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Is anyone just absolutely sick of the outdated concept of strict uniforms?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 It's such an outdated concept and I find it bizarre that schools are able to even dictate which (overpriced) shops the uniform must come from.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

@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.

all of the state schools here have a uniform. How do I send my child to a non-uniform school?

I can't afford a private school - but in any case, as far as I know the private schools are all uniform as well.

I could move house of course, but then I would need to find a new job, and would be a long way from my support networks.

so do, please explain to me how I choose a non-uniform school?

On the other hand, perhaps this is a good idea:
Every LA has to have a non-uniform school within reasonable travelling distance to all parts of their area. Parents who want to send their child to a non-uniform school get preferential admissions (sort of like faith schools - what would the non-uniform test be? I am sure those details can be worked out).

Then everyone has a valid choice.

If a parent has applied only to non-uniform schools, but been unsuccessful, their child is exempt from the uniform at whatever school they are allocated.

Simple!

We didn’t choose DT’s school because it was non uniform but am very glad. No shopping for specific clothes and shoes or horrible pointless blazers.

Each year we bought jeans, shorts, T-shirt’s, hoodie and trainers. Non branded (because no one cared what name was on the label), comfortable, practical, easy to wash, DT’s liked them and they wore them at weekends and holidays so saved money.

@Whatwouldscullydo

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

You don’t have to send your child to school

Most people have to work though

@Allington@warmfluffytowels

You don’t have to send your child to school.

@Allington

On the other hand, perhaps this is a good idea: Every LA has to have a non-uniform school within reasonable travelling distance to all parts of their area. Parents who want to send their child to a non-uniform school get preferential admissions (sort of like faith schools - what would the non-uniform test be? I am sure those details can be worked out).

Then everyone has a valid choice.

If a parent has applied only to non-uniform schools, but been unsuccessful, their child is exempt from the uniform at whatever school they are allocated.

Simple!

Not necessary, the choice already exists, you can home educate in whatever outfit you like

When I was 11 I passed the exam to go to a prestigious nearby grammar school.
The blazer alone was £120, I think all in all my uniform and pe kit was in excess of £350.
The local comps blazers were £30.
I am in total agreement that something must be done.

[quote korawick12345]**@Allington@warmfluffytowels

You don’t have to send your child to school.[/quote]
Of course.

I'll just jack in my job, home-school and we can all become homeless instead! What an excellent idea

You don’t have to send your child to school

Sure; you are allowed to home school whether you want to or not. Perhaps you would like to explain why this is ‘great news’, korawick12345?

@CecilyP

You don’t have to send your child to school

Sure; you are allowed to home school whether you want to or not. Perhaps you would like to explain why this is ‘great news’, korawick12345?

It’s great news because then they don’t have to deal with school uniforms which is obviously an issue they get very het up about.

But you still haven’t explained why it is ‘great news’ to have to home educate when you have neither the skills nor desire to do so, in a country where you pay high taxes in the expectation of state education?

@CecilyP

But you still haven’t explained why it is ‘great news’ to have to home educate when you have neither the skills nor desire to do so, in a country where you pay high taxes in the expectation of state education?

Surely it would always be great news to have the choice not to do or participate in something you really object to. Not sure why you don’t think having that choice is a good thing.

Workings a choice now?

Ffs home educating is not a choice for most people.

Most people have to work, are not qualified teachers, and want their kids to have the opportunity to make friends and learn social skills.

To say this is a perfectly reasonable option for people who dislike school uniform is just ridiculous.

