To think asking permission to take off a blazer is utterly ridiculous?

[ShowJumpSally]

My child's school has just moved into a new trust. Clearly it's one of those trusts as the latest email announces how children will be placed in internal exclusion or be suspended if they dare to wear a coat in the building or take their blazer off without asking permission.

Schools consistently moan about funding, there's a teaching retention crisis, teachers are overworked and leaving in their hoards, TAs are underpaid and in short supply, children's mental health is worse than ever, but somehow there's time and money to dish out internal exclusions if child gets hot and dares takes their blazer off without asking?

Aibu to say schools should try focussing their time, attention and money on the real issues instead of nonsense made up ones?
^

Top schools mostly have great behaviour and achievement because of the kind of students they attract, the kind of supportive and aspirational families those students come from and the well-qualified and good teachers they can attract and retain. In the case of private schools, they also usually have better resources, smaller classes, a higher staff to student ratio and the ability to expel students who persistently break the rules.

I teach in a highly over-subscribed grammar school. It's over-subscribed mainly because it's the only school of its kind for miles and miles around. It does well because it has bright, motivated students whose parents really wanted them to go to the school. It's always (until very recently) been fairly relaxed in terms of rules, particularly compared with the rigid academies we hear about now.

As had already been pointed out, students in both good and bad schools in Europe wear hoodies and trainers. I admit I have no inside knowledge regarding whether they 'saunter' though.

But that is a general permission not to wear a blazer, which will lead to some students/pupils pushing other boundaries e.g. not bringing equipment in, talking in lessons etc. Children are not angels and will disrupt if possible.

the school my children are now at was very poor until a few years ago when they adopted these rules. They explain it thus: give them small rules like this to rebel against and then they won’t have to rebel against bigger things.

the school is now one of the best in the area.

Yes, students are not angels and can be disruptive. So let’s punish them when they are doing nothing disruptive just in case they do decide to be disruptive later.

GThis will lead them to respect authority, because when we are going about our business and some petty bureaucrat comes up to us huffing and puffing about nothing in particular, we are instantly filled with deep respect for that person.

Or something.

But was it really the rule against taking off coats that did the heavy lifting, or did they make other changes at the time that more tangibly concerned their educational mission? I suspect the latter.

Correlation is not causation.

Why would it lead to that? They wear a uniform. By all means insist they have a blazer in school. But why would having, as part of the uniform, a blazer which may be removed when warm make them descend into ill-discipline? Some schools traditionally allowed students to wear shorts when it was warm. Would that make them 'disrupt if possible'? Of course it wouldn't! Being allowed to get away with breaking rules absolutely does lead to poor discipline. But if 'remove blazer if you're too warm' is part of the rules, then it's not a problem, is it?

Exactly.

Having the autonomy to remove what is effectively a jacket at one’s own determination does not show a lack of respect . Requiring young people to ask to do so does not show high standards or give an indication of good discipline or academic outcomes. DD’s school had this rule and were so busy concentrating on this and similar that they weren’t addressing widespread bullying, academic decline and poor reputation in the community. But oh, the children looked smart while they were stealing from the local shop. Some of you need to get a grip.

My children's schools allow the children to saunter in with hoodies and trainers and behavior is not outrageous. My DD has been at upper school for one term, the worst behaviour she's complained about is some children chatting too much in class. The worst behaviour complaint the school has made is that some children ignored the instructions on which route to take to the sports centre and biked the more dangerous route. Nothing like the behaviour I saw in school growing up. And this school is the only upper school in town so it's not a case of only the more aspiring students go there, they all go there, from the poorest roughest estate to the rich kids who own horses.

I'd say bringing in petty rules will more likely make students not respect any of the rules, because who respects leaders with petty pointless rules? I certainly don't, and especially did not as a teenager, nor did anyone else I knew.

What is the purpose of a blazer, surely in 2025 a windproof shell top would be more practical.

Oh dear me.

🤮

yes they made other changes. But the strict uniform rules were part of it and they explained them. They said it works. I think we need to listen to educators: if they are saying something is helpful. Otherwise are we saying that they are making silly rules for no good reason that are distressing for students? Educators want to teach, not cause distress.

Let’s not pretend it’s the rank and file teachers who make these rules, even though they have to enforce them. If by “educators” you mean the heads of academy trusts, then yes it is absolutely possible that they made arbitrary rules for silly reasons. Many of them want to have the image of a disciplinarian, and preferably to get written up in one of those “world’s strictest school” articles. Having punitive uniform rules is a great way to project that image without dealing with more difficult issues like bullying, etc.

My youngests former academy has a policy of no boots. Ok for the village kids going in on buses but others are expected to walk for 30+ minutes in Winter and suck it up when their feet are often wet and cold

So you evidently think the purpose of a complaints process is to allow the school to explain why they did nothing wrong and send the parent away with a patronizing pat on the head. That attitude probably explains why so many parents choose not to use the complaints process and instead go to the press, social media etc.

It is not universally known. It is known as the “broken windows” theory, only came into vogue in the past 30 years, was always controversial, and has been widely discredited.

No. All places have rules. Some seem petty, especially school rules to parents, but they are there to maintain an ethos for all the students. Conforming to what look like petty rules ensures that everyone is treated equally and that the aims of e.g. the school are not constantly thwarted by disruptive behaviour. I have been in schools where it was often impossible to teach, bullying was rife and many students were unhappy and unable to learn - so their life chances were destroyed by the students who constantly disrupted.
That's why schools have rules such as permission to take off a blazer, have your pens, pencils with you, line up on the left/walk on the left, no talking in the corridors - it's so the students who want to learn can, and those that would disrupt are stopped and can see the point of learning and cease to disrupt (or are excluded, of course, to the betterment of everyone else).

I think it’s bonkers too. Not everyone feels hot and cold at the same point and the kids should be able to decide - they won’t be institutionalised like this in the real world and need to be able to take responsibility for themselves.

My school had rules and strong discipline. It got stellar results.

It did not demand blazers or ties, although the headteacher did have a "thing" about skirt length.

You can have sensible rules, fairly implemented.

Rules for the sake of it just breed resentment.

have your pens, pencils with you, line up on the left/walk on the left, no talking in the corridors

But those rules have some kind of sense / logic to them, as if they don’t happen it’s disruptive, even if they might seem petty in some ways. What is the sense or logic behind requiring permission to take off a blazer?

I agree - it’s far from universally acknowledged.

That's why schools have rules such as permission to take off a blazer, have your pens, pencils with you, line up on the left/walk on the left, no talking in the corridors - it's so the students who want to learn can, and those that would disrupt are stopped and can see the point of learning and cease to disrupt (or are excluded, of course, to the betterment of everyone else

All the other things you mention aid the running of the school: having the right equipment, allowing for easy movement through corridors, not having a loud noise level etc.

needing permission to take off an item of clothing does not fit into that category.

Seriously, there is no justification for it. Get rid of the blazer anyway, but get rid of the rule in the meantime.

All the schools my kids went to had this ridiculous no-boots policy - even the primary school. Dd couldn't get lace-ups to fit her very slim feet so she had to wear Mary Janes every day for a mile walk there and back. And the only time they gave a shiny shit about the kids wearing a coat (no where to store it) was during their GCSE's in the height of summer - when the parents got a strongly worded reminder that children should wear coats when it was raining - the only time they noticed that kids weren't wearing coats in 7 bloody years!!!!
Care? Schools aren't interested, we don't educate our kids - we put them through exam factories.