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Is anyone just absolutely sick of the outdated concept of strict uniforms?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 It's such an outdated concept and I find it bizarre that schools are able to even dictate which (overpriced) shops the uniform must come from.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?

@Parker231

Uniform has countless benefits. Professional dress helps inculcate a culture of aspiration and hard work.

It also helps encourage discipline, concentration and focus on learning rather than clothing.

Then there’s the wider advantages in terms of creating an equal playing field where wealth does not translate into dress.

Professional dress helps inculcate a culture of aspiration and hard work. It also helps encourage discipline, concentration and focus on learning rather than clothing.

You saying these things doesn’t make them true.

Are all the pupils in mainland European schools unfocused dropouts then? Of course not. Probably the opposite.

[quote GreenLakes]@Parker231

Uniform has countless benefits. Professional dress helps inculcate a culture of aspiration and hard work.

It also helps encourage discipline, concentration and focus on learning rather than clothing.

Then there’s the wider advantages in terms of creating an equal playing field where wealth does not translate into dress.[/quote]
This is such utter nonsense.

Green Lakes - I’m assuming your DC’s don’t go to a non uniform school?
My DC’s - all A’s and recently 1st at Uni - no focus on what they wore to school. Everyone wore non branded jeans, T-shirt, hoodies etc - doesn’t seem to have affected their education. Same for my nephews and niece in Belgium and the US. All at top Uni’s or post grad jobs.
Sorry your argument doesn’t stand up.

It also helps encourage discipline, concentration and focus on learning rather than clothing.
It often increases focus on clothing. Skirts rolled up, ties shortened, then you see the college and university students dressed sensibly in jeans and hoodies.

Professional dress helps inculcate a culture of aspiration and hard work

So, all the careers whose uniform consists of sport kit, leggings, trainers, wellington boots etc. are just full of unprofessional layabouts are they?

So that would be all sports people, farmers, equestrians, anyone who works with animals (trainers, walkers, behaviourists, doggy daycare owners, cattery owners), vets, nurses/carers who need to dress for comfort and practicality, many doctors, CEO's, office workers, retail workers and managers....the list goes on.

All feckless and lazy are they because they might wear trainers and leggings to work?

Uniform has countless benefits. Professional dress helps inculcate a culture of aspiration and hard work.

Very few "aspirational" jobs require uniform. Judges, clergy, pilots... Otherwise its lower end employees who have to wear uniform. Not managers, not CEOs for sure.

@CatsArePeople

Uniform has countless benefits. Professional dress helps inculcate a culture of aspiration and hard work.

Very few "aspirational" jobs require uniform. Judges, clergy, pilots... Otherwise its lower end employees who have to wear uniform. Not managers, not CEOs for sure.

All these magical effects of wearing a uniform - get the teachers to wear uniform too - the schools would be even better - get the politicians to wear uniform - hell let's make it law - we should all wear uniform - make Britain great again, work harder, aspire more - the uniform way!😂

Uniform has countless benefits. Professional dress helps inculcate a culture of aspiration and hard work.

Let’s just disentangle uniform and professional dress shall we?

Uniform is worn as a symbol of identity, for protection or for ceremonial reasons.

Professional dress relates to someone working in a profession or perhaps in this case what was known as a white collar worker? So ‘professional dress’ would be a suit and tie, or a formal dress or suit.

The only people who seem to wear these are solicitors or salesmen..

Let’s look at a list of professionals who don’t wear formal or ‘professional’ clothing.

Doctors
Teachers
Advertising staff
Council staff
Journalists
Marketing
Lecturers and university staff
Nurses
Civil servants ( often work from home)
Design
Architects

Etc etc.

Now to my mind these are ‘professional’ jobs. But no ones worn suits for about 20 years🤔

You are actually referring to formal dress.

But hardly anyone wears it anymore. And Kier Hardie started the whole move towards less formal dressing when he was an MP.

I attended a grammar school in a poor neighbourhood. We didn’t have school trips or day trips because many kids couldn’t afford them. We did however have a strict uniform policy - it was an equaliser. Your class mates would not know if you were dirt poor and many families donated used uniforms to the school uniform fund, which lots of families benefited from. I am a firm believer in uniforms. If your kids want to express them selves through fashion, they can do it at the weekend/holidays. They only have to wear it in school hours.

@Thevoiceofreason2021

I attended a grammar school in a poor neighbourhood. We didn’t have school trips or day trips because many kids couldn’t afford them. We did however have a strict uniform policy - it was an equaliser. Your class mates would not know if you were dirt poor and many families donated used uniforms to the school uniform fund, which lots of families benefited from. I am a firm believer in uniforms. If your kids want to express them selves through fashion, they can do it at the weekend/holidays. They only have to wear it in school hours.

I went to a grammar school which at the time had a really strict uniform policy - we knew almost immediately who the poor kids were - tbh I'm really surprised you didn't because most kids do, even at primary - dd's best friend was teased for being poor! The equaliser thing is a pile of nonsense.

I also remember non-uniform days were a big massive deal - it was your chance to project your identity in a way that you were not usually allowed to - so lots of agonising went into how you presented yourself that day, so I can see why kids find it stressful - the whole day was about what you wore - the only focus of the day. Allow kids to do it every day - like at Uni or college and it no longer matters so much.

Your class mates would not know if you were dirt poor and many families donated used uniforms to the school uniform fund, which lots of families benefited from

Times have changed. Teenagers these days compare brands of tech, bags, phones, stationary, shoes, PE trainers. Uniform is no longer the ‘equaliser’ it was once believed to be. If simplified and made affordable to all eg black joggers, blue jumper with no visible branding, nobody would need to rely on donated clothes from school. Everyone would look ‘the same’ and achieve that sense of unity some feel is so important.