I think uniform for secondary (and primary) is so outdated. I mean, we all know that the teenage years are years for experimentation, for "finding ourselves", for discovering who we are, so why in those years do we insist on such draconian old-fashioned clothes? And for those who say there are jobs where you have to wear a uniform, then let them have the teenage years to express who they are. My dd transferred from a very strict on uniform school (where she actually sent home for having the wrong shoes, and was so so upset, as she had had perfect uniform every day for nearly 2 years, and her school shoes had gotten wrecked teh day before on a school trip), anyway, when she transferred to a new school with no uniform, i thought it was hilarious, as there was a "uniform" of sorts lol. All the girls wore very baggy jumpers and long baggy leggings, and the boys wore the same! Then when they got a bit older they started experimenting. It had no bearing on the learning at all. In fact, the teachers found it freeing, in that they no longer had to monitor the uniform which freed them up to do more constructive things... and discipline was taken more seriously as there was more time to concentrate on the more important things, like bullying etc etc. JMO

@korawick12345 As a tax payer, why shouldn't I expect to be able to send my child to a school that accommodates my beliefs about uniform? When there is no evidence that it contributes to attainment, and I am happy with the curriculum?

@korawick12345 and the poster up thread, who glorifies pupils having to wear jumper and blazer no matter how hot the weather, without even being able to ask to take it off?? WTF??? Do you apply that to yourself?

As it happens I am all in favour of a basic dress code that allows individual comfort and preferences to be accommodated.

We got our second preference school. Choice entirely on pastoral care. There were no choices available on uniform

I wasn't the poster who mentioned permission to take off blazers but we have the same rule at our school (it's a summer rule only announced at some point in the term when the weather gets hot enough).

Personally, I don't have an issue with the uniform rules at any of the schools my children have attended (which were strict about shorts, blazers etc). My sons have never complained about sitting in polyester trousers, buttoned up shirts, ties or whatever, in fact it's never been mentioned. Both of them like wearing uniform for formal exams as they feel it puts them in the right frame of mind. They attend private schools with well-stocked second hand uniform shops where you can get a blazer, all the various sports kit, jumper and coat for under £100 (and parents receive a share of the proceeds). There's no snobbery or bullying about wearing second-hand uniform.

Appreciate that some children may have particular sensory issues but I think there's more important components of a well-rounded education than worrying about uniform requirements. But each to their own, obviously others feel differently.

Anyone know the history of school uniform in the U.K.? Most of my family are in Europe and the US where there is no school uniform and we were lucky enough to find a school in London for DT’s which also doesn’t have uniform.
As wearing a school uniform doesn’t improve behaviour or exam results I wonder why some U.K. schools have such restrictive old fashioned rules.

@Parker231

Anyone know the history of school uniform in the U.K.? Most of my family are in Europe and the US where there is no school uniform and we were lucky enough to find a school in London for DT’s which also doesn’t have uniform. As wearing a school uniform doesn’t improve behaviour or exam results I wonder why some U.K. schools have such restrictive old fashioned rules.

I think it’s a fad that has been growing since the 70s to mimic private schools - parent often seem to equate strict uniform with good schooling - the evidence is irrelevant - it’s a gut feel thing - no critical thinking needed.😂

I think it’s a fad that has been growing since the 70s to mimic private schools - parent often seem to equate strict uniform with good schooling - the evidence is irrelevant - it’s a gut feel thing - no critical thinking needed.

Its the same why British people prefer eating shitty food while having much nicer options available. Because tradition. Because they don't know how.

Anyone know the history of school uniform in the U.K.?

I think it’s a lot to do with the class system. Private schools had uniforms so state grammar schools introduced them (along with school traditions, school mottos and school songs) to be like private schools. Then secondary modern and comprehensive schools introduced them to show they were as good as grammar schools. However, I’m not sure how they crept into primary schools; they were very unusual when I was at primary school in the 1960s.

[quote GreenLakes]@CatsArePeople

I think you’ll find that many of the top schools in North America actually have strict uniform policies.

Many others are implementing uniforms due to their significant benefits.[/quote]
DD1 school went to a top-10 US high school. No uniform. In fact the students often wore flipflops and pajama bottoms to school.

My other two children are at a top 200 US school. Again, no uniform.

If anything they're moving away from dress codes because they have realised that they are counter-productive and often misogynistic.

Which 'top schools' are you thinking of?

Actually, thinking about primary schools, there are 2 faith schools (one CofE, one RC) near where I lived as a child that have uniforms so fancy you would think they were private schools. As it is in an area with a large number of private schools, perhaps that is the intention.