Do you agree with school or the parents?

[Watermelon44]

Our high school has made the news because of a uniform dispute between (some) parents and the head who is recently in post.

The gist of it is that the school brought in a new rule in April that they were no longer allowing black leather trainers (eg superstars or nike air force) and instead the kids should be in smart plain black leather office shoes.

This appears to have caused ww3 with some parents, who despite having many months notice, still sent their kids in the banned trainers (100+ children apparently). The school has stuck to its guns and has isolated and then suspended those in the wrong shoes if they refused to comply.

The school has also banned girls from wearing socks, and have enforced a thick tights ruling, although socks are allowed in the summer term and if allowed by the head in any warm spells (eg the past 3 days).

Personally I think the tights ruling is worse and I have mixed views on the trainers rule.

I am interested in the real reasons behind these strict uniform rules as I feel if the real reasons were shared with parents they may be more on board with them, rather than the usual rubbish about dressing professionally eg like in an office, when my dp works in a head office in London and goes in jeans and trainers!

As this seems to have whipped up a storm locally, I am interested in other people’s views on this topic as some of the parents round here seem to have gone totally bats*it over it!!

God yes. My feet were damaged by school footwear, as I have wide feet and they were squashed into school shoes for years. I'd love children to be able to wear trainers, best shoes for comfort and active lifestyle.

Wouldn’t it be lovely if we could have a thread without one of these tedious posts.

A school local to me have gone down the tights route. It was because the skirts were just far too short and the parents wouldn’t comply with knee length skirts. The parents would purposely buy skirts that were too small. E.g age 9-10 for a 15 year old. The girls could wear them because they are pleated have a fully Elasticated waist band. They did this to get round the no rolling up rule.

Oh do be quiet @blossomtoes

Shoes OK
Tights out of order

There may well be parents who want shoes that are casual/ fashionable enough to wear at weekends, rather than having separate pairs for school &home. There are plenty of families who could one pair afford shoes but not two and/ or who would be be too proud to ask the school for donated shoes.

The tights rule is incredibly sexist. Really damaging to give young women the impression their bare legs are somehow unacceptable.

Personally, I think dressing teenagers as mini business people from a completely different era is absurd. At my school many moons ago the uniform was much more casual - black skirts or trousers, polo shirt & sweatshirt. Any black shoes. I think it’s a shame we’ve gone backwards from then.

I get why uniform exists but I think there should be enough freedom in it for kids to express their individuality & also to be comfortable according to their own individual needs.

I wouldn’t be going to the press, but I would be pushing back with the school if it were me.

Yes, kids need to know when to follow the rules & families should support that but equally I don’t believe kids (or anyone) should follow rules blindly without thinking critically & if rules are discriminatory they’re entitled to & should be empowered to question that.

Trainers last much longer. Schools should be more flexible about costly items. There is no equality be it that parents have to buy expensive shoes that don't last which some can afford and some can't, or girls having to wear tights.

The evidence, whilst a bit limited, seems to be that stricter, more disciplined environments make for better, more focused students and better grades as well as behaviour.

https://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/IJEM-09-2015-0118

https://www.trutexbtru2u.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Uniform-Research-Report-29_6_17.pdf

So I can see why the school are doing what they're doing. It's awful that some students will be bullied because their parents can't afford the expensive, fashionable shoes that teens often want nowadays.

My dcs school us no socks for girls too.

Shoes fine. Tights absolutely no way

I just don't understand the 'if you don't like it apply to another school' argument. Where do you all live where that's a realistic possibility?! Every single school on our city has the same draconian uniform rules, with minor differences in emphasis at most. It's apparently the latest thing in education to model schools on prison regimes. Short of leaving the system entirely (neither realistic nor desirable for the majority of us), there is no alternative!

Agreed it's such a daft retort. Realistically most are lucky if they have 2 options for secondary school and as you've said let's be honest it's not a case of one having strict pointless rules and the other letting you wear anything you like so how would moving even if it were a possibility solve the problems of the illogical overzealous rules?

OP I can answer number 8 for you (I’m not SLT but am an ex teacher turned home educator);
Control. It’s all down to control. Schools, particularly secondaries, are slowly losing control over children and parents (this is a whole other thread maybe!). To adults, highly controlled environments over young people are much less stressful. Strict control makes things easier for the adults and the children fall into line and then stuff can get done. But this is disingenuous in the long run, it’s a short cut. A knee jerk reaction to what is really going on in education. Like I said, this is a huge topic that I could pontificate on all night.

I mean one of those reports is plastered with the logo of a company that manufactures school uniforms so I’d take it with a bit of a pinch of salt…

It will be skirt length causing the school to make this rule. We don't need to see what they have had for breakfast thanks! I can understand why the school feels forced into doing something.

I took umbrage at our school’s policy during the end of lockdown when they suddenly switched back to full uniform after allowing hoodies etc because of the open windows and doors policy.

It became apparent that the one shop that sells the logo’d items that are mandatory didn’t have enough appointments for trying on and were expecting parents to click and collect multiple sizes then return them. Thus slowing down the process further due to them being quarantined before resale so loads of stock was unavailable.

I never understood why only one shop had the branded items. Especially as their attitude was visibly very ‘ugh these customers are such an inconvenience’.
The staff tried to guilt me into buying two ties. ‘But they’re so strict! What will happen if little Johnny loses his tie, they impose sanctions!!’

We’ve also had very strict rules on shoes- no visible stitching/ no cleated/chunky/only black soles (ie no DMs)/nothing that looks like a trainer/no loafers with metal trims/non functional buckles, nothing with ribbons instead of laces…

I’ve never understood why Clark’s think girls will usually be an F fitting and boys a G fitting! Makes no sense. My teen Dd chooses to wear shoes from the boys section and actually they look good on her.

Shes got wide, G fitted feet as well as a high instep, so the more supportive of the shoes they sell for girls, like brogues, are usually no good for her. And she’s got more sense than to wear crippling ballet flats.

My ds is an H fitting child, but I’m sure some boys are an F!

Girls with their bottoms hanging below their skirts distract me. I imagine they distract most people, it's very hard not to gape aghast. It's inappropriate clothing, whichever way you look at it. It's an uncomfortable truth that a lot of teenagers look incredibly sexual.

@GertrudePerkinsPaperyThing Good for your dd, it's so important to take care of feet - once they are damaged it's quite hard to live with. I live in trainers, wellies or sandals these days, the most suitable for my wide, flat feet I find! But maybe I should look into men's shoes.

Weve also had cycling shorts/leggings for PE banned (for girls although DC conceded boys don’t really wear them); words to the effect of inappropriate/distracting’. Several kids raised this as sexist language and got a retraction of sorts. With clarification that shorts are still banned!
Although you only really get the kids version of events don’t you. Otherwise you’d be in school every other day with your Daily Mail sad face.

I don’t disagree that it’s inappropriate. But it’s a problem when we present it as a problem because of our concern for male teachers, rather than because it’s inappropriate.

@Serendipitoushedgehog well said.

I know the school @Watermelon44 and have been reading the over the top comments on social media by parents - one compared the treatment of the kids to the holocaust.

The tights thing was ridiculous and had they not insisted on this on the first (really hot) day then it wouldn't have blown up like it did.

The show things comes down to the really large list of allowed and not allowed shoes that both contain pictures of exactly the same shoes but with different branding. So Clarkes are ok and Nike are not - yet they are the same other than a tick and a label

*shoe

Random sidenote completely unrelated but if you were unaware you can now edit posts within a time limit unless on the app. Just click the 3 dots and then edit. 🙂