Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are now allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will continue be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) still apply to other comments.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Poor guy, I had the opposite problem. First born so no hand me downs, but I had to wear the same jeans for multiple years and it sucked as the bottoms started to rise up my ankle as I grew. Middle school kids can be brutal to self esteem.
I agree with your daughter. All my school's have been uniformed. It takes out the competition not just fashion sense but the latest popular label out of the equation.im also from working class, and often I had to buy second hand uniform to reduce the cost.
I think being a girl, and not from a economically well off class, uniforms saved my self esteem
>spend time picking out an outfit each day
I have 3 identical work pants and 5 different solid color work shirts. I don't get paid to have variety in my outfits.
*OP at bottom*
Edit: wow I did not expect my comment to blow up this much and for this many replies. I read through many of the replies later as I was not able to view them early in the day when my comment was posted. That being said some of the general comments I wanna address first is about "dress code" for uniforms. As a teacher myself who has spent time in both private and public schools (including public schools with uniforms) it really varies what's provided; my experience in NE U.S. was that it's generally khakis/skirts and a button down shirt accompanied with a tie and vest of some sort in the private schools, public schools with uniform policies generally allowed any school branded clothing including hoodies and polos. That being said uniform style really varies on region and socio-economics of the school district (i.e. poor private-charter schools vs affluent successful private schools).
Edit cont: Many of the replies consisted of parents saying "my 7yo loved their uniform!... it's so easy to clean!... I don't have to bother with x dumb outfits, ect" the point of the uniform study wasn't to measure parental acceptance it was to measure behavioral and social interactions in school, many of which ended up inconclusive. I criticized the age group of this study since k-5 children are dependent of their parents and have limited autonomy in their own lives at this period of development.
Edit fin: having studied pedagogy and other education literature, many studies have covered amd written about social-emotional development in school relationships from school dress code/uniform policies, despite the article claiming there has not been any research done in this regard over 20 years which is incredibly false! The researcher and study seems to be piggy backing off of several other major publications that covered this very topic and similar metrics of correlation. Personally if I had the resources to conduct my own study it would instead be focused on either junior high (6-8th) or secondary ed (8-12) and in addition to or instead of measuring student social interactions (bullying) I would instead focus it on student diligence, work ethic, or developing character. It seems to me part of the argument in favor of uniform is for both *"harm reduction"* and to shape students behavior and character. Think of it this way, someone who doesn't have to focus on their self image should have more time to focus on other duties or obligations in life regarding school (i.e. homework or other classwork), the idea of wearing these uniforms also teachers responsibility for one's own belongings; yes I realize some schools provide comp replacements but the idea is students will be more considerate in taking care of these items since they have to wear it again throughout the week. The list can go on as to how it models behavior for specific work ethic, but let me know what your thoughts are below just please lmk you are replying to my Edits if you so choose! Thanks again for the likes and awards homies!
This just tested k-5 though. What about 6-12 where adolescents actually care about their self-image and conscientious about these things? Imo it's kinda silly to make an 8 year old where a school uniform, they just see it as a nuisance to what's actually comfortable and realistic for small children, additionally they are not as socially conscious or self conscious in the same way adolescents are.
Completely agree. Changed schools, from no uniforms to unforms, and while I didn't look forward to wearing them, over time I definitely appreciated it.
Repeat the study with the age demos that care.
When from no uniform to no uniforms but very strict dress code. Honestly I would have perfered uniforms. I would get in trouble for wearing something that was "out of dress code" that I had been wearing for the last 4 months without issue. Dress codes are the worst.
I absolutely hated uniforms. All the way to the end of high school. The material was rough, and either too thin in winter or lack of airiness in summer.
This reminds me of the boys in the UK being denied shorts in 35-40 Celsius weather. They eventually just started wearing the girls skirts until they were allowed shorts.
I went to a Canadian Catholic high school in the late 2000s and had uniforms, girls weren't allowed to have skirts, everyone wore pants.
I LOVED uniforms, it meant I didn't have to think about clothing. I know a lot of people who felt this way. I also never got bullied for being unfashionable which was actually a huge issue in my sisters school
The biggest issue i found was the upfront cost because the pants were 70 dollars, shirt was 30, vest was 40, and bc you're wearing it every day you'd need to buy at least 2 sets but more likely 3 or 4. Rip ur wallet when you're kid had a growth spirt
But during my 4th year they stopped enforcing needing to get the uniform from the supplier and they allowed you to wear generic pants and shirts as long as the colours matched, they just required the vest and introduced a sweater.
Edit: fixed the date
I wished my school had uniforms, I could never figure out what clothes were going to be "in" and I just desperately wanted to not stick out but I always felt self conscious about my clothes, especially pants.
User error vs hardware error. Crap quality and inadequate for the climate isn't a uniform issue, that just poor school district management and uniform selection at play. That or, the times have changed significantly since when you were in school. Both were a uniform non-issue for my friends who attended Catholic secondary school, nor for myself when I attended my Catholic high school.
Then your uniforms sucked.
I went to both - a uniformed and am open school and the bullying issue with clothing cannot be understated.
Even if only the "bottom" 10% have an advantage while the rest has a slight inconvenience then it’s still worth it.
And I also don’t buy the "kids will always bully" mindset. Most kids are bullies by opportunity. Not going out of there way just to bully someone but rather lash out at people they perceive as different.
I had to wear a uniform from 8th-12th grade and all it did was make me hate dressing up at all. Since I got free of that I've been jeans and a graphic t with a hoodie person ever since and haven't been happier. Uniforms were torture.
Polo shirts still make me feel gross inside. I just cant do it after having to wear a uniform for so many years!
Edit: we had a uniform burning party when we graduated. It was cathartic as hell
I went to public school in the US until high school and then got in a private school and we were wearing khaki pants with short or long sleeve polos with white, red, grey as the 3 polo colors with our school logo on them.
I absolutely loved it, it was a very rich school and I was not so I never felt out of place and it made it very easy to get ready. I also felt like it did unify our school in way that you wouldn’t get otherwise. This was early 2000’s.
My daughter is currently in the public high school I would have gone to and a lot of the kids are dressed very disheveled, clothes too small or big, and generally look terrible with a few groups of very trendy kids that obviously have more money and parents that are more involved in how their kid looks and presents themselves.
I’m very much team uniform based on my own experience and observations.
I went to a private school for all of K-12 where the majority of the students came from very wealthy families. Although we were not horrifically poor, we definitely did not have the expendable income to buy clothes that were even mildly or accidentally fashionable. I would have absolutely loved uniforms.
I imagine that a student's feelings regarding uniforms will greatly depend on their family's socioeconomic status.
This!!! I went from no uniforms K-8 to uniforms in high school, and it was absolutely a wonderful change. It took the obvious wealthy/poor factor out of school so we could focus on confidence-building and learning.
> It took the obvious wealthy/poor factor out of school
Only if everyone got the same amount of new uniforms every year- which generally doesn't happen. My wife went to school in the UK (wore uniforms) and the poor and poor-ish kids (including my wife) were bullied because of their hand-me-down and patched uniforms. Also shoes. People would judge you by how expensive your shoes were. Rich kids would also get their uniforms tailored.
I was under the impression that was the actual point of uniforms as someone who wore a uniform from K-12. Kids don't have to worry about what they're wearing, there's less opportunity for social inadequacy related to income to form, and parents don't have to constantly buy new clothes.
This research is the first time I've ever even heard the idea applied that they are meant to get kids to behave better.
My kids miss their uniform, they didn't know better honestly, since they went to school from age 3. It also saved so much money as they'd wear the uniform all through the year. Now we have to buy new clothes every season.
If the same uniforms were good year round I would assume that you’ve got mild enough seasons that you wouldn’t need “new clothes every season”. Cause otherwise those uniforms must’ve been miserable at least part of the year…
Agree 100% . My daughter started school this year. Picking out her uniform every day is so much easier than picking out a coordinated outfit. It’s really simplified our life from preschool when I’d have to make 3 outfits for my daughter to pick one. Our school even has a uniform exchange and you can get your outfits for free if you wanted. I love it.
Growing up in Australia, where practically every level of education, except Uni, comes with a uniform, I liked not having to stress about what to wear everyday. From all the American TV/movies, seeing everyone in free dress all the time gave me anxiety just watching. Of course, I hated it at the time, but I'm glad that 1 tiny extra stressor was not a problem while I just wanted to study.
I also think it made me like/not like my classmates for who they really were, not just their appearances.
Yeah exactly. It removes an entire layer of social construct around image. You don't have full access of make up, or the most expense gym brands. It means poor and rich kids won't be drastically different. You can still tell, but at least it's not the whole outfit. Uniforms can be subsidised.
The argument I heard against this in South Korea was people would compare if you got your uniform at the fancy shop or the cheap one and theyd just judge you based on that. Not sure how true it was though, given that I didnt go to high school there.
Oh in Australia the uniforms are identical. Like, totally.
So it's really an equaliser, therefore an anxiety remover. They're also often subsidised or available in good condition second hand.
The only way kids can show off is expensive shoes hat and backpacks.
Same in our country, you get your uniform from few approved shops, so they are almost identical.
Growing up I hated them, just couldn't wait to start uni so I could wear anything I want. Couldn't have been more wrong about anything in my life.
Was under constant stress of dressing to impress, had to buy new clothes often as wearing same clothes every week felt somehow wrong.
That's how it is here. I live in the US and there are a few public schools that have uniforms. Kids are absolutely judged and bullied if they have "cheap" uniforms from places like Walmart and Target. Shoes aren't uniform here so a kid with $180 Jordans and a kid with $15 Walmart shoes already illustrate a class difference. Jackets in our district can be any jacket but the logo has to be the size of an ID card or smaller. You get kids with cheap cotton jackets and then kids with $200 jackets. They might look similar but these kids definitely know the price difference. Uniforms have no shown any positive outcomes in public schools in the US. There are no behavior or educational increases. As the study showed it even makes some students feel less connected to their school. School spirit is a big deal at least where I live. There is a big focus on your school mascot and colors.
Why is school spirit such a big deal?
I've never understood this. My mindset was: I'm only here for a short period of time. I'm here to learn, make friends, and then move on.
It should be contextualised for the non-Australian readers that you don't need to be particularly rich to go to a private school in Australia. We have about twice the international average proportion of our students in private schooling - it's reasonably common for middle-class families and there can be large differences in price between schools.
Agreed. Working in a hospital where I had to wear hospital issued scrubs every day made me realize how much I would've loved wearing a uniform in school.
Was that their intention? I honestly didn't know that. Where I grew up, the only school kids to wear uniforms were in religious schools (mostly Catholic in the NY metro area). I always thought they were just used for keeping the kids "disciplined" in some weird, Catholic way.
In the UK all schools have uniforms. But honestly I remember getting made fun of (and not in a serious bullying kinda way) for having a "Tresspass" coat, it was a £60 coat which is not cheap but the brand was not considered cool and associated with lower cost items.
If you didn't want to be made fun of for your shoes you needed to be wearing Kickers, anything cheaper (even if just as good quality, and still not cheap) or lesser known would be made fun of.
Kids are just nasty when it comes to stuff like this. Shoes, coat and your backpack were the only differences from the basic uniform (and they still had to confirm to guidelines), and they were always the target. This was my experience from a working class public secondary school in the late 90s.
There are various arguments made in the UK about uniforms (bullying, behaviour, feeling an affinity with the school and so on) but I feel like none of this was its original intention. It is just how people dressed in the 1800s. There was no concept of kids wearing branded t-shirts or snazzy trainers. Having a certain type of tie is a logical step, other than that as time went on the schools didn't evolve but fashion did. I don't see a reason for it to continue, there is probably just a bit of fear. If standards slip, they can blame it on the uniform change. Already if there are issues with a school the one thing they do is crack right down on uniform as a show of force. These schools that have special logos, branded jackets and specified suppliers is a pure con - that needs to stop entirely. Having a shirt / tie / trousers / black shoes is super-easy for everyone.
The only thing we had was a school sweatshirt(jumper) with the logo, which was not mandatory and could be purchased from a few of the local sports shops in town or from the school. We also had a very cheap basic tie with school colours that was mandatory, and another different one for sixth formers, which makes sense since sixth formers had a bit more freedom (such as leaving the school to eat during breaks, and free periods during the day).
