Should the government introduce a scheme to help families afford school uniform?

[Darcey123]

A government e-petition has been set up which, if successful would help ease the burden on parents of buying school uniform but what are your views? Read all about it here: epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/65790

So, this salary sacrifice scheme would enable the parents of private school students to get tax relief on the cost of the most expensive private school uniforms, which often include incredibly costly sports kits, blazers, coats, cloaks, knickerbockers and in the case of Eton, morning dress.....

The alternative is that some poor workplace adminstrator will have to be checking what schools their employees attend.

Sorry, petition organisers, you really have not thought this through very well.

Yes, what a kerfuffle for remarkably little gain.

'School uniform is an important part of childrens everyday school life.' (children's btw)

Is it? In schools that don't have it, it isn't really missed.

'Hardworking parents deserve help to be able to afford the best school uniform for their child?'

Do they? If they are that hard-working, perhaps they are earning enough to buy the best school uniform. Or even the school uniform specified by the school their child actually attends. I am not really in favour of uniform, but if it has to exist, certainly in state schools, their should be a cap on what it costs, and the number of different items needed should be limited.

There is already a Local Authority run scheme of clothing grants for low income families which is very simple to administer as it is a fixed sum which only requires proof of benefits to qualify.

My older DDs uniform was under £100 pounds. Its lasted a year so good value. Don't parents budget for anything, do we always need government interference

I have never seen a shred of genuine evidence showing that there is any benefit in school uniform.

I will not be supporting anything which perpetuates the myth that teenagers need to be clad head to toe in dark polyester to do well at school.

It should not be the business of state schools to prescribe students' clothing. If parents want to have their DCs compulsorily dressed like yacht club commodores or 1920s cricketers then they can send their DCs to private school where fancy dress appears to be part of the appeal.

"I have never seen a shred of genuine evidence showing that there is any benefit in school uniform."

That's because there isn't any. In fact, to the contrary, a link was published on MN sometime recently t research that showed that is has no bearing whatsoever on academic performance, behaviour or anything else.

People just like it, and see it as a sign that the new head of an improving school means business.

All cant.

It should not be the business of state schools to prescribe students' clothing. If parents want to have their DCs compulsorily dressed like yacht club commodores or 1920s cricketers then they can send their DCs to private school where fancy dress appears to be part of the appeal.

I could not agree more.

see it as a sign that the new head of an improving school means business.

Unfortunately our Head introduced a new uniform then lead a black polyester clad charge to the very bottom of the school league table a couple of years later.

CharmQuark I think the link you were referring to was this one: Reducing class sizes, setting homework during primary school, and introducing school uniforms are among the least effective ways of improving school results, according to a new ‘Which?’ style guide for education published by the Sutton Trust today.

We are repeatedly lied to by schools and government. We are told that class size, homework and uniform are the panacea for problems in school. These things are easy to measure but in fact produce no result.

Instead the reality is that it is things like prompt feedback which make the difference. This is harder to measure and does require good management within a school. Unmarked work, lack of feedback are all missed opportunities.

Thank you Gnome - yes it was.

Interesting that small class sizes is big on the Emperor's New Clothes scale of spurious myth, given the frequency with which it is cited as a reason to buy private education.

I think the obsession with uniform is partly to do with persuading parents that the school is a sort of state wannabe private school.

Like teachers wearing gowns in Toby Young's Emporium.

I m coming round to the argument of no uniform for primary school aged children. I still quite like it for senior school though as that's the years of peer pressure and whilst MN seems to have a lot of children who aren't bothered by what their peers where, this hasn't been my experience in real life.

At primary school they have a lot more movement and activity so something practical like leggings and track suit bottoms much easier.

My experience of non-uniform was from outside the UK. Pretty much the rest of the state educated world manages to work out what to wear for school. Strangely enough, no one chooses head to toe black polyester when they have a free choice.

