Strict uniform at primary

[giantosprey]

Hi lovely people I hope you have some advice. I have 2 daughters at primary school in primary 4 (age 8) and primary 6 (age 10). It is a very good school but they could be going too far with the proposed uniform changes, which at present is quite shabby, granted. The idea is that for p5-p7 on non PE days will have to wear a shirt, tie, blazer with badge and girls will have to wear skirts chosen from approved styles, on PE days they can wear a poloshirt and trousers. The idea is to improve the ethos of the school and make them better role models for the younger pupils. I can just about except blazers and ties, but they will have a battle introducing skirts. Neither of mine even own a skirt through choice and I'll spend a fortune on heavy tights in winter. Youngest even wore trousers to a wedding recently, thats how much she hates skirts.

And yes I've heard the arguments that primaries can't enforce uniform but they say pupils can still be denied certain priveleges for non compliance, and above all it is a sign of a disobedient child. Or are they trying to set it deliberately too strict and turn a blind eye to sensible jackets/girls trousers etc?

Is this sensible for a primary school?

If it's the uniform I say go with it.

Ds has a pretty strict uniform policy and I don't fight it. I don't see the point.

the girls should be able to wear trousers
i think its odd as well havind different uniforns for pe days? mine dont always have set pe days, they keep pe kut at school and often do extra sports and outdoor lessons etc as well as the regular pe and swim lessons once a week. i would never remember which days they had to wear each uniform and essentially it just means buying more more uniform.

are they trying to insist on ligo and onlt available from certain shops? which they cant do at primary. has to be easily availablw and comparative in price to high street/supermarket etc.

and tgey cannot punish or deny priveleges to primary aged children because they arent wearing 'correct' uniform

girls can look smart in trousers too so I dont see why trousers cant be part of the approved uniform too.

If it is still "proposed", challenge it.

Sounds like you are in Scotland: get involved with your Parent Council. Has the "Parent Forum" been consulted?

Having two "uniforms" for girls is just plain ridiculous.

p.s. are they consulting the parents with regards to the changes?

We have had a couple of surveys out about uniform and whether it should change from the current polo shirt/skirt/trouser combo to the shirt/tie combo and the results have always come back that the parents want to stick to polo shirts .

If they drop the skirts only idea I think I would go with it. Boys can have a strict uniform and not need umpteen tights to keep warm in winter.

They could wear the smart uniform on PE days as well but it won't be enforced on those as its harder for young ones to change in and out of. The secondary has blazer and tie every day but trousers are optional.

Sorry, SKIRTS are optional.

And the two uniforms are for boys as well so that is equal.

Hmm, as someone who never wears skirts either, I ought to agree with you OP, but do somehow think girls in trousers with blazers look a bit odd. Don't really now why.

But, it's still getting parent's together to complain about the skirt rule - you can't be the only one who feels like this. Petition to the chair of governors?

Sorry, 'still WORTH getting parents together'

If they say skirts only for girls on certain days then surely you can get them on gender discrimination? I would certainly go that route if either of my DDs' schools tried this.

And a blazer with trousers looks VERY smart - it's what DD1 wears. Not that I'm thrilled about blazers, but then I am anti uniform and only put up with it because I've chosen to live in the conformity obsessed UK.

I'm not sure whether you are you unhappy about the skirts element or the whole idea of a uniform.

My DDs school has a smart, and quite strictly enforced, uniform. I quite like it, because it means that there are no arguments about what she can and can't wear to school in the morning. She's be a nightmare otherwise.

DS's (x4)state/faith primary have a VERY strict uniform policy. It is rigorously enforced and the kids get a huge pride from the way they dress and look when they are out and about. It's in an inner city area and the uniform is one of the ways they have created a strong, unifying identity for the pupils who are from very diverse backgrounds and incomes.

Yes when you are sorting out ties, caps, blazers (in my case) or hats, pinafores etc. it feels like a big chore but it does feel very worth it when you see the impact on the kids. They are so proud to be at their school and recognised for their distinctive uniform. Those families who can't afford it are (discretely) provided with assistance.

