To think that switching to polo shirts makes the school uniform look low-rent?

[Byetoshirts]

My kids' primary has announced a change from shirts to polo shirts (previously just KS1) for all years except year 6.

I just think it looks a bit rubbish - all the other (in the main more affluent) local primaries have kids that look smart, and ours now get to look like they've just rolled out of bed. My DC are annoyed as they enjoy looking smart at school.

I associate polos in school uniform with young children and others who struggle with buttons and spilling stuff on themselves.

They also wash and wear badly (as stains kind embed themselves in polos) and the collar doesn't sit properly when open so a lot of (KS1) kids wear them tightly buttoned up to the neck, which doesn't exactly seem comfortable.

It seems weird and out of date to put children in shirts and ties to me. Neither DH or DS wear a shirt or tie for work, both work in offices.

It’s a bit off topic but what I do hate in school uniform is blazers. Mainly because, for a blazer to look good, it needs to be quite expensive (probably unreasonably expensive for school uniform). Cheap polyester blazers look terrible and are not a good advert for a school. It would be better not to have them at all.

I agree. I'm a teacher and I don't wear business dress. I dress comfortably and appropriately for my workplace and job.

I agree with having a uniform but the rules around workplace dress codes has changed so much, I think it's ridiculous to have the children trussed up in shirts and ties.

I don't especially mind if people here think I am a snob, and it has become clear to me from this thread that polo shirts are much more widely worn at KS2 outside my local area, and don't have a negative connotation.

I will say that the 'affluent' thing was not about deriding people who aren't affluent, it was about putting the children at the school at a perceived disadvantage compared with other local schools (I guess re social capital) and the school's image (as it doesn't have the reputation it deserves locally - but maybe one reason is that the the SLT aren't overly bothered about 'marketing').

So it's more important to you that the kids look affluent than that they are comfortable?

So if the school is in fact entirely satisfactory and giving your children a good education, why would you worry about what people who don't have children at the school think of it?

I agree there couldn’t be a less practical school uniform item. I don’t know why they are so normalised in the uk still, apart from a few parents, no one likes them, although ‘cheap’ they are still the most expensive part of the whole uniform and they don’t even function in the sense of keeping you warm in the cold or keeping you cool in the heat, they feel horrible to wear, look awful after a few washes which with pongy teens you can’t avoid washing and they’re outdated. Outside of school the only time people tend to wear a blazer nowadays is for formal occasions, possibly a job interview, actual jobs that require them are getting rarer. The only secondary schools near me that don’t do ties and blazers are the SEND ones who have the right idea in my opinion. At this point there are more reasons for a uniform overhaul than against.

I need to replace my DC’s tie and blazer this year and buy a whole new uniform for younger dc starting in September. I resent having to pay for such pointless items of clothing when a polo and jumper would be more comfortable, would wash better and do the job just fine but schools seem obsessed with their image and if I want them to go to school I have no choice as they all have stuffy uniform policies where I am.

My dc are at private school and have a very smart uniform that’s quite strictly followed. Shirt, tie and blazers. Our summer uniform is a polo shirt but that’s just due to the weather. I quite like the smart look.

Our school has a choice of polo or shirt from P4 onwards and it looks absolutely fine.

Polos are great, affordable and comfy.

I hate to see primary aged children going to school looking like little accountants. Polo t-shirts all the way!

@WorkCleanRepeatWhat does an accountant look like? A suit? And tie? Many primaries have abandoned ties. A skirt and socks? All accountants could wear this of course!

It may interest you to know that the only schools that do uniforms in the US are private schools and some schools in very rough areas. Private schools (unless for the very rich) tend to have far poorer facilities than the public/ state schools, and actually many have a dress code instead of a uniform per se. There are certainly no blazers that must be worn daily.

When I see people here huffing and puffing about image I always chuckle.

If I saw an American student wearing a uniform that didn't have a plaid skirt folded up to within 2 inches of the knickers or a pair of messy looking tan chinos, I'd assume they went to a school in a deprived area. Generally speaking, the stricter and neater the uniform, the lower the income and the higher the crime rate. The kids forced to adhere to strict uniform are being fit for enlistment in the armed forces and other careers where they will be taking orders, not giving them.