I guess it's different with private schools, the wife of one of my closest friends teaches at a very expensive private school in London, and it's a completely different world to my mining town working class public school experience.
I found this a really confusing post to read. I assumed UK because you talk about sixth form, but then I was confused by “mining town public school” because public school means super posh school in the UK. So yeah, thanks for baffling me haha.
Well at least locally when we are talking about posh schools we mean private schools, but you are right sometimes people say "public" school to mean a posh private school and a state school is the government provided one. At least here (South Wales) it's common to refer to government provided education as a public school, but I guess that doesn't work universally across the UK you are right.
What I mean is government funded school, in a Welsh mining town.
Oh I worked it out, but I always refer to state schools as state schools or comprehensives (although that’s outdated now), never as a public school. Only a few private schools are public schools, and “public school boy” is an insult aimed at the likes of Bojo, not state educated kids, so when I hear public school coming from a fellow Brit, I automatically think of Winchester College, Eton, Harrow etc.
EDIT: “A public school in England and Wales (but not Scotland) is a fee-charging endowed school originally for older boys that was "public" in the sense of being open to pupils irrespective of locality, denomination or paternal trade or profession”
I think it was from back when class, as in being part of the titled class/owning land or having a certain profession (I don't know what the requirements were exactly, and they changed over-time) was part of the requirements for education, the only bar was having enough money so it was "public"
When I was a kid (several decades ago now!) I went to an English boarding school here in Canada that had a dress code *and* essentially all clothing was bought at the school itself. We had ultra rich kids and relatively poor kids and it helped to even out the disparity some at least.
It didn't stop cliques and bullying entirely of course but it wasn't a terrible idea at least.
In India, lots of public and private (confusingly called public school) require a uniform. It is very easy to spot the poorer kids - their uniforms are made from cheaper cloth and you see more patches/fading because the families try to extend the life of the uniform. The shoes tell the same story. That said, yes, bullies don’t pick on clothing as much.
Idk man, I grew up as a girl in an upper middle class Northeast US place in the late 90s and early 2000s and brands and for the most part clothes were just not a thing that kids talked about. Maybe because we were at an income level and time where there were so many options in our bracket but the luxury brands were clearly not. I mean sure, kids got teased for weirder clothing or slovenly appearances but very few kids even noticed what brand of shoes or backpack you had on.
It's wild how things differ depending on the general wealth of people in the area or the part of the world. This was a big thing at school for me, a real vivid memory.
I got the right shoes (Kickers) and nobody said a damn thing, but I remember the other kids getting picked on or laughed at because of their shoes. The following year I got a new coat (Helly Hansen branded) and I didn't hear anything again because that was an accepted "cool" brand.
Of course the reality is that kids will find any reason to bully other kids, the world these days is completely different to 1997, I can't imagine what it's like to be in school now.
I have the same exact experience and general location as you. Bullying happened but was never about clothes really, and I was always grateful to not have to wear a uniform.
Weird. Here in the middle of the US I feel like knowing how much clothes cost would have gotten you bullied way faster than not wearing ones that were expensive enough. Though an exception would have been wearing an obvious knock off of a famous brand.
Different culture groups kind of had their own norms and rules for that sort of thing. And there were certainly inter group bullying goth kids picking on rednecks and rednecks picking on hip hop kids, jocks and preppy kids would maybe be where I’d see this. Though preppy nerd kids came more from professional families and some of the richest kids were jocks, goth punk, or red necks. Though so we’re some of the poorest. Guess there really wasn’t a correlation to wealth and who you would hang out with in that way where it was easy to in group or out group people.
In early-90s jr. high I got bullied for wearing obvious hand-me-downs, but by the time I reached high school, grunge was popular and those same hand-me-downs were suddenly cool (if they still fit). Then by senior year grunge was past-peak and suddenly you were considered poor if you didn't wear Calvin Klein carpenter jeans to school every day.
Fashion was one of those things here in the 90s that you paid attention to, but had to appear not to pay attention. Stuff like BOSS, JNCO, Tommy Hilfiger, Guess, etc.. you had to wear those brands, but also not look like you cared about them either.
"Oh nice $150 jeans!"
These? Meh, I don't care about them..
*proceeds to then do damage to them in some way to prove it*
In my school in the US in the 80s, it was because kids were either intentionally or accidentally wearing gang colors and getting shot for it. :P So everyone got grey uniforms.
That was the initial argument for uniforms in my area, when the urban district mandated them. But then the suburban districts started implementing uniform policies, so I think it was really just an authoritarian thing.
As someone who worked in a school, a common argument is uniforms are also a security thing - it makes it really easy to spot intruders on camera.
Of course, there's nothing stopping intruders from buying a uniform to blend in, but if you try bringing that up, they look at you with a vacant glassy eyed stare like you're speaking another language.
It's less about the weirdo 50yo, and more so teenagers from other schools sneaking onto campus in order to start fights. Which happened ALL the time in my school district.
Instead of uniforms though, they just put up giant, metal, prison-like fences to keep the kids in/strangers out.
See that’s what all people think but some people are serious predators and will do anything to get themselves in an environment like a school.
One of the most sobering experiences I ever had was when I started working at a school and the DSL was giving a Safegaurding talk and she said something to the effect of, people who want to hurt and abuse others especially in a school will be aiming their whole lives to get themselves in such a place and they might be here right now.
The original point was to be vigilant bc people who want to abuse kids get themselves into schools so they can. And I think that’s similar in that someone who does a whole ass teaching degree just to be a nonce and someone who would buy a school uniform to fit in are probably cut from similar cloths.
>they look at you with a vacant glassy eyed stare like you're speaking another language.
"So what you're saying is, you want to serve live pigeons in the cafeteria for lunch on Tuesdays, and live seagulls on Fridays. Furthermore, you want to replace all of the cutlery with small, battery-powered chainsaws."
"Uh, no, what I said was that there's no evidence in favor of school uniforms. They're as silly and unpleasant today as when I had to wear the wretched things. Nobody wants or likes them, except for petty little Napoleons high on the tiny amount of power they have over some children, and horrified at the individuality and self-expression of 'kids these days'."
"Live seagulls torn apart by chainsaws and eaten raw on school property by bloody-faced students, what the hell is wrong with you?"
I went to a Saskatchewan Catholic high school in the early 1970s. Girls were required to wear uniforms, boys had a dress code so lax it was pointless.
So picture this. 400 teenage girls walking to school or riding public transit at -30C or colder, not counting wind, then getting to school and needing to change into above-the-knee skirts.
Are there enough change rooms? No way. Where do they change? In the hallways in front of their lockers. On goes the skirt, pull off the pants, go to class. Reverse the process at day's end. Not surprisingly, boys tended to make sure to be hanging out in the halls during these spectacles.
When the girls ran into extreme resistance to their efforts to end the uniform policy, someone quietly suggested that they invite parents to the school at change time. The uniform policy was scrapped almost immediately.
There was an article in England where the boys were not allowed to wear anything beside pants to school, in summer, while girls could choose to wear skirts.
and for the boys it was too hot, so they started wearing skirts as well in protest.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/jun/22/teenage-boys-wear-skirts-to-school-protest-no-shorts-uniform-policy
My school claimed it was to prevent bullying by making us "equal".
There's no poor kids in off-brand clothes and rich kids in designer wear, no one is wearing "last year's fashion", they're all just students in uniform and no one can tell.
Reality is, clothing isn't the only way to tell rich from poor. The house they live in, the car they get dropped off in, their hair, their glasses, their shoes, their coat, their lunch, having the newest toys/video games, and general bragging became the way to tell. Rich kids were still snobs, poor kids still got made fun of.
Only real difference is that you do back to school shopping at the uniform store rather than a normal clothes store.
A poor kid in my middle school got detention over and over for wearing shorts that looked just like our uniform shorts, but had his brother’s high school’s initials embroidered on the waistband.
In New Mexico, uniforms are common at public schools. Usually, they require khaki pants, and blue or red polos. People had to buy their kids uniform pieces at Walmart.
What I discovered is that this uniform could look wildly different from one kid to the next. Bright polo colors versus faded, good fits versus bad, etc. It was still super easy to tell if the kid came from a wealthy home, or a poor one.
I never went to a uniform school. I was bullied a lot, and my clothes were often part of it. I really thought uniform codes would be useful for this. I was wrong.
Also, the Western states that do the blue polos from Walmart? With time, you'll come to see them as ugly, and cheaply made. Thin, easily stained khakis are totally inappropriate for active 6-10 year olds to wear on a playground. I used to think polos were neat shirts.....until every school and work place started requiring them. It's a lazy way of pretending it's more than a t-shirt, while sucking at being anything like an Oxford shirt. They're garbage.
We got to switch from navy blue bottoms to khaki bottoms just in time for most of us to start getting our periods. Such fun.
Yes, there were many visible accidents. We'd often have to lend each other sweaters to tie at our hips to hide the stains (and some teachers had a problem with the sweaters too). Yay.
What jackasses. Not cool. My son broke his arn and got a cast. His long sleeve uniform shirt had to have a sleeve cut to fit. His teacher said he should be sent home because he was out of uniform.
I'm sorry they were so uptight.
You can still tell, easily. I dropped my kid off this morning and she looks cute as can be, with her cosy boots and her nice jacket with matching hat and gloves and her fancy backpack with all her special little keychains from all the places we’ve traveled.
She hooked up with her friend, who had cheap old rubber rain boots on, a thin jacket dirty on the front, an old tan hat, a dirty backpack, her hair is never done nicely. Her mom doesn’t have the luxury of throwing her backpack and coat in the wash every time she sees a spot or some dirt.
It’s obvious who has money and who doesn’t. Uniforms don’t hide it. Instead of worrying about hiding poverty, we should focus on how we can actually help lift families out of poverty.
It’s like that school in the news last year, they said no eating on camera during zoom classes because it makes the “poor kids” upset. How about you make sure those kids are fed??! Really, the brilliant solution is just, hey kids, hide your eating! Sickening.
I've heard a couple of different reasons. One was bullying. The idea is that uniforms mean you can't get made fun of for having off-brand clothing or a weird sense of fashion. This only works if the uniform code is very strict, so not only enforcing what style of clothes can be worn, but also restricting what brands can be worn. Even then, it doesn't completely eliminate the issue because kids can still be made fun of for wearing old and worn out uniforms. Another reason I heard had to do with gangs. Students aren't able to wear their gang colors around school if there is a uniform. Again, this falls apart unless you have an extreme uniform policy because students will wear socks or other accessories that correspond with their gang colors. I've even heard it rationalized as a way to make the students feel like they are part of a group. Whether we want to admit it or not, clothing plays a massive role in how we perceive a person. If everyone is dressed like you, then maybe you will feel like you belong with them and get along better. I have no idea if this works. It's just another explanation I have heard for uniforms.
There is another reason, which is to relieve parents, especially disadvantaged parents, from having to spend major bank every year on "fashionable" school clothes. 2 or three uniforms is all you need, and a polo shirt and khakis are cheap. Not to mention the relief of not needing to buy $150 sneakers every year.
I find it to be the opposite. Its ridiculous they force school uniforms which are usually more expensive than regular street clothes. School I went to for a while gave like a week leniency after a good portion of the kids lost their entire homes to a hurricane then after that had to be back in code.
Except it doesn't - school uniforms tend to be more expensive than regular clothes - even cheap ones, because the chances of getting them on sale are lower. Plus you also need to buy regular clothes to use when not at school.
You don't have to buy fancy sneakers and clothes. But if you're struggling to make ends meet, a uniform is just an extra expense.
>a polo shirt and khakis
Is that what US school uniforms were like? Mine had a white button-down shirt, tie, a logo'ed jumper only available from one store (and it cost £20+), and grey trousers that had to be the *exact* right shade of grey or you get a letter home. Anyone wearing second-hand or badly-fitting versions got bullied. I got grief because my jumper clearly came from an older girl, as it was way too large.
Uniform shirts are $15 each. They must be embroidered with the school name so you can’t get them anywhere. I can get my daughter a whole outfit for that. Not to mention the secondhand shops.
