Rigid school uniforms

[Waitrosedisaster]

I've just had the usual letter from my child's secondary school, where it outlines all the dos and don'ts surrounding school uniform for the next academic year.

Is anyone just absolutely sick of the outdated concept of strict uniforms? The nitty gritty details of 'only black or brown hair bobbles', 'no bows on socks', 'all clothes including p.e kit must have the school logo'. Why? Just why? My personal favourite this year is the following 'any piercing other than single lobe piercings will be removed immediately, regardless of when piercing was obtained'. Also, nail varnish and shellac will also be removed immediately? Wtf?

School uniforms (other than being used as a money making scheme) were originally used for purposes not to dissimilar from uniforms for prisons, or mental health units. They were used to strip away a person's individuality and make them more likely to conform and obey as they are effectively 'uniform'. It's such an outdated concept and I find it bizarre that schools are able to even dictate which (overpriced) shops the uniform must come from.

I hear arguments from teacher friends about how uniforms are better for low income families, but are they really? Unless the parents do not work, are they even able to claim money off uniforms?

Anyone else agree?

It matters because Josie's mum is loaded and will go and buy expensive branded fancy black leggings with various features indicating they are fashionable and expensive, and Sophie's mum is a lone parent on a tight budget who will have to buy cheap thin ones in Asda, and no matter what anyone says, kids spot the difference and it's an issue, and Sophie ends up feeling crap about her trousers.

But that can happen even with the policy you're proposing. If Josie's mum has money, she'll buy brand new, expensive trousers from John Lewis and replace them when they're showing signs of wear and tear, and when they don't fit, and Sophie will have a cheaper pair from ASDA or the second-hand shop that probably don't fit properly because her mum can't afford to keep replacing them every few months.

Fashion brands don't make tailored style school trousers because they are unfashionable. So they are only sold by supermarkets, m&s, john lewis etc and you honestly cannot tell the difference visually between the different pairs other than perhaps one or other brand comes up slimmer etc so fits a child better etc. The lack of variation & fashion input required means they can be mass produced for low cost.

See above. You can tell the difference between expensive M&S trousers and cheap ASDA ones, even if they claim to be the same fit, style and colour. Even if every child comes in in an identical uniform, kids will still get picked on for being "poor". It happened at my private school - posh, expensive uniform but kids knew who wore the second-hand stuff.

@NoIDontWatchLoveIsland

It makes NO difference if Josie and Sophie wear two different styles of grey trouser. I'm not sure why people are so insistent that it's vital lol.

The point is that smart tailored school trousers are available cheaply everywhere. Almost no other style of trouser is. So by specifying that type, they ensure its available to all.

But lots of schools don't ALLOW them to be bought "cheaply everywhere". That's the entire argument lol. Insisting uniform comes from certain shops at certain prices is wrong.

@NoIDontWatchLoveIsland

Maybe they're buying the black leather trainer-style shoe so that they have one pair for uniform and one for PE, so they don't have to pay for two pairs of shoes at the same time?

Except plimsolls can be bought for almost nothing, which is why schools require children to have separate shoes for PE.

You can't wear plimsolls for outdoors PE.

Wearing nail polish to school isn't going to stop them learning English.

Except when they are so busy showing off their fancy nails done at the nail bar at the weekend that they and their friends don't concentrate in the lesson and disturb the others around them.
And then later when they don't want to do PE incase they damage their nails.
And the next day when they need to remove them before the food tech practical lesson.

Except when they are so busy showing off their fancy nails done at the nail bar at the weekend that they and their friends don't concentrate in the lesson and disturb the others around them. And then later when they don't want to do PE incase they damage their nails. And the next day when they need to remove them before the food tech practical lesson.n't concentrate in the lesson and disturb the others around them.

But if it wasn't nail polish, it would be something else. Our school had a super-strict uniform policy and they STILL had all these problems. I just don't believe super-strict uniform rules actually prevent all this behaviour or bullying.