Many schools don’t have spare donated uniform, or if they do it’s often well worn and faded, clearly not new.

For infants I think schools should focus on practicality; warm winter clothes with stretch, cool breathable summer clothes. Do away with tailored shorts, button up shirts and ties, how do they help or encourage a 4 year old to learn?

Your class mates would not know if you were dirt poor and many families donated used uniforms to the school uniform fund, which lots of families benefited from. I am a firm believer in uniforms. If your kids want to express them selves through fashion, they can do it at the weekend/holidays.

Unless the uniform policy includes that all kids must have identical phones, exactly the same games console, and go on holiday only to a particular destination - everybody knows the haves from the have nots. It is impossible to hide it.

Suffers? Little extreme for the vast majority of kids. Totally agree with adjustments for those with specific needs

How would you ensure all those with special needs were identified? ASD and sensory processing disorders often go undiagnosed until the child is older, especially in girls as they have a greater ability to ‘mask’ thanks to the physical structure of the brain.

Waiting lists for assessments are long.

If your child cries because the labels or seams itch, or the top button hurts, or they can’t sit comfortably in non-stretch trousers should parents wait months or years before adapting the uniform?

In reality most parents prioritise their child’s comfort over strict illogical uniform rules. They buy plain stretch trousers as close to uniform as possible, spend extra on sensory clothing or shirts with flat seams, allow child to leave the top button open.

Even children with no sensory needs suffer if they’re cold, overheated, have seams or buttons digging in, or shoes that hurt because the only pure black leather style didn’t fit as well as the style with yellow soles.

I think we should try to put ourselves in the child’s position; would you want to sit on a cold floor in winter in shorts that are not only thin but have no give in the fabric?
Would you want to learn whilst sweating and hot because you’re not allowed to remove your jumper or blazer?
How would you feel spending hours in wet socks and wet shoes because it rained on the walk to school and sensible waterproof ankle boots are not allowed?
Would you be happy leaning over a desk to write if your top button was digging into your throat?
How about being cold all day 5 days a week because shorts or thin polyester trousers must be worn, and you’re not allowed to wear your school fleece even though the doors and windows are open and a -2 breeze is chilling you to the core?

Why on earth would you send a young child to school in shorts when the wear is bad? An adult doesn’t wear shorts unless it’s hot.

A child’s comfort is much more important than a ridiculous school rule. If the school are being difficult, send them in long trousers and contact the school governors. (I am one).

@Parker231

The governors in most schools approve the uniform policy so I can’t imagine you’d get far with complaining to them.

I don’t think having shorts as uniform is a huge issue in the UK. It is a tradition dating back centuries and many top schools clearly feel it works for them.

Things being old and posh doesn’t necessarily make them a good choice.

People really need to engage some critical thinking here.

I was pro uniform when mine were small and the local school even 20 years ago used John Lewis/Peter Jones as the supplier of logo'd jerseys, etc. On the whole though uniform was the cheapest form of children's clothing.

They went onto selective independent London day schools and to be fair apart from jerseys/blazers and dd's blouses everything was purchasable from M&S or a supermarket. DS has quite rigid sports kit as he was in the teams but dd wasn't and it was fairly relaxed. DD did a couple of years at a holy grail cofe selective first and there was far more pressure there to have this brand bag etc.

On balance I think French children look far better in their uniform of jeans, hoodie and trainers than the average British child in rolled up skirt, polyester blazer, ankle socks and scruffy shirt. I have changed my mind as I have aged.

I'm sorting out my sons first set of uniform, he starts in September. His school seems to have a sensible policy with no branded garments required. Friends however have primary kids that require branded everything, it seems to vary so much from school to school.

I used to be in the 'uniforms are a great leveller' camp, but I just don't think this is the case anymore. With retailers like Primark and supermarkets you can get perfectly good kids clothes that don't look cheap for prices that you could only dream of in the 80s. I'm sure there would still be competition but we had that before still with shoes, bags, glasses etc. If there is going to be a uniform then why not joggers and t shirt for everyone?

The other thing that has really turned me on uniform is the amount of waste there must be, pp's have already spoken about uniform being changed year on year. I've just taken a load of my nieces old uniform to the tip because its all branded and the school won't accept it anymore as have a new uniform. Such a huge waste!

The great news is, for those parents who don’t like school uniforms, that you don’t have to send your child to a school with a school uniform. So stop moaning about some thing that there is no compulsion for you or your children to partake in.

@korawick12345

The great news is, for those parents who don’t like school uniforms, that you don’t have to send your child to a school with a school uniform. So stop moaning about some thing that there is no compulsion for you or your children to partake in.

Silly me.

I forgot I could just magic my ideal school out of thin air and send my child there

So stop moaning about some thing that there is no compulsion for you or your children to partake in.

It’s AIBU. Get over yourself.

My kids don’t wear uniform, thankfully. I’m allowed to say I find it an outdated practice.

There isn't always a choice.

You can only express a preference. Thats not a choice. Many use all six spaces ajd still get either no place or sent miles away regardless of whether ir not they can get there. Any transport assistant is fir the chikd not the parents is 4 yr olds may well have to get in taxis alone or their parents pay fir 2 lots if their own bus fares a day as it only pays fir the kid.

Many schools Rs over subscribed ajd academies Can set their own rules meaning you could live in the school basement and still not qualify.

Only people who have no idea how the system.works make silly comments about choices