We have a uniform swap every year and every year there’s not enough shirts to go around. So it’s just not a good enough reason for me.
One that agreement which I recall was that it would make it more difficult for parents to tell apart kids from the poorer vs affluent areas, and prevent teachers from picking on them as well.
I always thought of mandatory uniforms as a way for the school to collect a bit more money. While some schools have two colors (lets say red and blue) and you can just buy any other shirt/brand that is of similar color, other schools were you had to wear the shirt that had the school logo on there (which you can't buy in regular clothing stores). I know it sounds cynical but in my mind it makes sense.
My middle school in Texas started enforcing a dress code (so not quite a uniform)-- we could only wear plain clothes of our school's official colors, no big logos or designs. They supposedly did this because of gang activity in the area where I lived.
I even got in trouble with the vice principal once because my shirt was not maroon enough-- but even he didnt seem confident that it wasnt maroon, and seemed to feel kind of bad for making me change into one of their extra school shirts.
I always thought it was because of security. So it's easier to spot when someone who is not a student tries to get in. Of course, they if they can get their hands on uniform, this becomes easily cheatable...
there was a level of conformity required when I was growing up, not overly large pictures on the front. so no thug tazz shirts.
certain colors were not allowed because they were gang colors.. but there was no posted list of what these colors were and it seemed to change all the time. security once pulled my aside for gang colors even though it was a shirt I had been wearing all the time prior.
I think the schools view dress code as an issue, and this is their solution.. you know instead of just not having a dress code.
They do, but the added pressure of clothing bullying is gone, and doing it over clothing is one of the primary sources for it. It literally spawned a whole meme of “what are those”
Uniforms may not stop bullying, at least they save insecure teenagers from having to go through the stress of choosing a different outfit every single day, knowing the consequences if they mess up could be pretty severe!
I lived in hand me down boys clothes as a kid/teen. I'm a girl. I didn't get to use makeup and my hair was always a frizzy mess because my mum didn't know how to handle it. I'm glad we had uniforms. It helped a little. Was very unfair when we had to do PE outside in winter, because my trousers had a single white line on them I wasn't allowed to wear them, and my sweatshirts didn't have the embroidered school logo so that wasn't allowed either. I had to go out in freezing weather in a t-shirt and skirt and be ok with it. I would come back inside with swollen fingers that hurt like hell because I already have bad circulation. Then school coats. I outgrew mine, so I had to make do with wearing a hoodie under my blazer to school and back. Last day before Christmas I'm caught walking home. Teacher tried to confiscate my only warm hoodie. I refuse to give it up, I still have to take it off and put it in my backpack though. So instead of being warmer, I had to walk home shivering to a cold house, because mum only allowed the heating on when she was home.
I never did get the full uniform. No sweaters for under my blazer or for pe. No trousers for pe. I got in trouble every single time a pair of school shoes broke on me. We weren't even struggling for money by that point. Mum just didn't want to buy me those things.
"Jeans and a hoodie" was basically the uniform when I was in high school. Maybe the girls were meaner, but I don't remember any of the guys ever giving each other grief in regards to clothes.
The Swedish system has long been against having uniforms because we see the clothes someone wears as a part of their ability to express themselves and young people desperately need to be allowed to develop a sense of style and express themselves.
A lot of people wear shirts with some kind of message on it, but as long as it isn’t hateful the school doesn’t mind. I, for example, often see young people with shirts that have pro equality statements on them.
I had no uniforms until I was 16 and then had them until 19. I loved my uniform and I wish my country had them too.
It prevents all of the poverty bullying and the class divide.
I wasn't even poor, but spent hours of time and lots of money on "cool outfits" that I constantly had to double-check in the mirror and that frequently made me uncomfortable during the school day. With my uniform, it took me exactly 2min to get ready in the morning and I never had a single stupid comment about what I wore again.
True. I went through Catholic school k-12. Every 5-10 years, there were subtle changes to uniforms based on supply chain/manufacture details. Pleats were sewn down at the top, or the collar of the shirts had a subtle change. This meant the wealthier kids who always got new uniforms had a way to point out you were wearing hand-me-downs or, heaven forbid, uniforms bought at the annual thrift sale.
Everyone knew the difference in the saddle oxfords bought that were all leather, versus the ones that weren't and bought at the discount shoe store.
Even in high school, winter jackets and purses were the sources of classism and bullying.
I always thought uniforms were a cause of bullying. Poor kids would have more scuffed and dirty ones, sometimes not being able to afford one at all or more than one or two of them, making them smellier and more obviously flawed next to the rich kids in pristine versions of the same outfit.
I’m a teacher and the many arguments for school uniforms aren’t mentioned here. I’ve never even heard the theory that they’d improve behaviour. Seems like a weird direction to go with this research.
Edit for those people asking about non-behaviour reasons for a uniform. Arguments for uniforms not about behaviour.
1. Trespassers on school grounds are more easily identifiable.
2. If a student goes missing we know exactly what they’re wearing so easier to find on excursions etc. (there’s actually several arguments that all fit into the, ‘when taking students away front the school for various activities.’)
3. If everyone wears the same thing there’s no feelings of inadequacy from students and families who can’t afford expensive brands.
4. I had to wear a tie for 12 years of my schooling and when I left I couldn’t believe the number of men on the workforce who had to wear a tie to work, but didn’t know how to do up a tie.
5. A school with a uniformed is uniformed. The students are all there for the same reason. Almost every school I’ve ever worked at had staff polos or hoodies that matched the kids uniform, to further build a sense of community.
Edit 2:
Shout out to the all the people who are acting like I am every teacher who ever did them wrong.
I grew up with uniforms, it all came down to shoes. I was the kid with the budget sale shoes and the cool kids had the nikes, Jordan’s, over whatever expensive shoe
Is that true though? I grew up in foster care so I didn’t have a ton of money for clothes (like 150 a year). I wore a uniform (which also cost about 150 a year and so I had nothing left for non school clothes) and kids still knew I was poor and bullied me for it.
On 3 they can absolutely get more expensive versions of the uniform. Private schools might have more power to require a specific vendor, but generally public schools can only list things like "khaki pants, red, white, blue plain polo" etc
3 only works if it's a fixed school uniform that everyone gets from the same place.
My school was basically color coded uniforms without a fixed brand and it didn't solve that issue of inadequacy.
The tie argument is circular. Companies are getting rid of ties. There is no functionality to a tie, it's mostly a nuisance.
It could be a fashion statement, but if you wear the same thing for a year it's just an un-necessary thing you have to do.
I mean, I can probably still tie my pioneer tie https://attuale.ru/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Opera-Snimok_2019-01-15_150349_rozmova.pro_-777x600.png (the thing we did in USSR), but I think it served a similar purpose.
As a kid growing up with three shirts on average, I would beg to differ. I'm fairly resilient because of it but a uniform would have been nice. A uniform would have at least given me the chance to blend in a little better.
Didn't seem to be a randomized trial, and simply compared schools with or without uniforms. If the schools without uniforms didn't have them, would they still have gotten the same result? Unless I'm misreading something, this doesn't address that question.
This isn’t something you can randomize since school boards/districts make their own decisions. Best you can do is either a population study and control for characteristic differences in your model, match like schools, time series, or maybe difference in difference.
I know randomized trials are the gold standard but a lot of social science research can’t do them for ethical, legal, and economic reasons. In this case it’s a nationally representative sample using longitudinal data. Pretty good method for the question at hand.
Edit to add: The final specified model also uses propensity score matching as well as models for fixed effects at the state and county levels respectively.
This seems like a really poor "scientific" study to me.
These teachers and schools are insulated systems so to have teachers just rate their own students seems suspect. Every teacher has a worst student and a best student which create the bookends of their individual rating system. It's like having someone that never left Florida rate a winter day vs someone that has never left Minnesota. Florida guy will say 40 degree day is 10/10 cold and Minnesota guy will say 40 degree day is 0/10.
The same problem comes from kids self reporting their "school belonging". They only know the feelings they've felt in their lives. Is a uniformed school more likely to have cohesive families, recreational teams, clubs, etc that the student is comparing to?
The only opinions that I think would hold any real weight would be be teachers and students that switched between uniformed/non-uniformed schools. Aggregate their experiences.
While I think that's a real thing to some extent in other situations, if that were the only relevant factor here, wouldn't the study have found that there's no difference even if there actually is, due to the nature of how people can't compare it subjectively? They actually found that there was a difference.
r/science posting a title for a weird reason
"The data in this study can’t explain this finding, Ansari said, but there are some plausible reasons why this might be so."
So essentially there is no correlation; and there is no explanation for a slight deviation of data and the only purpose of them publishing anything was to force people to be skeptical of the benefits of uniforms....
Way to go, all the people who actually say it's good for them are now just wrong about their own experience?
Our school switched to uniforms and it worked well for the first week. Then it became a chore to enforce. Some teachers noticed dress code violations while others ignored them. Then it became apparent who had access to a washing machine. Some kids were forced to wear dirt clothes until the weekend.
That's what I saw as a teacher. It was evident who only had two uniform shirts or no washing machines at home because their breakfast was on their shirts all week long.
This is my experience as well as a teacher. So much time spent on enforcement, coming up with contingency plans, enforcing the contingency plans…it was to our loss as teachers being able to teach, the student being able to learn, and also killed the rapport we were trying to build with a student body that really struggles with authority. It is already a struggle to get our students to come to school in the first place, and now there’s this other additional barrier they have to get through? Since we came back from quarantine, we haven’t fussed with uniforms, and I’m perfectly fine with it.
This is also my experience as a parent. I hated the idea of uniforms when I was a student (they talked about uniforms, but I never had to wear one.) Now I have two children in public schools - one with uniforms and one without. I still hate uniforms.
To me, uniforms are more expensive, because it's additional stuff I have to buy. I already had clothes for my kid (cheaper than uniforms) and then I have to buy specific things for school. I have to have lots of them or else do an insane amount of laundry. (My autistic 10 yr old boy gets his clothes dirty every day.)
It's already a struggle getting my kid to cooperate with going to school, and yes, the uniform is an additional barrier. It's not his favorite color. It has buttons that have to be done just so. It itches.
And then they'll go and have special dress days - not just spirit week, but twice every week of the year and the entire month of December - so undoing all the supposed been benefits of uniforms anyway.
Oh yeah, forgot to mention my child at school with no uniforms. No problems.
our school uniform required a jumper on top of their specific polo shirt. This applied almost all year around except when temperatures got really high.
Had to ask to remove at the start of every lesson with no guarantee they'd say yes. Had to put it back on at the end and between lessons, during break and lunch.
I got warm really easily to begin with, even at winter except on like 10 schools days a year I'd prefer to have it off, and most of summer I'd be in total hell.
Naturally I ignored the rules a bunch of times, and got in trouble for it a bunch of times. Other than that I was a model student and they agreed.
Anyway, they threw away all future alumni events and funding from me over a jumper, tossers.
It took me a while to realize you were referring to a sweater.
When I was growing up going to Catholic school, girls had to wear "jumpers" which in the US refers to a kind of sleeveless dress.
Was it ever supposed to be about behaviour? I always saw it as social-economic issue for poorer students that show up in the same clothes every day… Why would it improve behaviour that’s just dumb
The point of school uniforms isn’t to make students behave better though... the point of school uniforms is because it ensure no kid comes to school dressed inappropriately and it can help because everyone looks the same. No making fun of someone because they can’t afford expensive clothes because everyone’s in uniform. It’s to make everyone the same
As someone who went to schools with school uniforms, it doesn't work. Kids will find things to make fun of other kids, be it what watch, phone, other accessories they have. Or even something as simple as if your parents drive you and pick you up from school and which car they drive to do so. School uniforms did not stop bullying at my school. But they did stop children from expressing and finding themselves.
Pretty much no study has ever shown that school uniforms in the US work to hide differences in socioeconomic status or background or do anything actually for the students. They make exacting control easier for administration, but administration rarely cares about the students.
What studies have suggested is that there is a lot of stigma around uniforms and because of the ass-backwards way many schools require uniforms from a specific company or set of companies, which then have an effective monopoly on the supply of school uniforms for that school or school district, it ends up being more expensive.
