they did that they would be the most over subscribed school in the country, filled with the best behaved children?

Why do parents/teachers/mumsnet/teaching unions etc not create one of these wonderful 'schools' and show us how its done. I wonder?

I’m not against uniform. In fact, I’m massively in favour of it... as long as it is cheap, there are a range of style options and a sensible variety of shoes allowed including black trainers.

Not the answers I was hoping for guys! Ok, I’ll investigate later today, start a thread and link it here.

I guess the schools point of view is that if they accept this excuse, then they have to accept similar ones from pupils just trying it on, as kids do to be rebellious.

You and your son should have noticed that the shoes needed replacing , and got new ones before this stage.At the end of the day, the whole situation was caused by this oversight, and the fact that you dont have a spare back up pair.

It's the same argument about uniforms and haircuts every time when its pupil/parent V School..."What's it got to do with his education ".

Uniforms and style rules exist to prevent bullying, elitism and wealth shaming . It can prevent anti social behaviour around schools , it creates a sense of belonging. Many careers require some form of uniform or dress and style code , and this is an introduction to managing this kind of rule.

Blaming the school because you or your son didn't pick up on his need for new shoes weakens any argument and criticism about their sanctions in my opinion.

All the so called arguments in favour of uniform are disproved by all the school systems that don't use uniform.
In those countries it's elitist private schools that use uniform.

And all these ott rules about uniform and colour scream more about school identity than anything relating to the pupils.

Bullying is not prevented by uniform and, as is the case with this thread, excluding pupils from class could indeed lead to bullying.
Much better if pupils learn to accept eachother as equals regardless of what they wear. Which is a more valuable life lesson than temporarily avoiding the issue by putting everyone in identical clothes.

This seems to make a lot of people quite angry. Why don't Mumsneters direct that anger at a school? Somebody could post the contact details of a school with an ""inclusion"" policy on this thread so that people can tell them what they think. Post e-mails and responses on here.

You need to call the big boys.

#DailyMail

I said 'helps to prevent' bullying it's quite obvious there would be more if childten could wear what they wanted. It would turn into a labled fashioned parade.

Your lovely school uptopia of kids all getting along and singing cum by ya because the school tells them to is all well and good, but completely unrealistic.

Whoever said up thread it increases the gap between rich and poor had an excellent point.

There's replies here about "why didn't you just replace" "why didn't you have a back up pair". Ok, easy if you have that sort of money just floating around. If £20 for a crap pair of shoes at best is beyond your budget then the child is effectively being excluded for their socioeconomic background.

There HAS to be some middle ground here. Same with anything. By hyper focussing on one specific thing and ignoring context you drive a wedge in society not create cohesion.

I fear we are going backwards. We are going to disenfranchise the poorer in society within education. This creates a negative spiral of unemployment and claiming benefits which passes down through families. The only problem now is they are creating these mindsets and simultaneously removing the financial backstop these people rely on because education has failed them.

And teachers often feel the same way - I've spoken to many who say they just want to teach rather than run uniform inspections. And it's often the teachers on the front line that know and have the relationship with theses kids that SLT who enforce the rules don't.

it's quite obvious there would be more if childten could wear what they wanted

Always beware of the obvious.
Do you have data to back that statement?

Bullying is not caused by clothes or anything other than bullying attitudes.

I've experienced school with haves and have nots and no uniform.
I've also experienced school for a couple of years with a noticeable difference from other students.
And I can tell you that bullying has nothing to do with differences but with attitudes on the part of students and teachers.

And let's not forget the schools who send out the head lice letters every other day but don't allow very short hair.

Do they specify what constitutes "very short"? Imo, it's quite subjective. Being used to living with a baldy and having had a very short crop myself from time to time, I wouldn't regard anything longer than a no.3 as "very short". But a colleague regards anything above the collar as "very short", for women and for men (we found this out the other day when we got our wires badly crossed - the IT support guy that I think of as having longish hair has short hair, in her eyes).

Uniforms and style rules exist to prevent bullying, elitism and wealth shaming . It can prevent anti social behaviour around schools , it creates a sense of belonging. Many careers require some form of uniform or dress and style code , and this is an introduction to managing this kind of rule.

But isolating a child because their parents cannot afford to replace a broken/stolen piece for a period of time is counter productive. It's highlighting the fact that the child doesn't have the right equipment and punishing them for not being able to afford the replacement. That's wealth shaming.
I would agree that if the child repeatedly loses equipment and makes no attempt to look after it properly, then punishment is appropriate.
And yes, many jobs do require a uniform, however work uniforms are generally provided and for the items that aren't there is a basic requirement - black trousers and full shoes (not trainers) - I've not heard of a job where you must have a pair of logo'd trousers, at your own expense, and shoes that have to fit a very narrow description. Nor do they generally tell you that you can't wear boots in awful weather and change when you get there or dictate the kind of coat you wear.

Bear in mind that modern state schooling is there to teach children compliance and to snuff out rebelliousness and it all makes more sense.

You and your son should have noticed that the shoes needed replacing , and got new ones before this stage.At the end of the day, the whole situation was caused by this oversight, and the fact that you dont have a spare back up pair.