Schools all over the world seem to cope just fine allowing teens to wear jeans, nail polish and flip-flops to school. Nobody has exploded and no school has collapsed into riots as a result - so I don't know why the UK seems so determined to believe it will happen here.

You can't wear plimsolls for outdoors PE.

Um, you can. Our children's school does not allow trainers for PE in the infants. Plimsolls are required and thats what the children all wear.

But lots of schools don't ALLOW them to be bought "cheaply everywhere". That's the entire argument lol. Insisting uniform comes from certain shops at certain prices is wrong.

Sooo many posters missing this fairly crucial part if the argument!!

@NoIDontWatchLoveIsland

You can't wear plimsolls for outdoors PE.

Um, you can. Our children's school does not allow trainers for PE in the infants. Plimsolls are required and thats what the children all wear.

But infants PE is not comparable to secondary-school PE.

You can't wear plimsolls to play rugby, for example.

The thing is, if parents really did not want uniforms in their current form, the majority would protest and rebel against them.and yet.... they do not. Where I live parents LOVE uniform. No arguments over what you wear, it's available cheaply and easily, the kids look smart.

Plimsolls are unsupportive and flimsy Shite. I'd be making complaints if my kids were made to wear them for outdoor sports.

Whoops added some extra oos there

I'm ok with uniform I just dont like being forced to make an appointment to buy it from one shop.

@NoIDontWatchLoveIsland

The thing is, if parents really did not want uniforms in their current form, the majority would protest and rebel against them.and yet.... they do not. Where I live parents LOVE uniform. No arguments over what you wear, it's available cheaply and easily, the kids look smart.

The thing is, if parents really did not want uniforms in their current form, the majority would protest and rebel against them.and yet.... they do not. Where I live parents LOVE uniform.

I suspect a lot of that is because they've been raised in uniform themselves. It's a weir part of the UK "tradition" to stick kids in shirts, ties and blazers at aged 4, for some reason.

Very few countries in the world have our uniform standards and they all seem to manage just fine. It's really only in this country where people are convinced that uniform is vital.

No arguments over what you wear, it's available cheaply and easily, the kids look smart

It's not cheap, though. Nor is it easily available when schools demand parents use a choice of one overpriced supplier.

I suspect alotof that is because they've been raised in uniform themselves. It's a weir part of the UK "tradition" to stick kids in shirts, ties and blazers at aged 4, for some reason

I think its snobbery. Many areas have grammar schools and schools are such a mixed bag that if your kid is at " 100 percent gcse high" they don't want to be mixed up with thise who attend " worst results in the town academy "

very few countries in the world have our uniform standards

This just literally isnt true. Uniforms are widespread and mandatory in many African & Asian countries, and are common in australia, New Zealand and latin America.

It's a weir part of the UK "tradition" to stick kids in shirts, ties and blazers at aged 4, for some reason

Find me a state infant school that requires a blazer at 4 and I will believe you.

This just literally isnt true. Uniforms are widespread and mandatory in many African & Asian countries, and are common in australia, New Zealand and latin America.

I didn't say uniforms weren't widespread, I said uniforms with our standards aren't widespread.

Yes, some places have uniform, but Europe, North America, Canada, Russia and plenty of other countries have no uniform whatsoever and seem to cope fine. So you clearly don't need uniform to instil manners and discipline, but people on here are saying that the only way to instil those things is by insisting on strict uniform rules. It's clearly not the case.

I actually have no issue with a simple uniform (mine would be trousers of your choice in grey or black, a plain white polo shirt and a plain jumper in school colours). Any shoes would be fine as long as they're not open-toed sandals/flip-flops for safety reasons.

What I do have an issue with is schools insisting on using expensive suppliers, demanding logos on everything and ties for 4 year olds. It's bonkers and I don't understand why we do it.