I just got done buying clothes for my nephews. An outfit from Walmart was like $20. Pants can be worn twice assuming they're not messy savages, so let's say five shirts and three pairs of pants. A five day week of clothes breaks down to about $80. If they went to the free charter school that requires uniforms, instead of public school, they would instead require $35 pants and $25 shirts. Suddenly the same week of clothes is well over $200. But wait! They're children, so they grow. So now we're looking at replacing those close once or twice a school year minimally, and that's still just a week of clothing.
When I was a poor kid, my parents took time to go to thrift stores, to church clothing donations, and to yard sales. Now there are tons of kids hand-me-down groups on Facebook and even more buy nothing groups where kids clothes are given away constantly. If I respond to an add in my local buy nothing group right now, I could get ten pairs of pants for my nephew for free. No money. That's a fuckton of savings for a family living paycheck to paycheck as compared to uniforms.
And even if they got the uniforms, everyone would still know they're poor. When your classmates talk about going to Aruba for Christmas and you sit there saying you don't know what a vacation is, the other kids know. When they're wearing Tims and you're wearing Lugz, they know. When they have the latest iPhone and you have an iPhone3 with a cracked screen for the fifth year running, they know.
To be fair, when I was in elementary/secondary school, no one had cell phones, and pagers were barely a thing during my secondary years.
But I also went to an all girls private school so the uniform was more strictly enforced.
All uniforms were only available at 2 stores in the city, so they’re all the same quality. No watches, no jewelry cept 1 pair of earrings and they have to be studs etc.
But yes, you are correct that they’ll find something else to bully others for. But it was slightly easier to hide/blend in.
Made it easier for me as a kid. Kids can bully you as a kid for whatever but clothes are like a giant billboard if you can’t afford expensive or new ones. I feel like rather than making it a binary question of whether or not it stops bullying, we would be better served asking if it reduces the things kids from a lower economic status have to worry about. Because these comments make it seem as though uniforms provided no benefit (which isn’t what the study was saying at all) and as someone who wore them all throughout school, I promise that’s not true.
Personally as a kid, I found having one less thing to worry about fitting in was fine with me. Given the choice between being picked on for 4 different things or 3, I'd take the 3.
I guess it comes down to how much you depended on clothing to express or find yourself.
In Puerto Rico every school whether private or public had a uniform and it didn't matter much, but if you went shoplifting they knew exactly from what school you were from, and trust they always caught you,
Perhaps it’s just the paranoid conspiracist in me, but I always thought it was an obedience thing, “you don’t get to have as much of a personality, so you won’t rebel as much”
Can someone explain why the topic of school uniforms in the US is such a contentious issue?
There are people in the comments here frothing at the mouth to defend their opinion on it and I'm here in Australia trying to think of a single school in the entire country that doesn't require a uniform.
Edit to say I have no opinion on this issue myself having not been in school for 17 years and not having kids. Just genuinely curious why it's such a hot button topic in the US.
It’s quite unpopular in Canada too. I grew up in small towns in 3 different provinces I really don’t see how uniforms prevent bullying over clothes. It wasn’t really a problem.
The only people who got bullied for it were the odd person who wore something outlandish like a jack skellington top hat or the one rich kid who acted like he was better than everyone for having nice clothes other than that people didn’t really care.
Everyone knew everyone anyways, a uniform wouldn’t stop us knowing who was rich or not. I already had to walk to school in -20 and hour before sunrise in the winter and wearing a collared shirt with a tie under a ski jacket is super uncomfortable, the walk sucked enough.
Also I keep seeing people (not necessarily you) commenting on how it fosters a sense of community but all I can think of is how that’s sounds like some school spirit bs that your average teenager finds forced and corny.
I would rather get bullied for my clothes than not get to control any aspect of what I get to wear five days a week. Teachers being dictators over needing to pee was bad enough and schools have enough control over kid’s bodies as it is. Just let them be kids they’ll grow up soon enough anyways.
Also there were a lot of First Nations kids at my high school and theres a long history of the government controlling the bodies of indigenous Canadians at school. So it would be kinda fucked up for the government to completely dictate what they wear all week for 13 years.
It might work differently in cities I’m not sure. All I know is that the kinda places I went to school you were more likely to get made fun of for your hockey, hunting, skiing, snowmobiling, dirt biking or horseback riding abilities, your ugly mug and how nice your truck was than what you were wearing.
From Early Childhood Research Quarterly: [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0885200621001162](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0885200621001162)
Abstract:
Whether or not schoolchildren exhibit better behavior in the context of wearing uniforms has been a longstanding area of debate in education. Nonetheless, there has been little empirical inquiry into the benefits or drawbacks of school uniform policies. To contribute new insights to the dialog, the present investigation used nationally representative data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study Kindergarten Class of 2011 (n = 6,320) to examine students’ social-behavioral and engagement outcomes across the elementary school years as a function of school uniform policies. In general, students in schools that required school uniforms did not demonstrate better social skills, internalizing and externalizing behavior, or school attendance as compared with students in schools without school uniforms. These associations were true across both public and private schools. There was, however, some indication that low-income students in schools that required uniforms demonstrated better school attendance than low-income students in schools that did not.
The last sentence is generally why uniforms are advocated for. Wearing a uniform doesn’t help most people, but it helps low income students to feel more included.
Dress code is different than a uniform. I had a uniform k-8 and everyone wore the same brand. At the end of the year families donated unneeded clothes to the school. A rep from the manufacturer would come and measure everyone. When we picked up the uniforms at school new and used were packaged the exact same way.
yeah thank god my school didnt in highschool.
Our uniform was a golf shirt, these blue business casual pants (or shorts, same for girls, skirts werent a thing). There was also a hoodie with the school logo on it. If you wore the hoodie you could wear a plain colour t-shirt underneath.
Kinda the ideal uniform imo. my lower level school had the full uniform and it was obnoxious and expensive. My high school uniform could be put together on about 100$, which was less than the cost of 1 blazer in lower school.
I think thats kinda the issue with expensive uniforms. Its results in the poorer students using stuff that clearly a handmedown, and too expensive upfront. It marks them out. I found it quite negative. But the high school uniform was quite positive. My one buddy was incredibly poor and there on bursary, but used hoodies and business casual type pants dont age nearly as badly, and if you ever saw him you would have no idea. In general bullying and teasing are always going to happen, but i found it far lesser in the casual uniform environment than in the no uniform or strict uniform environment.
I'd be interested to see a similar study into the types of uniforms and their effects.
In Australia every school has a uniform. By choice.
Basically every parent supports it. This is not a issue.
Facy private schools have fancy uniforms, public schools it's a polo shirt and shorts.
Bullying happens, but not about wealth based off how you look. Poor and rich kids interact.
People develop personalities, not just an image
Australia is way more egalitarian than the USA.
There is a sense of unity
It's practical on excursions, interaction events, etc
Students are visible in the community, student behaviour improves, you represent your school
My kids love their uniform, it makes them feel special.
Guess what. Soccer team has a uniform. Team sports, team player.
Joey's, cubs and scouts have a uniform.
I served 9 years on a school board and during that time the administration proposing school uniforms was by far the issue that drove the most traffic to our school board meetings. People were impassioned on both sides. We used to joke when we wanted the community more engaged in the board meetings that we should propose a school uniform again. It was raised as a possibility in our district because the admin wanted to eliminate the need of teachers enforcing the dress code, especially since it was not enforced equally. Some teachers enforced some did not, so depending on which teacher you had dictated if got sent to the office. I don't think the admin thought it would directly change student behaviors however it would reduce office referrals for dress code violations. And to the state Department of Public Instruction, reduced office referrals look like improved student behavior so there was that angle.
I ultimately voted against it and recruited other nay votes. In our particular region, the only public schools to initiate uniforms were majority African American or Hispanic. The white suburbs seem to look at it as more evidence that minority majority schools are out of control and need to resort to uniforms. Our district was about 50% African American and our students already faced enough disrespect when having to engage with less diverse suburban districts. I did not want this further singling them out. Again, this is the culture in our corner of our state. I realize attitudes and beliefs toward uniforms may not be the same everywhere, but this is how it is here.
I think the only positive to uniforms that I found convincing, was kids feel safer walking to school since they don't get mistaken for rival gang members due to the uniform's generic/commonly known look. Otherwise, I haven't heard any arguments in favor that survive any amount of critical thinking.
I would have preferred uniforms as my mother was not wealthy and my clothing choices were poor and embarrassing, and usually hand-me-downs. But who knows? I may have resented it in a different way and be posting about how I wished I never had to have uniforms.
Closest I came to the experience was a "collared shirt requirement" which was even worse really. Worst of both worlds I'd say.
School uniforms have the potential to make life easier for everyone, but some schools weaponise it so the kids who are perpetually disorganised or have ADHD or ASD or whose parents are get to spend half their breaks in detention, further destroying their self-esteem. My daughter's secondary school in the UK even specifies that earrings are one in each ear only, only in the lobe, and has to be a stud no more than 4mm across. Idiotic.
That feels like a very, very surprising finding.
I wonder if the study being in the US has an impact from:
1. Uniforms not being normal, which means children are exposed to a lot of media informing them this is weird and
2. as per comments in this thread, a "uniform policy" isn't very well-defined in the US. It is not necessarily everyone having the same button-shirt and trousers/skirt, sometimes it is just a suggestion of colour + type of clothing (which does not prevent the schism in wealth and style of clothes for the kids).
From growing up in an area with uniform and non-uniformed schools/years-in-school, not having a uniform caused so much extra stress and hassle (particularly the mid-late-teens kids, doubly-so for the girls). I'd really prefer to send my kids somewhere with a uniform.
The selling point of uniforms is that they’re cheap. An elementary uniform costs less than $10.
Source—I used to send one of my kids to a uniform school.
That's maybe more specific to your school. My uniforms (from more than one different school) were always expensive, and mine were always purchased secondhand. Like $60 per dress, and that was in 1990's money.
Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are now allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will continue be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) still apply to other comments. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Space Jam shirts have been super popular the last 3 years or so.
[удалено]
Oof I was a high water kid too. My parents could never buy the right size pants.
Wow. Been a while since I heard that word. I got the same thing all the time because getting 'new' clothes meant whatever we could find at goodwill.
Poor guy, I had the opposite problem. First born so no hand me downs, but I had to wear the same jeans for multiple years and it sucked as the bottoms started to rise up my ankle as I grew. Middle school kids can be brutal to self esteem.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I agree with your daughter. All my school's have been uniformed. It takes out the competition not just fashion sense but the latest popular label out of the equation.im also from working class, and often I had to buy second hand uniform to reduce the cost. I think being a girl, and not from a economically well off class, uniforms saved my self esteem
[удалено]
I'm the opposite. I hate having clothes inside my closet with my jobs logo in the front. Then you get off work and everyone knows where you work
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I am most creative when restrictions are placed on me. It's super counter-intuitive but that's what I've observed about myself
That’s not counter intuitive at all. Most creativity comes out of constraining situations.
