To think boots are shoes

[crazybutterflylady]

I have two daughters, 7&5. Both seem to wreck their school shoes so quickly. I bought them each a pair of smart black chelsea boots for the winter for school, in the last week of term.

DD1’s teacher told her she couldn’t wear them so DH emailed the head to ask why and ask that if there was an issue they speak to us, since we buy their clothes. The head said boots are not uniform, since the policy says shoes. DH replied that he will ask the governors to consider amending the policy to particularly specify boots and in the meantime the children will wear them since we have already bought and used them.

DD1 came home in tears today because her teacher made her change into her (white and pink) trainers and everyone heard the teacher tell her off.

AIBU to think this is ridiculous?

It wouldn't have occurred to me that Chelsea boots wouldn't be acceptable as sensible black school shoes. This sort of thing really annoys me.

I’m a teacher and wouldn’t take it out on the children- that is unnecessary. I would also turn a blind eye to the otherwise totally sensible boots.

I did check before I sent mine in in boots when they started at the school. Our head is absolutely fine with the kids wearing boots to school - as long as they've got something sensible on their feet - but our school is very relaxed in terms of its uniform policy anyway. Mind you I could have got away with boots anyway as both of mine seem to have decided to wear trousers to school all winter.

I hope your DH contacts the governor's again and asks why it's acceptable for a 7 year old to be humiliated by a teacher as well as by other children.
If it snows in the next couple of weeks as forecast are the children who walk to school meant to wear shoes? That's stupid.

if I read black shoes I would assume that's shoes or boots, basically not trainers.

When I read black shoes I would assume that means black leather polishable shoes that close with laces. (That's what it meant in every school in my day, but that was a long time ago.)

The idea of a uniform is that everyone looks the same, if some wear boots and some shoes, they wouldn't be the same. Similarly if they wore non-leather shoes, or slip-ons instead of lace-ups, they would be different.

(I'm aware that school uniform standards aren't always as strict as this now. DW has bought DD "black shoes" for next term, they are boots with silver glitter on the side! When I questioned this she said she's got away with similar before.)

Im so glad DD school is being sensible about boots. I could not get her any decent winter school shoes ( reception so cant tie laces yet) and all that was on offer were either massive clumpy ‘boy’ shoes shoes or mary janes.

We walk over a mile each way in all weathers and she suffers from poor circulation. I made the gesture when she started wearing them if sending in her in with her old school shoes in a bag ‘ in case’ but they have never asked her to change or spoken to me about it. Even though the policy does say shoes.

"close with laces" is for boys shoes, I should clarify. Buckle for girls.

YABU. Boots are not shoes. If you don’t want to adhere to a uniform policy, don’t send her to school.

What a stupid rule for the school to have, and what a pointless and nasty way of enforcing it.

I think it's much harder to be "uniform" with shoes than clothes. Feet come in all sorts of shapes and sizes and shoe styles have to be bought accordingly. Wearing ill fitting shoes is not like wearing an ill fitting shirt; it can cause real problems.

I've got a kids with wide chunky feet like me and kids with slim shallow feet like DH. Neither type of foot is easy to buy for. And it's not as simple as getting the measured and getting the right size; some styles of shoe just dont work. Schools need to acknowledge this.

moredoll at my DC's school, yes. We have a 20 minute walk.

Aside form the overall question ... surely black chelsea boots are closer to uniform than pink and white trainers? If you're going to say a boot isn't a shoe then surely a trainer isn't a shoe either, it's not as if there's anything particularly dangerous/non-practical about a chelsea boot and when the trainer is the wrong colour it's going to look a lot less uniform. So I'd certainly be questioning what was achieved by making her change one non-uniform item of footwear for another in that instance.

Bollocks! Having posted how reasonable DDs school is being - today I get taken aside and told that she can no longer wear her boots. So now I need to buy another pair of winter school shoes... aside from the reason that I bought boots in the first place as I couldn’t find anything at all except Mary Janes in DD’s size - our small town only has one shoe shop.

WIBU to buy DD a pair of lace ups to be worn in the classroom and insist that a member of staff help her change everytime she goes outside ( reception/ freeflow)?

It's a stupid rule - but it's the rule.

Boots aren't school shoes.

One reason to not allow boots is to stop the 'fashion parade' aspect, sparkly, heeled, multiple buckles, knee length etc.

With DD in winter, on wet or snowy days she wore wellies to school and changed when she got there. Sorted.

My daughter does wear boots to school in winter (not even Clark's ones ) BUT I do agree that boots aren't shoes, they're not supportive/fitted enough to do things like run and climb. TBH it would be much easier for all if schools said black trainers for boys and girls as 'girls' shoes are so impractical.