In nursery we could wear whatever we liked. Velcro shoes, slip on dresses. I loved going to nursery. Then in year one, our uniform was a stiff button pinafore, a white button up shirt, black tie and lace up shoes. My teacher was horrible and made me feel stupid after every single PE lesson for struggling with the uniform. She would humiliate me and call my big sister out of her class to come and help me, which ruined our relationship as it embarrassed her. I never liked school after that.
In college I found out I had severe dyspraxia. I'm still angry they trashed my self esteem for basically nothing.

In secondary school we had a strict no make up policy. A girl from the year above had horrific acne and wore simple foundation to try to cover it up. Our head teacher cornered her in a corridor and ordered her to remove it in front of everyone. She did, while sobbing. I wonder how well she learned that day, while feeling horribly sad and self conscious.

It's not cheap, though. Nor is it easily available when schools demand parents use a choice of one overpriced supplier.

I agree that schools should not use single expensive suppliers and shouldnt be doing this ridiculous logos on PE joggers etc.

But I do think school uniform should be smart and require uniformity of style, and I think the easiest way to achieve that is to stick with the current accepted style of tailored trousers and smart leather shoes, rather than swapping to leggings/trainers.

@NoIDontWatchLoveIsland

It's a weir part of the UK "tradition" to stick kids in shirts, ties and blazers at aged 4, for some reason

Find me a state infant school that requires a blazer at 4 and I will believe you.

I'm exaggerating, but my point is that uniform is clearly not a necessity or every school in the world would demand it. And they don't.

But I do think school uniform should be smart and require uniformity of style, and I think the easiest way to achieve that is to stick with the current accepted style of tailored trousers and smart leather shoes, rather than swapping to leggings/trainers.

But that's an added expense for many. Requiring leather shoes means parents have to buy regular shoes plus extra shoes for PE, for example. Requiring tailored trousers means they have have to find money for new trousers rather than sending kids in another pair of a different style that still fit.

@NoIDontWatchLoveIsland

It's a weir part of the UK "tradition" to stick kids in shirts, ties and blazers at aged 4, for some reason

Find me a state infant school that requires a blazer at 4 and I will believe you.

Not quite what you asked, but this state primary school has an optional blazer. www.ajkfed.com/johnkeble/school-uniform.html I don't know how many children avail themselves of the option though.

*I agree with you. A secondary school is a huge expense and worry for low income families. There are many ways of identifying a child's background even with a uniform. Things also got lost or damaged causing even more aggro.

If you have your own clothes , you don't need to spend 200+ or replace overpriced garments from one or two shops.*

---

I have a feeling people who say this are wealthy enough to have a full and varied wardrobe for their kids

I would've absolutely hated school without a uniform- it was bad enough with one (wrong coat/shoes/bag). The pressure to wear branded clothes, new outfit everyday and conform to trends. Absolutely no.

Schools offer free or discounted blazers, skirts and trousers for those who really need it. Forcing parents to have to buy 10 Nike tracksuits to fit in at school isn't doing anybody a favour, because that's what it would've been at my school.

Schools offer free or discounted blazers, skirts and trousers for those who really need it. Forcing parents to have to buy 10 Nike tracksuits to fit in at school isn't doing anybody a favour, because that's what it would've been at my school.

You can get around that by saying "no branded clothing".

@warmfluffytowels

Schools offer free or discounted blazers, skirts and trousers for those who really need it. Forcing parents to have to buy 10 Nike tracksuits to fit in at school isn't doing anybody a favour, because that's what it would've been at my school.

You can get around that by saying "no branded clothing".

Firstly, that won't happen. They say that in every school and kids still come in with Nike air forces. Also, it doesn't stop kids being bullied due to fashion taste. It puts unnecessary pressure.

The solution to strict or expensive uniforms isn't remove them entirely unless you're in a middle class area and that's just me speaking from experience. Maybe it should depend on the individual school but I think some posters can't see it from outside their immediate circle