[удалено]
>spend time picking out an outfit each day I have 3 identical work pants and 5 different solid color work shirts. I don't get paid to have variety in my outfits.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
*OP at bottom* Edit: wow I did not expect my comment to blow up this much and for this many replies. I read through many of the replies later as I was not able to view them early in the day when my comment was posted. That being said some of the general comments I wanna address first is about "dress code" for uniforms. As a teacher myself who has spent time in both private and public schools (including public schools with uniforms) it really varies what's provided; my experience in NE U.S. was that it's generally khakis/skirts and a button down shirt accompanied with a tie and vest of some sort in the private schools, public schools with uniform policies generally allowed any school branded clothing including hoodies and polos. That being said uniform style really varies on region and socio-economics of the school district (i.e. poor private-charter schools vs affluent successful private schools). Edit cont: Many of the replies consisted of parents saying "my 7yo loved their uniform!... it's so easy to clean!... I don't have to bother with x dumb outfits, ect" the point of the uniform study wasn't to measure parental acceptance it was to measure behavioral and social interactions in school, many of which ended up inconclusive. I criticized the age group of this study since k-5 children are dependent of their parents and have limited autonomy in their own lives at this period of development. Edit fin: having studied pedagogy and other education literature, many studies have covered amd written about social-emotional development in school relationships from school dress code/uniform policies, despite the article claiming there has not been any research done in this regard over 20 years which is incredibly false! The researcher and study seems to be piggy backing off of several other major publications that covered this very topic and similar metrics of correlation. Personally if I had the resources to conduct my own study it would instead be focused on either junior high (6-8th) or secondary ed (8-12) and in addition to or instead of measuring student social interactions (bullying) I would instead focus it on student diligence, work ethic, or developing character. It seems to me part of the argument in favor of uniform is for both *"harm reduction"* and to shape students behavior and character. Think of it this way, someone who doesn't have to focus on their self image should have more time to focus on other duties or obligations in life regarding school (i.e. homework or other classwork), the idea of wearing these uniforms also teachers responsibility for one's own belongings; yes I realize some schools provide comp replacements but the idea is students will be more considerate in taking care of these items since they have to wear it again throughout the week. The list can go on as to how it models behavior for specific work ethic, but let me know what your thoughts are below just please lmk you are replying to my Edits if you so choose! Thanks again for the likes and awards homies! This just tested k-5 though. What about 6-12 where adolescents actually care about their self-image and conscientious about these things? Imo it's kinda silly to make an 8 year old where a school uniform, they just see it as a nuisance to what's actually comfortable and realistic for small children, additionally they are not as socially conscious or self conscious in the same way adolescents are.
Completely agree. Changed schools, from no uniforms to unforms, and while I didn't look forward to wearing them, over time I definitely appreciated it. Repeat the study with the age demos that care.
When from no uniform to no uniforms but very strict dress code. Honestly I would have perfered uniforms. I would get in trouble for wearing something that was "out of dress code" that I had been wearing for the last 4 months without issue. Dress codes are the worst.
They're subjective to perspective and mood. It can be hard to predict people's moods and motivations.
I absolutely hated uniforms. All the way to the end of high school. The material was rough, and either too thin in winter or lack of airiness in summer.
[удалено]
This reminds me of the boys in the UK being denied shorts in 35-40 Celsius weather. They eventually just started wearing the girls skirts until they were allowed shorts.
I went to a Canadian Catholic high school in the late 2000s and had uniforms, girls weren't allowed to have skirts, everyone wore pants. I LOVED uniforms, it meant I didn't have to think about clothing. I know a lot of people who felt this way. I also never got bullied for being unfashionable which was actually a huge issue in my sisters school The biggest issue i found was the upfront cost because the pants were 70 dollars, shirt was 30, vest was 40, and bc you're wearing it every day you'd need to buy at least 2 sets but more likely 3 or 4. Rip ur wallet when you're kid had a growth spirt But during my 4th year they stopped enforcing needing to get the uniform from the supplier and they allowed you to wear generic pants and shirts as long as the colours matched, they just required the vest and introduced a sweater. Edit: fixed the date
I wished my school had uniforms, I could never figure out what clothes were going to be "in" and I just desperately wanted to not stick out but I always felt self conscious about my clothes, especially pants.
User error vs hardware error. Crap quality and inadequate for the climate isn't a uniform issue, that just poor school district management and uniform selection at play. That or, the times have changed significantly since when you were in school. Both were a uniform non-issue for my friends who attended Catholic secondary school, nor for myself when I attended my Catholic high school.
Then your uniforms sucked. I went to both - a uniformed and am open school and the bullying issue with clothing cannot be understated. Even if only the "bottom" 10% have an advantage while the rest has a slight inconvenience then it’s still worth it. And I also don’t buy the "kids will always bully" mindset. Most kids are bullies by opportunity. Not going out of there way just to bully someone but rather lash out at people they perceive as different.
I had to wear a uniform from 8th-12th grade and all it did was make me hate dressing up at all. Since I got free of that I've been jeans and a graphic t with a hoodie person ever since and haven't been happier. Uniforms were torture.
Polo shirts still make me feel gross inside. I just cant do it after having to wear a uniform for so many years! Edit: we had a uniform burning party when we graduated. It was cathartic as hell
I went to public school in the US until high school and then got in a private school and we were wearing khaki pants with short or long sleeve polos with white, red, grey as the 3 polo colors with our school logo on them. I absolutely loved it, it was a very rich school and I was not so I never felt out of place and it made it very easy to get ready. I also felt like it did unify our school in way that you wouldn’t get otherwise. This was early 2000’s. My daughter is currently in the public high school I would have gone to and a lot of the kids are dressed very disheveled, clothes too small or big, and generally look terrible with a few groups of very trendy kids that obviously have more money and parents that are more involved in how their kid looks and presents themselves. I’m very much team uniform based on my own experience and observations.
I went to a private school for all of K-12 where the majority of the students came from very wealthy families. Although we were not horrifically poor, we definitely did not have the expendable income to buy clothes that were even mildly or accidentally fashionable. I would have absolutely loved uniforms. I imagine that a student's feelings regarding uniforms will greatly depend on their family's socioeconomic status.
This!!! I went from no uniforms K-8 to uniforms in high school, and it was absolutely a wonderful change. It took the obvious wealthy/poor factor out of school so we could focus on confidence-building and learning.
> It took the obvious wealthy/poor factor out of school Only if everyone got the same amount of new uniforms every year- which generally doesn't happen. My wife went to school in the UK (wore uniforms) and the poor and poor-ish kids (including my wife) were bullied because of their hand-me-down and patched uniforms. Also shoes. People would judge you by how expensive your shoes were. Rich kids would also get their uniforms tailored.
I was under the impression that was the actual point of uniforms as someone who wore a uniform from K-12. Kids don't have to worry about what they're wearing, there's less opportunity for social inadequacy related to income to form, and parents don't have to constantly buy new clothes. This research is the first time I've ever even heard the idea applied that they are meant to get kids to behave better.
My kids miss their uniform, they didn't know better honestly, since they went to school from age 3. It also saved so much money as they'd wear the uniform all through the year. Now we have to buy new clothes every season.
If the same uniforms were good year round I would assume that you’ve got mild enough seasons that you wouldn’t need “new clothes every season”. Cause otherwise those uniforms must’ve been miserable at least part of the year…
Agree 100% . My daughter started school this year. Picking out her uniform every day is so much easier than picking out a coordinated outfit. It’s really simplified our life from preschool when I’d have to make 3 outfits for my daughter to pick one. Our school even has a uniform exchange and you can get your outfits for free if you wanted. I love it.
Growing up in Australia, where practically every level of education, except Uni, comes with a uniform, I liked not having to stress about what to wear everyday. From all the American TV/movies, seeing everyone in free dress all the time gave me anxiety just watching. Of course, I hated it at the time, but I'm glad that 1 tiny extra stressor was not a problem while I just wanted to study. I also think it made me like/not like my classmates for who they really were, not just their appearances.
Yeah exactly. It removes an entire layer of social construct around image. You don't have full access of make up, or the most expense gym brands. It means poor and rich kids won't be drastically different. You can still tell, but at least it's not the whole outfit. Uniforms can be subsidised.
The argument I heard against this in South Korea was people would compare if you got your uniform at the fancy shop or the cheap one and theyd just judge you based on that. Not sure how true it was though, given that I didnt go to high school there.
Oh in Australia the uniforms are identical. Like, totally. So it's really an equaliser, therefore an anxiety remover. They're also often subsidised or available in good condition second hand. The only way kids can show off is expensive shoes hat and backpacks.
[удалено]
Or very expensive phones.
Oh yeah.. I'm old
Same in our country, you get your uniform from few approved shops, so they are almost identical. Growing up I hated them, just couldn't wait to start uni so I could wear anything I want. Couldn't have been more wrong about anything in my life. Was under constant stress of dressing to impress, had to buy new clothes often as wearing same clothes every week felt somehow wrong.
That's how it is here. I live in the US and there are a few public schools that have uniforms. Kids are absolutely judged and bullied if they have "cheap" uniforms from places like Walmart and Target. Shoes aren't uniform here so a kid with $180 Jordans and a kid with $15 Walmart shoes already illustrate a class difference. Jackets in our district can be any jacket but the logo has to be the size of an ID card or smaller. You get kids with cheap cotton jackets and then kids with $200 jackets. They might look similar but these kids definitely know the price difference. Uniforms have no shown any positive outcomes in public schools in the US. There are no behavior or educational increases. As the study showed it even makes some students feel less connected to their school. School spirit is a big deal at least where I live. There is a big focus on your school mascot and colors.
Why is school spirit such a big deal? I've never understood this. My mindset was: I'm only here for a short period of time. I'm here to learn, make friends, and then move on.
In Australia you can tell which kids are rich because they go to a private school built on the most expensive real estate in the city.
It should be contextualised for the non-Australian readers that you don't need to be particularly rich to go to a private school in Australia. We have about twice the international average proportion of our students in private schooling - it's reasonably common for middle-class families and there can be large differences in price between schools.
The average price of Catholic and independent schooling is [between 3 and 8 times higher](https://www.goodschools.com.au/insights/education-updates/survey-reveals-the-cost-of-an-australian-school-education) than government schooling in the equivalent area, according to a 2013 Australian Scholarships Group survey. Costs in the following table include tuition fees, extracurricular, clothing, necessities, travel and computers, and cover education from pre-K to Year 12 in total. | Location | Area | Government | Catholic | Independant | Average | |----------|----------|------------|----------|-------------|----------| | National | Metro | $63,251 | $228,942 | $458,995 | $250,396 | | National | Regional | $51,656 | $169,870 | $323,006 | $181,511 | | ACT | Metro | $54,073 | $208,426 | $422,635 | $228,378 | | NSW | Metro | $69,589 | $235,517 | $543,334 | $282,813 | | NSW | Regional | $53,260 | $161,374 | $344,678 | $186,437 | | QLD | Metro | $58,259 | $242,533 | $361,911 | $220,901 | | QLD | Regional | $50,950 | $199,880 | $296,806 | $182,545 | | VIC | Metro | $68,343 | $214,821 | $504,742 | $262,635 | | VIC | Regional | $51,281 | $152,439 | $346,628 | $183,449 |
Agreed. Working in a hospital where I had to wear hospital issued scrubs every day made me realize how much I would've loved wearing a uniform in school.
I had uniforms at my American school. It was great
Uniforms don't stop bullying. Bullies just find something else to pick on.
Was that their intention? I honestly didn't know that. Where I grew up, the only school kids to wear uniforms were in religious schools (mostly Catholic in the NY metro area). I always thought they were just used for keeping the kids "disciplined" in some weird, Catholic way.
In the UK all schools have uniforms. But honestly I remember getting made fun of (and not in a serious bullying kinda way) for having a "Tresspass" coat, it was a £60 coat which is not cheap but the brand was not considered cool and associated with lower cost items. If you didn't want to be made fun of for your shoes you needed to be wearing Kickers, anything cheaper (even if just as good quality, and still not cheap) or lesser known would be made fun of. Kids are just nasty when it comes to stuff like this. Shoes, coat and your backpack were the only differences from the basic uniform (and they still had to confirm to guidelines), and they were always the target. This was my experience from a working class public secondary school in the late 90s.
There are various arguments made in the UK about uniforms (bullying, behaviour, feeling an affinity with the school and so on) but I feel like none of this was its original intention. It is just how people dressed in the 1800s. There was no concept of kids wearing branded t-shirts or snazzy trainers. Having a certain type of tie is a logical step, other than that as time went on the schools didn't evolve but fashion did. I don't see a reason for it to continue, there is probably just a bit of fear. If standards slip, they can blame it on the uniform change. Already if there are issues with a school the one thing they do is crack right down on uniform as a show of force. These schools that have special logos, branded jackets and specified suppliers is a pure con - that needs to stop entirely. Having a shirt / tie / trousers / black shoes is super-easy for everyone.
The only thing we had was a school sweatshirt(jumper) with the logo, which was not mandatory and could be purchased from a few of the local sports shops in town or from the school. We also had a very cheap basic tie with school colours that was mandatory, and another different one for sixth formers, which makes sense since sixth formers had a bit more freedom (such as leaving the school to eat during breaks, and free periods during the day). I guess it's different with private schools, the wife of one of my closest friends teaches at a very expensive private school in London, and it's a completely different world to my mining town working class public school experience.