My kids could go to school in 'top hat and tails' and they'd still look low rent by the time they finish!!

I'd much prefer them to be comfy.

The accountancy firm I work for has branded polo shirts we can wear if we choose, and fleecy gilets & jackets.

There’s only one primary around here (in an affluent part of Cheshire, if it matters) which insists on shirts over polos. And it’s the school known for being very formal, not particularly warm and “rules for the sake of rules”.

At primary school, I think it’s reasonable for small children to have a uniform that doesn’t need ironing and is easy to take on and off. Our preferred primary has an “active uniform” which would probably horrify you- essentially a PE kit all the time. I love the concept.

I don’t think kids need to “be prepared” for wearing shirts and formal uniform at secondary. It’s not like wearing certain clothes is a skill you need to learn- you just start wearing it. Why start doing it at 4 when you could be comfortable for longer?

I’m team polos all the way

the secondary kids have to wear shirts and jumpers and blazers and yes while smart it doesn’t look comfy at all

most of the world has moved on from “smart”. My (very corporate) office is now jeans and trainers and in summer, shorts/summer dresses and flip flops are the norm

As you don't actually rent school shirts I think you really mean 'low class'. You don't seem to be concerned about children being comfortable, but more about how affluent they look.

I don’t think kids need to “be prepared” for wearing shirts and formal uniform at secondary. It’s not like wearing certain clothes is a skill you need to learn- you just start wearing it. Why start doing it at 4 when you could be comfortable for longer?

The crazy thing is that they go to university right before they start work and lounge around in hoodies and trackies for 3 years.

Why are they being 'prepared for work' at 4, but not at 20?

It makes not a jot of sense.

Goodness me this is just a sad post I think. Worrying about ks2 kids looking affluent over their comfort or what other people might perceive them to be. I am so glad I don’t live in that world. My kids go to probably the best primary in the country we live in, they wear polos and jumpers and trousers, on PE days they have a school tracksuit. They’re happy, healthy and full of curiosity, most importantly they love school - if that makes them low rent, I’ll take being a scrubber any day over that kind of snobbery and nonsense. Blimey the worlds gone crazy

@TheKeatingFive Well no, they don’t all go to university. 37% go. For example, my hairdresser recruits at 26. They want presentable young people. The trainees are looking great because they have a dress code. Lots of employers do. It’s not just about the uniform, it’s about understanding that employers in many cases, will have dress standards. Young people are representing their brand. They want standards upheld and a uniform promotes this way of thinking. You cannot always do what you want in life.

But none of that explains why young people in countries where there is no school uniform manage to do this perfectly well. Do we really think British children are so thick that they need 12+ years of practice in order to be presentable at work? I certainly don't.

A very high percentage go on to some kind of further education of training.

There is nothing in your post that addresses the absurdity of 4 year olds in school uniform to 'prepare them for work'.

If it's important, bring it in at 16. Though I'm not convinced anyone needs practice in wearing smarter clothes. Absolutely no need for pre teens to be concerned with it.

Agree. I only wore “uniforms” for dance classes (classic leotard and tights) and summer holiday clubs (coloured 👕 to differentiate the different age groups).

I grew up with a dress code. There was rarely a disruption over clothes and we also knew what and what wasn’t allowed to be worn which would be on par with most workplaces today.

The last thing they were going to do is send a child home or prevent them from entering over clothes and shoes like I’ve read here. You had to do something pretty bad to be sent home.

If there was a uniform, it would be basically jeans, a top and whatever shoes we were comfortable in, typically trainers all year round with options of boots in the fall/winter and sandals in the summer.

Yes, all those Europeans looking scruffy and unprofessional at work, because they haven't had years of training in how to wear a set of clothes that's the same as everyone else they work with (which most of them don't need to do in their job anyway)! The French and Italians for example. Famed for being scruffier and less presentable than the Brits. Oh hang on....