Ffs, isn't life hard enough for parents without checking the soles of kids' shoes every 5 minutes? And I've had shoes where the sole has split or become detached without any warning or signs of wear, footwear malfunction can happen without any warning.

And how are people struggling to juggle family finances supposed to afford a 2nd pair of shoes that could well be outgrown long before they are needed?

That's one of the reasons that I get so incensed about these obsessions with skirt length and trouser tightness. Kids have growth spurts, are all parents supposed to have a spare skirt or trousers a size bigger to hand just in case the kids shoot up/fill out before the end of term?

Being a parent, especially a working parent/lone parent/low income parent is bloody hard enough without schools buggering about with ridiculous rules, making it even harder. The stress all this shite puts people under is bloody ridiculous.

And when these control freaks start on about how it's preparing pupils for the world of work, it boils my piss. Outside of the police and the armed forces, I'm struggling to think of any working environment where there is such a ridiculous dress code, so harshly enforced. And if there is, at least employees have some redress against the unreasonable and discriminatory, like that City firm that insisted on female staff wearing heels.

If non-parents are allowed to join this campaign, count me in. Few things rile me more than the petty tyranny of small minds.

LakieLady

1. The OP knew the shoes were fucked.

2..The OP was not juggling finances.

1. They sent their child in without a note that could have got got him out of the (ridiculous) sanction.
2. They knew about the sanction.
3. They went ahead.
4. They come onto MN to piss and moan.

FYI - outside of academies, it's parents who want uniforms.

FFS. I personally as a parent want uniforms and my children like wearing them.

What I do want is some sense flexibility in the uniform policy. The choice isn’t no uniforms vs ridiculously strict uniform policies.

Bear in mind that modern state schooling is there to teach children compliance and to snuff out rebelliousness and it all makes more sense
I never get this sort of hyperbole that gets chucked out on any thread about school rules. It's utter nonsense.

I teach amazing, polite, well behaved students who follow the uniform and school rules. Many of them are very articulate and keen to debate ideas and challenge authority. We laugh daily, they learn stuff, we debate big issues and challenge dominant ideas. And yet we somehow manage all of that whilst being polite and following basic rules. Following rules and being able to think for your self and challenge authority aren't mutually exclusive.
In fact i would probably go further and say that the critical, polite and thoughtful students will probably go further than those who are told rules are stupud and you don't need to follow them/be argumentative and defiant every time you don't like an instruction because I'm not raising my child with blind obedience. One set of students learn how to shape change and be thoughtful and critical, the other set have been told to be argumentative and defiant every time you don't like something.

Love the way people think sending in a note waves a magic wand and makes everything ok.

In the real world it doesn’t make any difference.

Ds wanted to try out school (home ed for a lot of primary school)

We found a school he liked. Everything was going well till at the introduction meeting until they spotted ds’s shoes.

They were classified as trainers but were plain black pseudo leather with black soles.

They were the only shoes that his feet fitted in. He had a problem about how his feet were growing. Normal shoes didn’t fit him. (Thankfully they have grown now and become more normal shaped). He was under the hospital. Even now he does still have a certain way of walking.

They were adamant even with a hospital letter that he could not attend class until proper shoes fitted him and he would be put in the isolation room until he was able to come in with proper shoes and comply with the uniform.

He ended up being Home ended until he went to college.

A friends son broke his ankle and ended up in one of those grey plastic boots.

School put him in isolation and said he would remain there until he could get back into proper shoes.

His mum took him out of school for nearly 1/2 a term.

Utterly ridiculous

Love the way people think sending in a note waves a magic wand and makes everything ok.
It does in most cases.

Student 1 wears non schools shoes without a note so breaking clearly communicated uniform rule.
Student 2 wears non school shoes and has a note, school know the issue and it's fine for a reasonable timeframe which depends on the issue.
It's how it's been at every school I've worked in. Sure sometimes places can be unreasonable, but as a general rule having a note is common sense vs sending a child in non uniform without a note.

What about the person who had the doctor's letter for her child who had a broken toe? Utter madness!

I have a friend whose dd is regularly put in inclusion because of her trousers. She is very tall, with a 'fuller figure' and wears the regulation trousers but the cut does not fit her well. School insist she is wearing the wrong trousers despite receipts having been produced and various meetings. She's in her gcse year and this nonsense is setting her up to fail.

My son has a neuromuscular disorder. It causes problems with his feet.

I sent him in in plain black trainers with a note explaining pain and will wear them for a few days.

His school are generally very sensible and so no isolation etc. But even they asked for medical evidence. I suggested they read his EHCP which states it all but also sent in pages and pages of consultants letters 😂.
What I got back was basically ok - few a few days and they're sure he'll be back in school shoes by Monday. (Very clear "expect" message within it).

As it was he was fine after a few days but if he wasn't he'd have gone in in comfy shoes with letter reminding them of equality act.

I know in some local schools it would have become a fight. It would have involved isolation and detentions - even with medical stuff. I also know despite what his school wrote he'd have been allowed to wear whatever shoes he needed for whatever length of time. The same as he doesn't do up top button or tuck his shirt in!

Like I said above. Rules are great and necessary. But rules have to be applied in context.