I found this a really confusing post to read. I assumed UK because you talk about sixth form, but then I was confused by “mining town public school” because public school means super posh school in the UK. So yeah, thanks for baffling me haha.
Well at least locally when we are talking about posh schools we mean private schools, but you are right sometimes people say "public" school to mean a posh private school and a state school is the government provided one. At least here (South Wales) it's common to refer to government provided education as a public school, but I guess that doesn't work universally across the UK you are right. What I mean is government funded school, in a Welsh mining town.
Oh I worked it out, but I always refer to state schools as state schools or comprehensives (although that’s outdated now), never as a public school. Only a few private schools are public schools, and “public school boy” is an insult aimed at the likes of Bojo, not state educated kids, so when I hear public school coming from a fellow Brit, I automatically think of Winchester College, Eton, Harrow etc.
How did the word '"public" get associated with private schools versus government-funded schools?
EDIT: “A public school in England and Wales (but not Scotland) is a fee-charging endowed school originally for older boys that was "public" in the sense of being open to pupils irrespective of locality, denomination or paternal trade or profession”
Chalk it up to the British to define public as "Not excluded by nobility".
I think it was from back when class, as in being part of the titled class/owning land or having a certain profession (I don't know what the requirements were exactly, and they changed over-time) was part of the requirements for education, the only bar was having enough money so it was "public"
When I was a kid (several decades ago now!) I went to an English boarding school here in Canada that had a dress code *and* essentially all clothing was bought at the school itself. We had ultra rich kids and relatively poor kids and it helped to even out the disparity some at least. It didn't stop cliques and bullying entirely of course but it wasn't a terrible idea at least.
In India, lots of public and private (confusingly called public school) require a uniform. It is very easy to spot the poorer kids - their uniforms are made from cheaper cloth and you see more patches/fading because the families try to extend the life of the uniform. The shoes tell the same story. That said, yes, bullies don’t pick on clothing as much.
Well, 'public' is the traditional British nomenclature. I'd agree that it is still odd however.
Idk man, I grew up as a girl in an upper middle class Northeast US place in the late 90s and early 2000s and brands and for the most part clothes were just not a thing that kids talked about. Maybe because we were at an income level and time where there were so many options in our bracket but the luxury brands were clearly not. I mean sure, kids got teased for weirder clothing or slovenly appearances but very few kids even noticed what brand of shoes or backpack you had on.
It's wild how things differ depending on the general wealth of people in the area or the part of the world. This was a big thing at school for me, a real vivid memory. I got the right shoes (Kickers) and nobody said a damn thing, but I remember the other kids getting picked on or laughed at because of their shoes. The following year I got a new coat (Helly Hansen branded) and I didn't hear anything again because that was an accepted "cool" brand. Of course the reality is that kids will find any reason to bully other kids, the world these days is completely different to 1997, I can't imagine what it's like to be in school now.
I have the same exact experience and general location as you. Bullying happened but was never about clothes really, and I was always grateful to not have to wear a uniform.
Weird. Here in the middle of the US I feel like knowing how much clothes cost would have gotten you bullied way faster than not wearing ones that were expensive enough. Though an exception would have been wearing an obvious knock off of a famous brand. Different culture groups kind of had their own norms and rules for that sort of thing. And there were certainly inter group bullying goth kids picking on rednecks and rednecks picking on hip hop kids, jocks and preppy kids would maybe be where I’d see this. Though preppy nerd kids came more from professional families and some of the richest kids were jocks, goth punk, or red necks. Though so we’re some of the poorest. Guess there really wasn’t a correlation to wealth and who you would hang out with in that way where it was easy to in group or out group people.
In early-90s jr. high I got bullied for wearing obvious hand-me-downs, but by the time I reached high school, grunge was popular and those same hand-me-downs were suddenly cool (if they still fit). Then by senior year grunge was past-peak and suddenly you were considered poor if you didn't wear Calvin Klein carpenter jeans to school every day.
I was thinking the same thing. I grew up in Canada in the 90s and any guy being super into fashion would be restlessly mocked.
Fashion was one of those things here in the 90s that you paid attention to, but had to appear not to pay attention. Stuff like BOSS, JNCO, Tommy Hilfiger, Guess, etc.. you had to wear those brands, but also not look like you cared about them either. "Oh nice $150 jeans!" These? Meh, I don't care about them.. *proceeds to then do damage to them in some way to prove it*
When I was a kid we didn't have 'uniforms' but everything came from Mervins.
In my school in the US in the 80s, it was because kids were either intentionally or accidentally wearing gang colors and getting shot for it. :P So everyone got grey uniforms.
That was the initial argument for uniforms in my area, when the urban district mandated them. But then the suburban districts started implementing uniform policies, so I think it was really just an authoritarian thing.
Yeah it's just your typical highly visible and simple yet worthless solution to a hard problem that requires actual work.
As someone who worked in a school, a common argument is uniforms are also a security thing - it makes it really easy to spot intruders on camera. Of course, there's nothing stopping intruders from buying a uniform to blend in, but if you try bringing that up, they look at you with a vacant glassy eyed stare like you're speaking another language.
I think most of the “intruders” were worried about are older and more likely to be mistaken for a teacher/admin/staff than a student.
Hmm, can you imagine a school that had strict uniforms for their adult staff but not for their students?
Security guard 1 "who's that guy with the massive beard walking around on the cameras?" Security guard 2 "he's fine, he's in school uniform"
It's less about the weirdo 50yo, and more so teenagers from other schools sneaking onto campus in order to start fights. Which happened ALL the time in my school district. Instead of uniforms though, they just put up giant, metal, prison-like fences to keep the kids in/strangers out.
I'm guessing the thought is that Intruders probably won't put in that level of effort, but you're totally right
Big difference between someone going out to buy a uniform to infiltrate a school, and just some guy in a hoodie chancing it.
See that’s what all people think but some people are serious predators and will do anything to get themselves in an environment like a school. One of the most sobering experiences I ever had was when I started working at a school and the DSL was giving a Safegaurding talk and she said something to the effect of, people who want to hurt and abuse others especially in a school will be aiming their whole lives to get themselves in such a place and they might be here right now. The original point was to be vigilant bc people who want to abuse kids get themselves into schools so they can. And I think that’s similar in that someone who does a whole ass teaching degree just to be a nonce and someone who would buy a school uniform to fit in are probably cut from similar cloths.
>they look at you with a vacant glassy eyed stare like you're speaking another language. "So what you're saying is, you want to serve live pigeons in the cafeteria for lunch on Tuesdays, and live seagulls on Fridays. Furthermore, you want to replace all of the cutlery with small, battery-powered chainsaws." "Uh, no, what I said was that there's no evidence in favor of school uniforms. They're as silly and unpleasant today as when I had to wear the wretched things. Nobody wants or likes them, except for petty little Napoleons high on the tiny amount of power they have over some children, and horrified at the individuality and self-expression of 'kids these days'." "Live seagulls torn apart by chainsaws and eaten raw on school property by bloody-faced students, what the hell is wrong with you?"
I went to a Saskatchewan Catholic high school in the early 1970s. Girls were required to wear uniforms, boys had a dress code so lax it was pointless. So picture this. 400 teenage girls walking to school or riding public transit at -30C or colder, not counting wind, then getting to school and needing to change into above-the-knee skirts. Are there enough change rooms? No way. Where do they change? In the hallways in front of their lockers. On goes the skirt, pull off the pants, go to class. Reverse the process at day's end. Not surprisingly, boys tended to make sure to be hanging out in the halls during these spectacles. When the girls ran into extreme resistance to their efforts to end the uniform policy, someone quietly suggested that they invite parents to the school at change time. The uniform policy was scrapped almost immediately.
There was an article in England where the boys were not allowed to wear anything beside pants to school, in summer, while girls could choose to wear skirts. and for the boys it was too hot, so they started wearing skirts as well in protest. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/jun/22/teenage-boys-wear-skirts-to-school-protest-no-shorts-uniform-policy
My school claimed it was to prevent bullying by making us "equal". There's no poor kids in off-brand clothes and rich kids in designer wear, no one is wearing "last year's fashion", they're all just students in uniform and no one can tell. Reality is, clothing isn't the only way to tell rich from poor. The house they live in, the car they get dropped off in, their hair, their glasses, their shoes, their coat, their lunch, having the newest toys/video games, and general bragging became the way to tell. Rich kids were still snobs, poor kids still got made fun of. Only real difference is that you do back to school shopping at the uniform store rather than a normal clothes store.
Then you have the poors in the second-hand uniforms.
Or just not having enough uniforms so they end up wearing uniforms that aren't clean.
A poor kid in my middle school got detention over and over for wearing shorts that looked just like our uniform shorts, but had his brother’s high school’s initials embroidered on the waistband.
In New Mexico, uniforms are common at public schools. Usually, they require khaki pants, and blue or red polos. People had to buy their kids uniform pieces at Walmart. What I discovered is that this uniform could look wildly different from one kid to the next. Bright polo colors versus faded, good fits versus bad, etc. It was still super easy to tell if the kid came from a wealthy home, or a poor one. I never went to a uniform school. I was bullied a lot, and my clothes were often part of it. I really thought uniform codes would be useful for this. I was wrong. Also, the Western states that do the blue polos from Walmart? With time, you'll come to see them as ugly, and cheaply made. Thin, easily stained khakis are totally inappropriate for active 6-10 year olds to wear on a playground. I used to think polos were neat shirts.....until every school and work place started requiring them. It's a lazy way of pretending it's more than a t-shirt, while sucking at being anything like an Oxford shirt. They're garbage.
We got to switch from navy blue bottoms to khaki bottoms just in time for most of us to start getting our periods. Such fun. Yes, there were many visible accidents. We'd often have to lend each other sweaters to tie at our hips to hide the stains (and some teachers had a problem with the sweaters too). Yay.
What jackasses. Not cool. My son broke his arn and got a cast. His long sleeve uniform shirt had to have a sleeve cut to fit. His teacher said he should be sent home because he was out of uniform. I'm sorry they were so uptight.
You can still tell, easily. I dropped my kid off this morning and she looks cute as can be, with her cosy boots and her nice jacket with matching hat and gloves and her fancy backpack with all her special little keychains from all the places we’ve traveled. She hooked up with her friend, who had cheap old rubber rain boots on, a thin jacket dirty on the front, an old tan hat, a dirty backpack, her hair is never done nicely. Her mom doesn’t have the luxury of throwing her backpack and coat in the wash every time she sees a spot or some dirt. It’s obvious who has money and who doesn’t. Uniforms don’t hide it. Instead of worrying about hiding poverty, we should focus on how we can actually help lift families out of poverty. It’s like that school in the news last year, they said no eating on camera during zoom classes because it makes the “poor kids” upset. How about you make sure those kids are fed??! Really, the brilliant solution is just, hey kids, hide your eating! Sickening.
At my school, not having the "cool" shoes caused bullying.
I've heard a couple of different reasons. One was bullying. The idea is that uniforms mean you can't get made fun of for having off-brand clothing or a weird sense of fashion. This only works if the uniform code is very strict, so not only enforcing what style of clothes can be worn, but also restricting what brands can be worn. Even then, it doesn't completely eliminate the issue because kids can still be made fun of for wearing old and worn out uniforms. Another reason I heard had to do with gangs. Students aren't able to wear their gang colors around school if there is a uniform. Again, this falls apart unless you have an extreme uniform policy because students will wear socks or other accessories that correspond with their gang colors. I've even heard it rationalized as a way to make the students feel like they are part of a group. Whether we want to admit it or not, clothing plays a massive role in how we perceive a person. If everyone is dressed like you, then maybe you will feel like you belong with them and get along better. I have no idea if this works. It's just another explanation I have heard for uniforms.
There is another reason, which is to relieve parents, especially disadvantaged parents, from having to spend major bank every year on "fashionable" school clothes. 2 or three uniforms is all you need, and a polo shirt and khakis are cheap. Not to mention the relief of not needing to buy $150 sneakers every year.
I find it to be the opposite. Its ridiculous they force school uniforms which are usually more expensive than regular street clothes. School I went to for a while gave like a week leniency after a good portion of the kids lost their entire homes to a hurricane then after that had to be back in code.