CharmQuark, I agree. I think that a faux private school uniform introduced when there has been a change of regime is intended as a kind of short-hand for a new broom sweeping clean. The reality is that too many schools get stuck on page one. The school uniform gets changed but the same old school with all its old problems is still there under the new blazers and clip on ties.

This was what happened with my DCs school. New head came in, introduced a new uniform (identical to the one introduced at his previous school). In the mean time he managed the school down to being the second worst in Britain. On his watch almost an entire year failed to achieve the accepted standard for GCSE English.

For a good school uniform is irrelevant. In bad school uniform is a distraction.

HelpMe- my DC's teen riends aren't bovveredd about fashion and labels, perhaps because they all went to the same uniform-free primary.

aaargh - tablet typos!

I agree that the issue is the overpriced uniform items from sole source.

Standard primary uniform, dark trousers, white polos and logo sweatshirt for under £10 is all much cheaper than ordinary clothes.

Our school runs a second hand uniform stall. Logo sweatshirts for £3. I had a lady buy all her uniform for her ds for sept for under £10 on saturday.

Secondary is harder, ds starts in sept. White shirts and black trousers OK - they can be bog standard supermarket. Blazer is about £30, second hand available. The killer is the pe kit because there is a lot of it, including trainers and football boots.

But that is all the clothes he needs for mon-fri, so I think it is cheaper than normal clothes.

Secondary school uniform. makes no sense. Shoes only, regardless of how wet, snowy it is. A blazer (ffs) which has to be worn at all times so making coat wearing uncomfortable and awkward. And the same uniform all year round so your either too hot, or too cold. And don't get me started on ties!

I found my uniform a severe distraction all the way through secondary school as it was so stiff and formal. Think I might have done better if I had just been comfortable.

I didn't have a primary uniform and I don't have even 1 clothes related memory from that time.

I would love my kids to not have to wear uniform, but there isn't such a school near us.

The usual 'it's what you'd have to wear to work' argument used to justify the sea of dark polyester also makes no sense. Very few jobs require a nasty polyester blazer, clip on tie and oodles of PE kit.

Even if we pretend it's an unconvincing approximation of 'business dress', that isn't necessarily what everyone will wear to work. It's not even the case that 'good jobs' = must wear suits and 'not so good jobs' = wearing something else. My colleagues would look at me funny if I turned up looking like one of those irritating people that go on the apprentice.

And that's completely ignoring the fact that, at (say) 13, they don't actually need to dress like they're going to work because they aren't. Wearing jeans and a tshirt for non-work activities doesn't prevent people who are required to wear them from putting on a shirt and tie to go to work.

The problem with the affordability of uniform is to do with the labeled stuff (Sweatshirts / polos / PE Kit / blazers) or schools choosing colours that are really hard to find in supermarkets etc. (One of our bog standard local schools has brown and yellow and another has maroon - not exactly supermarket uniform friendly)

I don't have an issue with uniform, but I hate the fact everything has to have a logo. Bring back the option to buy sew on badges. When I was at primary school we had shirt and tie (no sweatshirts or polos). Parents could buy 1 tie at the start of school and it could be used for many years. We also had blazers (optional but encouraged) and sew on school badges. It worked well for us growing up - I had one badge and one tie in 7 years.

In DD's school 99% of the children wear logo polos and sweatshirts. The quality is ok(ish), but for the price I could buy something plain of much better quality or go for the same quality but buy 3 times the amount.

At my very expensive DDs boarding school, the girls wore navy skirts, white blouse, house tie and navy pullover. The best girls' schools keep it simple and chic! If a school ramps up the uniform it may not have the substance to go with it, private or state. "All top show" as my Mum says.

I come on these threads to argue against school uniform because I think that parents have been educated from an early age to see school uniform as essential.