I am sure the law says you can't enforce skirts/uniform yadda, yadda, yadda but for my kids and the other pupils there is a lot that the uniform gives them.

So I say embrace it and enjoy the fact that they will look lovely.

Here here loverofwine. My DS's local primary have a very strict uniform albeit (without hats/blazers) but shirt & tie, regulation jumper, grey trousers or skirts, regulation coat & bag, black shoes & absolutely no jewellery except discrete faith or medical necklace/band.
It makes my life so much easier and DS takes huge pride in his appearance (& at age 5 could tie a better tie than me!). Unfortunately yours & the schools idea of 'sensible attire' may be might not be everyone else's so far better to leave nothing to chance and have a rigid policy. Is it really so bad to be in a smart uniform and learn that some rules MUST be adhered to?

Yes, but loverofwine and lechatnoir are girls allowed to wear trousers in the schools your children go to? Learning to adhere to rules is one thing.

(Disclaimer: I completely fail to see the point of 'preparing for the world of work' by being stuffed into a uniform until age 16 only to be allowed 'civvies' in 6th form AND at university. I also see children in other countries being able to 'prepare for the world of work' without being stuffed into uniform and doing it perfectly well)

However, no trousers for girls is a rule that is discriminatory and makes no sense, and I don't see how anyone can think it is acceptable to have such a rule in 2012.

Just for clarity, it is a myth that primary schools cannot enforce uniform, at least in England. Primary schools are entitled to enforce uniform and have legal backing if they choose to do so. Many take a relaxed view but that does not alter the legal position.

I think the OP is in Scotland and I don't think that here state schools can enforce uniforms.

They can make things awkward though.

but the uniform.still has to be of teasonable price ie comparable to supermarket/high street. easily available ie not one single supplier etc. there ate dofe guidlines on this which we used succesfullynto challenge new uniform.policy at our primary (second complete uniform.change in four years!)

and saying skirtd only for girls is crap imo.

our school.still changed the colour...again. but dropped the tank tops! and we can use the right colour top without the logo, tho they prefer the logo the goveners decided they couldnt insist on it. also childten cant be punished (primary age) fir wearing wrong uniform. schools can speak ti parents tho obviously.

OP as you are in Scotland suggest that it shouldn't be a skirt but a kilt and the boys can wear them too, then there will be no sexual discrimination. See what they say to that

Hi again. It was actually some of the parent council who wanted the uniform smartened up with the heads approval. Latest update is that the skirts rule is being dropped which is a relief as there was a lot of opposition to it. It will of course remain an option for those who want to but styles of trousers and skirts will be narrowed down. The shirt tie and blazer rule however is coming into force, possibly as soon as January.

"OP as you are in Scotland suggest that it shouldn't be a skirt but a kilt and the boys can wear them too, then there will be no sexual discrimination. See what they say to that"

Funnily enough they did suggest a kilt skirt for the girls but it was deemed too expensive and only viable if all girls bought one. Mine wouldn't wear it on any days.

Ours tried this as well but poloshirts have always remained an option at primary. I don't think skirts only is acceptable these days even at primary, though my daughter has no problem wearing them.

The outfit sounds too impractical for primary age with blazer, tie and skirt.

My friends daughter is at private school in primary and wears a blazer, tie and skirt every day and always will at that school. I wore a skirt every day at primary and even at secondary they were required for concerts and prizegiving BUT that was in the days children had to do as they were told. I'm not overjoyed and neither are my daughters but it is perfectly laudable to smarten up the uniform and hence the image of the school.

That's ridiculous. Its a state school, right? No need for blazers and ties at that age. And though my girls generally wear skirts I couldn't think of them not having the choice of trousers and nor could they, not in 2012 certainly. Our high school even mandates blazers and length of skirts but allows trainers as long as they are all black and smartish. Comfort is important as well.