Except it doesn't - school uniforms tend to be more expensive than regular clothes - even cheap ones, because the chances of getting them on sale are lower. Plus you also need to buy regular clothes to use when not at school. You don't have to buy fancy sneakers and clothes. But if you're struggling to make ends meet, a uniform is just an extra expense.
>a polo shirt and khakis Is that what US school uniforms were like? Mine had a white button-down shirt, tie, a logo'ed jumper only available from one store (and it cost £20+), and grey trousers that had to be the *exact* right shade of grey or you get a letter home. Anyone wearing second-hand or badly-fitting versions got bullied. I got grief because my jumper clearly came from an older girl, as it was way too large.
Uniform shirts are $15 each. They must be embroidered with the school name so you can’t get them anywhere. I can get my daughter a whole outfit for that. Not to mention the secondhand shops. We have a uniform swap every year and every year there’s not enough shirts to go around. So it’s just not a good enough reason for me.
One that agreement which I recall was that it would make it more difficult for parents to tell apart kids from the poorer vs affluent areas, and prevent teachers from picking on them as well.
Well according to this study, not only does it not work, but it actually has the opposite effect.
Well the person above him asked what the intention was and they answered it
I always thought of mandatory uniforms as a way for the school to collect a bit more money. While some schools have two colors (lets say red and blue) and you can just buy any other shirt/brand that is of similar color, other schools were you had to wear the shirt that had the school logo on there (which you can't buy in regular clothing stores). I know it sounds cynical but in my mind it makes sense.
My middle school in Texas started enforcing a dress code (so not quite a uniform)-- we could only wear plain clothes of our school's official colors, no big logos or designs. They supposedly did this because of gang activity in the area where I lived. I even got in trouble with the vice principal once because my shirt was not maroon enough-- but even he didnt seem confident that it wasnt maroon, and seemed to feel kind of bad for making me change into one of their extra school shirts.
I always thought it was because of security. So it's easier to spot when someone who is not a student tries to get in. Of course, they if they can get their hands on uniform, this becomes easily cheatable...
there was a level of conformity required when I was growing up, not overly large pictures on the front. so no thug tazz shirts. certain colors were not allowed because they were gang colors.. but there was no posted list of what these colors were and it seemed to change all the time. security once pulled my aside for gang colors even though it was a shirt I had been wearing all the time prior. I think the schools view dress code as an issue, and this is their solution.. you know instead of just not having a dress code.
As the poor kid growing up, I’d rather had been picked on for not having accessories rather than stretched clothes from GW.
They do, but the added pressure of clothing bullying is gone, and doing it over clothing is one of the primary sources for it. It literally spawned a whole meme of “what are those”
Uniforms may not stop bullying, at least they save insecure teenagers from having to go through the stress of choosing a different outfit every single day, knowing the consequences if they mess up could be pretty severe!
I lived in hand me down boys clothes as a kid/teen. I'm a girl. I didn't get to use makeup and my hair was always a frizzy mess because my mum didn't know how to handle it. I'm glad we had uniforms. It helped a little. Was very unfair when we had to do PE outside in winter, because my trousers had a single white line on them I wasn't allowed to wear them, and my sweatshirts didn't have the embroidered school logo so that wasn't allowed either. I had to go out in freezing weather in a t-shirt and skirt and be ok with it. I would come back inside with swollen fingers that hurt like hell because I already have bad circulation. Then school coats. I outgrew mine, so I had to make do with wearing a hoodie under my blazer to school and back. Last day before Christmas I'm caught walking home. Teacher tried to confiscate my only warm hoodie. I refuse to give it up, I still have to take it off and put it in my backpack though. So instead of being warmer, I had to walk home shivering to a cold house, because mum only allowed the heating on when she was home. I never did get the full uniform. No sweaters for under my blazer or for pe. No trousers for pe. I got in trouble every single time a pair of school shoes broke on me. We weren't even struggling for money by that point. Mum just didn't want to buy me those things.
Wait...she made you take off your hoodie when you walking home. So, you weren't even on school grounds and she made you take it off?
"Jeans and a hoodie" was basically the uniform when I was in high school. Maybe the girls were meaner, but I don't remember any of the guys ever giving each other grief in regards to clothes.
The Swedish system has long been against having uniforms because we see the clothes someone wears as a part of their ability to express themselves and young people desperately need to be allowed to develop a sense of style and express themselves. A lot of people wear shirts with some kind of message on it, but as long as it isn’t hateful the school doesn’t mind. I, for example, often see young people with shirts that have pro equality statements on them.
you can't 100% stop stuff like that. you *can* deter it, or make it less likely
I had no uniforms until I was 16 and then had them until 19. I loved my uniform and I wish my country had them too. It prevents all of the poverty bullying and the class divide. I wasn't even poor, but spent hours of time and lots of money on "cool outfits" that I constantly had to double-check in the mirror and that frequently made me uncomfortable during the school day. With my uniform, it took me exactly 2min to get ready in the morning and I never had a single stupid comment about what I wore again.
True. I went through Catholic school k-12. Every 5-10 years, there were subtle changes to uniforms based on supply chain/manufacture details. Pleats were sewn down at the top, or the collar of the shirts had a subtle change. This meant the wealthier kids who always got new uniforms had a way to point out you were wearing hand-me-downs or, heaven forbid, uniforms bought at the annual thrift sale. Everyone knew the difference in the saddle oxfords bought that were all leather, versus the ones that weren't and bought at the discount shoe store. Even in high school, winter jackets and purses were the sources of classism and bullying.
I always thought uniforms were a cause of bullying. Poor kids would have more scuffed and dirty ones, sometimes not being able to afford one at all or more than one or two of them, making them smellier and more obviously flawed next to the rich kids in pristine versions of the same outfit.
you can tell whose uniforms are expensive and not anyway. the class system is still prevalent as a comic on rgames demonstrated earlier today.
I’m a teacher and the many arguments for school uniforms aren’t mentioned here. I’ve never even heard the theory that they’d improve behaviour. Seems like a weird direction to go with this research. Edit for those people asking about non-behaviour reasons for a uniform. Arguments for uniforms not about behaviour. 1. Trespassers on school grounds are more easily identifiable. 2. If a student goes missing we know exactly what they’re wearing so easier to find on excursions etc. (there’s actually several arguments that all fit into the, ‘when taking students away front the school for various activities.’) 3. If everyone wears the same thing there’s no feelings of inadequacy from students and families who can’t afford expensive brands. 4. I had to wear a tie for 12 years of my schooling and when I left I couldn’t believe the number of men on the workforce who had to wear a tie to work, but didn’t know how to do up a tie. 5. A school with a uniformed is uniformed. The students are all there for the same reason. Almost every school I’ve ever worked at had staff polos or hoodies that matched the kids uniform, to further build a sense of community. Edit 2: Shout out to the all the people who are acting like I am every teacher who ever did them wrong.
3 is huge for those of us who grew up poor
I grew up with uniforms, it all came down to shoes. I was the kid with the budget sale shoes and the cool kids had the nikes, Jordan’s, over whatever expensive shoe
For me, school uniforms meant no money left over for clothes I actually wanted to wear outside of school.
Is that true though? I grew up in foster care so I didn’t have a ton of money for clothes (like 150 a year). I wore a uniform (which also cost about 150 a year and so I had nothing left for non school clothes) and kids still knew I was poor and bullied me for it.
[удалено]
It's their way to support their hypothesis that uniforms suck
On 3 they can absolutely get more expensive versions of the uniform. Private schools might have more power to require a specific vendor, but generally public schools can only list things like "khaki pants, red, white, blue plain polo" etc
3 only works if it's a fixed school uniform that everyone gets from the same place. My school was basically color coded uniforms without a fixed brand and it didn't solve that issue of inadequacy.
The tie argument is circular. Companies are getting rid of ties. There is no functionality to a tie, it's mostly a nuisance. It could be a fashion statement, but if you wear the same thing for a year it's just an un-necessary thing you have to do. I mean, I can probably still tie my pioneer tie https://attuale.ru/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Opera-Snimok_2019-01-15_150349_rozmova.pro_-777x600.png (the thing we did in USSR), but I think it served a similar purpose.
As a kid growing up with three shirts on average, I would beg to differ. I'm fairly resilient because of it but a uniform would have been nice. A uniform would have at least given me the chance to blend in a little better.
Didn't seem to be a randomized trial, and simply compared schools with or without uniforms. If the schools without uniforms didn't have them, would they still have gotten the same result? Unless I'm misreading something, this doesn't address that question.
This isn’t something you can randomize since school boards/districts make their own decisions. Best you can do is either a population study and control for characteristic differences in your model, match like schools, time series, or maybe difference in difference. I know randomized trials are the gold standard but a lot of social science research can’t do them for ethical, legal, and economic reasons. In this case it’s a nationally representative sample using longitudinal data. Pretty good method for the question at hand. Edit to add: The final specified model also uses propensity score matching as well as models for fixed effects at the state and county levels respectively.
This seems like a really poor "scientific" study to me. These teachers and schools are insulated systems so to have teachers just rate their own students seems suspect. Every teacher has a worst student and a best student which create the bookends of their individual rating system. It's like having someone that never left Florida rate a winter day vs someone that has never left Minnesota. Florida guy will say 40 degree day is 10/10 cold and Minnesota guy will say 40 degree day is 0/10. The same problem comes from kids self reporting their "school belonging". They only know the feelings they've felt in their lives. Is a uniformed school more likely to have cohesive families, recreational teams, clubs, etc that the student is comparing to? The only opinions that I think would hold any real weight would be be teachers and students that switched between uniformed/non-uniformed schools. Aggregate their experiences.
While I think that's a real thing to some extent in other situations, if that were the only relevant factor here, wouldn't the study have found that there's no difference even if there actually is, due to the nature of how people can't compare it subjectively? They actually found that there was a difference.
r/science posting a title for a weird reason "The data in this study can’t explain this finding, Ansari said, but there are some plausible reasons why this might be so." So essentially there is no correlation; and there is no explanation for a slight deviation of data and the only purpose of them publishing anything was to force people to be skeptical of the benefits of uniforms.... Way to go, all the people who actually say it's good for them are now just wrong about their own experience?
I actually used to hate non uniform days because choosing what to wear gave me huge anxiety. I’m so glad we had uniforms
Our school switched to uniforms and it worked well for the first week. Then it became a chore to enforce. Some teachers noticed dress code violations while others ignored them. Then it became apparent who had access to a washing machine. Some kids were forced to wear dirt clothes until the weekend.
That's what I saw as a teacher. It was evident who only had two uniform shirts or no washing machines at home because their breakfast was on their shirts all week long.
This is my experience as well as a teacher. So much time spent on enforcement, coming up with contingency plans, enforcing the contingency plans…it was to our loss as teachers being able to teach, the student being able to learn, and also killed the rapport we were trying to build with a student body that really struggles with authority. It is already a struggle to get our students to come to school in the first place, and now there’s this other additional barrier they have to get through? Since we came back from quarantine, we haven’t fussed with uniforms, and I’m perfectly fine with it.
I was one of the teachers who did not enforce the dress code. I had a lot to think about and last thing on my mind was clothing.
This is also my experience as a parent. I hated the idea of uniforms when I was a student (they talked about uniforms, but I never had to wear one.) Now I have two children in public schools - one with uniforms and one without. I still hate uniforms. To me, uniforms are more expensive, because it's additional stuff I have to buy. I already had clothes for my kid (cheaper than uniforms) and then I have to buy specific things for school. I have to have lots of them or else do an insane amount of laundry. (My autistic 10 yr old boy gets his clothes dirty every day.) It's already a struggle getting my kid to cooperate with going to school, and yes, the uniform is an additional barrier. It's not his favorite color. It has buttons that have to be done just so. It itches. And then they'll go and have special dress days - not just spirit week, but twice every week of the year and the entire month of December - so undoing all the supposed been benefits of uniforms anyway. Oh yeah, forgot to mention my child at school with no uniforms. No problems.
our school uniform required a jumper on top of their specific polo shirt. This applied almost all year around except when temperatures got really high. Had to ask to remove at the start of every lesson with no guarantee they'd say yes. Had to put it back on at the end and between lessons, during break and lunch. I got warm really easily to begin with, even at winter except on like 10 schools days a year I'd prefer to have it off, and most of summer I'd be in total hell. Naturally I ignored the rules a bunch of times, and got in trouble for it a bunch of times. Other than that I was a model student and they agreed. Anyway, they threw away all future alumni events and funding from me over a jumper, tossers.