I am not against uniforms per se, I am against uniform where it serves no purpose. Two of my DCs attend cadets (one Army, one ATC). In cadets the uniform serves two main purposes:

• practicality - it is well designed workwear. DS has come back from week long camps where he has lived in the field without changing his clothes for days on end yet still looks as smart as when he set off. Forces uniform is practically indestructible.

• uniformity - uniform isnt uniform unless it's uniform. Uniformity matters in the armed forces and in their cadet organisations. Learning as one, behaving as one. Individuality is not what is wanted

School uniform fails because it isnt practical (who on earth thinks that polyester is a practical fabric for the teenage years?) and uniformity is not what teenagers should be learning. At school they should be looking to foster individual approaches to learning.

PE kit at dd's state comprehensive is £46.

Kilts are £35 each.

Logo blouses are £18 for 2.

Logo jumper is £22.

Then there's the butchers apron and science overall.

It all adds up.

Have a friend who had twins starting last year. She really struggled.

Starter set for secondary school costs approx £200. Why don't just carry on the way like primary school just give a set of guidelins then let fimalies buy them from major superstores etc.

It really makes my blood boil when people complain about school uniform. It's cheap as chips compared with out-of-school clothes, even Primark ones, and, let's face it, how many teenagers happily trip out of the door in Primark/Tesco outfits (except ds, who is the most utterly bargainous child ever: he just doesn't care two hoots about clothes - yippee!)?

Anyway, ime the people who shout the loudest about the cost of a school uniform - and let's make that school trips, too - especially at primary school when you can kit a child out from Asda for under a tenner - are the ones whose dcs when it's a non-uniform day are wearing the most designery clothes. They are not wearing Shoezone trainers, but ones costing £100.

There is no faff with school uniform. That's what a kid wears, five days a week. No arguments, no decisions. And school uniform generally washes very well - in fact I think ds's sweatshirt is indestructible.

Cheap as chips? Really?

Primary- yes as you can kit then out in asda.

But secondary is a different story. Blazers,specific pe kits, ties, etc it adds up.

I could buy several outfits for £200+ that it costs

lainie have you even bothered read the posts from those parents who are forced to buy uniform costing silly money? £200+ may be 'cheap as chips' to you, but to many parents it is a financial body blow. Can it with the 'I'm all right Jack' stuff, will you, and have a bit of compassion for people who are worse off than you?

I haven't signed this petition as I think it misses the point - we don't need state subsidies, we need to force schools to make uniform truly sensible and affordable. That means losing the sole supplier deals and the obsession with logos on everything. It should be simple.

The fact that your school uniform is sensible and indestructible isn't the point - across the UK, parents are paying silly money for polyester crap that looks awful after two washes. They have no choice about buying something equally smart but better. That is wrong.

I agree that blazers for state school pupils are a bit ott. Sweatshirts/polo shirts - with a logo - are good enough, and then the rest of the uniform can be generic supermarket stuff.

But "compassion for people who are worse off than you" - you have no idea of my financial circumstances and all I am saying is that some people should get their priorities right. No wonder so many children have a poor attitude to school when their parents are moaning about the cost of school uniform.

Honestly, it's not 'as cheap as chips' compared to non-school clothes. I can buy tshirts for both my children for less than £9/10 (which is what their polo shirts cost, each). School trousers for a 14 year old cost just the same as (or even more than) jeans/trousers from H&M.

And then there's the PE kit debacle. What is wrong with a cheap pair of jogging bottoms or shorts and a plain tshirt? Why is a £9 polo shirt and a £16 rugby shirt necessary? Why do they need two different pairs of PE specific socks? Why do the boys need to have football boots?

If it weren't for school uniform, they could wear their clothes 7 days a week. You need to have a full week's worth of non-school clothes anyway because they're on holiday so often. They also wouldn't need school shoes because they could just wear their trainers like they do every day outside school.

Whether we can afford £200 on school uniform or not is completely immaterial. Why should we have to? Plenty of countries manage to educate children very well without school uniform.