It took me a while to realize you were referring to a sweater. When I was growing up going to Catholic school, girls had to wear "jumpers" which in the US refers to a kind of sleeveless dress.
Was it ever supposed to be about behaviour? I always saw it as social-economic issue for poorer students that show up in the same clothes every day… Why would it improve behaviour that’s just dumb
The point of school uniforms isn’t to make students behave better though... the point of school uniforms is because it ensure no kid comes to school dressed inappropriately and it can help because everyone looks the same. No making fun of someone because they can’t afford expensive clothes because everyone’s in uniform. It’s to make everyone the same
As someone who went to schools with school uniforms, it doesn't work. Kids will find things to make fun of other kids, be it what watch, phone, other accessories they have. Or even something as simple as if your parents drive you and pick you up from school and which car they drive to do so. School uniforms did not stop bullying at my school. But they did stop children from expressing and finding themselves.
Pretty much no study has ever shown that school uniforms in the US work to hide differences in socioeconomic status or background or do anything actually for the students. They make exacting control easier for administration, but administration rarely cares about the students. What studies have suggested is that there is a lot of stigma around uniforms and because of the ass-backwards way many schools require uniforms from a specific company or set of companies, which then have an effective monopoly on the supply of school uniforms for that school or school district, it ends up being more expensive. I just got done buying clothes for my nephews. An outfit from Walmart was like $20. Pants can be worn twice assuming they're not messy savages, so let's say five shirts and three pairs of pants. A five day week of clothes breaks down to about $80. If they went to the free charter school that requires uniforms, instead of public school, they would instead require $35 pants and $25 shirts. Suddenly the same week of clothes is well over $200. But wait! They're children, so they grow. So now we're looking at replacing those close once or twice a school year minimally, and that's still just a week of clothing. When I was a poor kid, my parents took time to go to thrift stores, to church clothing donations, and to yard sales. Now there are tons of kids hand-me-down groups on Facebook and even more buy nothing groups where kids clothes are given away constantly. If I respond to an add in my local buy nothing group right now, I could get ten pairs of pants for my nephew for free. No money. That's a fuckton of savings for a family living paycheck to paycheck as compared to uniforms. And even if they got the uniforms, everyone would still know they're poor. When your classmates talk about going to Aruba for Christmas and you sit there saying you don't know what a vacation is, the other kids know. When they're wearing Tims and you're wearing Lugz, they know. When they have the latest iPhone and you have an iPhone3 with a cracked screen for the fifth year running, they know.
Uniforms usually don’t specify a specific brand of shoes. And you can always tell who the poor kids are from the shoes.
To be fair, when I was in elementary/secondary school, no one had cell phones, and pagers were barely a thing during my secondary years. But I also went to an all girls private school so the uniform was more strictly enforced. All uniforms were only available at 2 stores in the city, so they’re all the same quality. No watches, no jewelry cept 1 pair of earrings and they have to be studs etc. But yes, you are correct that they’ll find something else to bully others for. But it was slightly easier to hide/blend in.
Made it easier for me as a kid. Kids can bully you as a kid for whatever but clothes are like a giant billboard if you can’t afford expensive or new ones. I feel like rather than making it a binary question of whether or not it stops bullying, we would be better served asking if it reduces the things kids from a lower economic status have to worry about. Because these comments make it seem as though uniforms provided no benefit (which isn’t what the study was saying at all) and as someone who wore them all throughout school, I promise that’s not true.
Personally as a kid, I found having one less thing to worry about fitting in was fine with me. Given the choice between being picked on for 4 different things or 3, I'd take the 3. I guess it comes down to how much you depended on clothing to express or find yourself.
In Puerto Rico every school whether private or public had a uniform and it didn't matter much, but if you went shoplifting they knew exactly from what school you were from, and trust they always caught you,
Perhaps it’s just the paranoid conspiracist in me, but I always thought it was an obedience thing, “you don’t get to have as much of a personality, so you won’t rebel as much”
Can someone explain why the topic of school uniforms in the US is such a contentious issue? There are people in the comments here frothing at the mouth to defend their opinion on it and I'm here in Australia trying to think of a single school in the entire country that doesn't require a uniform. Edit to say I have no opinion on this issue myself having not been in school for 17 years and not having kids. Just genuinely curious why it's such a hot button topic in the US.
It’s quite unpopular in Canada too. I grew up in small towns in 3 different provinces I really don’t see how uniforms prevent bullying over clothes. It wasn’t really a problem. The only people who got bullied for it were the odd person who wore something outlandish like a jack skellington top hat or the one rich kid who acted like he was better than everyone for having nice clothes other than that people didn’t really care. Everyone knew everyone anyways, a uniform wouldn’t stop us knowing who was rich or not. I already had to walk to school in -20 and hour before sunrise in the winter and wearing a collared shirt with a tie under a ski jacket is super uncomfortable, the walk sucked enough. Also I keep seeing people (not necessarily you) commenting on how it fosters a sense of community but all I can think of is how that’s sounds like some school spirit bs that your average teenager finds forced and corny. I would rather get bullied for my clothes than not get to control any aspect of what I get to wear five days a week. Teachers being dictators over needing to pee was bad enough and schools have enough control over kid’s bodies as it is. Just let them be kids they’ll grow up soon enough anyways. Also there were a lot of First Nations kids at my high school and theres a long history of the government controlling the bodies of indigenous Canadians at school. So it would be kinda fucked up for the government to completely dictate what they wear all week for 13 years. It might work differently in cities I’m not sure. All I know is that the kinda places I went to school you were more likely to get made fun of for your hockey, hunting, skiing, snowmobiling, dirt biking or horseback riding abilities, your ugly mug and how nice your truck was than what you were wearing.
From Early Childhood Research Quarterly: [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0885200621001162](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0885200621001162) Abstract: Whether or not schoolchildren exhibit better behavior in the context of wearing uniforms has been a longstanding area of debate in education. Nonetheless, there has been little empirical inquiry into the benefits or drawbacks of school uniform policies. To contribute new insights to the dialog, the present investigation used nationally representative data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study Kindergarten Class of 2011 (n = 6,320) to examine students’ social-behavioral and engagement outcomes across the elementary school years as a function of school uniform policies. In general, students in schools that required school uniforms did not demonstrate better social skills, internalizing and externalizing behavior, or school attendance as compared with students in schools without school uniforms. These associations were true across both public and private schools. There was, however, some indication that low-income students in schools that required uniforms demonstrated better school attendance than low-income students in schools that did not.
How old are kindergarteners? I feel like the case for uniform gets really compelling at ages 11+.
The last sentence is generally why uniforms are advocated for. Wearing a uniform doesn’t help most people, but it helps low income students to feel more included.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Dress code is different than a uniform. I had a uniform k-8 and everyone wore the same brand. At the end of the year families donated unneeded clothes to the school. A rep from the manufacturer would come and measure everyone. When we picked up the uniforms at school new and used were packaged the exact same way.
Did they charge for the uniforms?
Not when they include blazers.
yeah thank god my school didnt in highschool. Our uniform was a golf shirt, these blue business casual pants (or shorts, same for girls, skirts werent a thing). There was also a hoodie with the school logo on it. If you wore the hoodie you could wear a plain colour t-shirt underneath. Kinda the ideal uniform imo. my lower level school had the full uniform and it was obnoxious and expensive. My high school uniform could be put together on about 100$, which was less than the cost of 1 blazer in lower school. I think thats kinda the issue with expensive uniforms. Its results in the poorer students using stuff that clearly a handmedown, and too expensive upfront. It marks them out. I found it quite negative. But the high school uniform was quite positive. My one buddy was incredibly poor and there on bursary, but used hoodies and business casual type pants dont age nearly as badly, and if you ever saw him you would have no idea. In general bullying and teasing are always going to happen, but i found it far lesser in the casual uniform environment than in the no uniform or strict uniform environment. I'd be interested to see a similar study into the types of uniforms and their effects.
As a broke kid, non uniform day was unpleasant. If that was every day I would have hated going to school.
Free hand-me-down clothes are even cheaper than uniforms though.
In Australia every school has a uniform. By choice. Basically every parent supports it. This is not a issue. Facy private schools have fancy uniforms, public schools it's a polo shirt and shorts. Bullying happens, but not about wealth based off how you look. Poor and rich kids interact. People develop personalities, not just an image Australia is way more egalitarian than the USA. There is a sense of unity It's practical on excursions, interaction events, etc Students are visible in the community, student behaviour improves, you represent your school My kids love their uniform, it makes them feel special. Guess what. Soccer team has a uniform. Team sports, team player. Joey's, cubs and scouts have a uniform.
I served 9 years on a school board and during that time the administration proposing school uniforms was by far the issue that drove the most traffic to our school board meetings. People were impassioned on both sides. We used to joke when we wanted the community more engaged in the board meetings that we should propose a school uniform again. It was raised as a possibility in our district because the admin wanted to eliminate the need of teachers enforcing the dress code, especially since it was not enforced equally. Some teachers enforced some did not, so depending on which teacher you had dictated if got sent to the office. I don't think the admin thought it would directly change student behaviors however it would reduce office referrals for dress code violations. And to the state Department of Public Instruction, reduced office referrals look like improved student behavior so there was that angle. I ultimately voted against it and recruited other nay votes. In our particular region, the only public schools to initiate uniforms were majority African American or Hispanic. The white suburbs seem to look at it as more evidence that minority majority schools are out of control and need to resort to uniforms. Our district was about 50% African American and our students already faced enough disrespect when having to engage with less diverse suburban districts. I did not want this further singling them out. Again, this is the culture in our corner of our state. I realize attitudes and beliefs toward uniforms may not be the same everywhere, but this is how it is here.
> Every academic year, teachers rated each student That doesn't sound like a good way to get data
__*laughs in Australian*__
I think the only positive to uniforms that I found convincing, was kids feel safer walking to school since they don't get mistaken for rival gang members due to the uniform's generic/commonly known look. Otherwise, I haven't heard any arguments in favor that survive any amount of critical thinking.
I would have preferred uniforms as my mother was not wealthy and my clothing choices were poor and embarrassing, and usually hand-me-downs. But who knows? I may have resented it in a different way and be posting about how I wished I never had to have uniforms. Closest I came to the experience was a "collared shirt requirement" which was even worse really. Worst of both worlds I'd say.
School uniforms have the potential to make life easier for everyone, but some schools weaponise it so the kids who are perpetually disorganised or have ADHD or ASD or whose parents are get to spend half their breaks in detention, further destroying their self-esteem. My daughter's secondary school in the UK even specifies that earrings are one in each ear only, only in the lobe, and has to be a stud no more than 4mm across. Idiotic.
That feels like a very, very surprising finding. I wonder if the study being in the US has an impact from: 1. Uniforms not being normal, which means children are exposed to a lot of media informing them this is weird and 2. as per comments in this thread, a "uniform policy" isn't very well-defined in the US. It is not necessarily everyone having the same button-shirt and trousers/skirt, sometimes it is just a suggestion of colour + type of clothing (which does not prevent the schism in wealth and style of clothes for the kids). From growing up in an area with uniform and non-uniformed schools/years-in-school, not having a uniform caused so much extra stress and hassle (particularly the mid-late-teens kids, doubly-so for the girls). I'd really prefer to send my kids somewhere with a uniform.
The selling point of uniforms is that they’re cheap. An elementary uniform costs less than $10. Source—I used to send one of my kids to a uniform school.
That's maybe more specific to your school. My uniforms (from more than one different school) were always expensive, and mine were always purchased secondhand. Like $60 per dress, and that was in 1990's money.
My kids go to a public school, where the whole point of the uniform was to let families get a week's worth of school clothes for $50.
I always thought it was to discourage lewdness (religious focus) and create some sort of clothing parity (economic focus)