Abstract
This paper analyzes the pros and cons of mandatory school uniforms and whether the compulsory wearing of uniforms adversely impacts the development of students. The research comprises two main parts – our own research conducting using interviews and questionnaires to seek the opinions of students, teachers and parents, backed up by data made available to us regarding suspension rates before and after school uniforms were introduced. The second part is a study made by Dreilinger (2013) which primarily examines the costs aspects of school uniforms, supplemented by opinions, views and concerns of parents, school authorities, uniform suppliers, and a representative from a charity helping poorer families find the monies to buy the needed uniforms. The findings produced not unexpected results that a majority of students were against uniforms, whilst more teachers and parents were in favor of them. However, even those parents who supported a school uniforms policy were concerned about school uniform costs, especially where schools insist on monogrammed shirts or socks, etc. Interestingly, it was also found from school data made available that suspension rates increased following introduction of school uniforms. The paper discusses the various findings and makes a number of recommendations for the way forward in respect of school uniforms, but concludes overall that a school uniforms policy does not help the development of students, as a policy is an unnecessary expense for parents, and that school uniform concerns could even be a distraction from learning.
Introduction
In recent years schools have developed a more liberalized view as regards making the wearing of school uniforms compulsory for their students. According to Dreilinger (Aug 2013) school uniforms in private schools have been the norm for many, many years – especially the Catholic schools – though many of our public schools in the U.S. followed suit in the 1990s. However, more recently there has been a change to that scenario and the most recent statistics available (for the school year 2009-10) fewer than 19 percent of the nation’s public schools still require uniforms to be worn by their students.
Dreilinger discusses the views of various parties on school uniforms: parents, school authorities, and uniform suppliers. Her article is primarily about the costs of the uniforms – costs that are in many cases unnecessarily steep because those dictating the uniform policy and specifying the details of it insist on fancy details like monogrammed shirts and socks and a rigid specification for shoes – not just the color but the actual style itself. As might be expected the opinions regarding the merits of school uniform policies are mixed. Points of view on the subject to some extent follow stereotypical expectations based on the demographic of the group surveyed – in this instance students, teachers, or parents (plus a few comments from clothing suppliers and a charity spokeperson).
Although the research (including the Dreilinger study) provided a range of views regarding uniform policy – pros and cons – for this researcher the negatives outweighed the positives and overall it was the “cons” that carried the day.
Research Method
Two methods of research form the basis of the findings for this paper – both reaching similar conclusions. The first hand research carried out by this researcher relied upon personal observation, responses to questionnaires specifically designed for students, for school teachers and for parents. Additionally, previous observations were taken into account.
The second source of data was the study undertaken by Dreilinger and published in the website of NOLA.com. She also took into account the perspectives of parent ans school personnel, but additionally sought opinions from uniform vendors.
Research Materials
In the case of this researcher, the majority of the research (Study 1) was undertaken in the form of one-to-one interviews with the respondents, in order to complete the questionnaires designed specifically for this study, and thereby to obtain the required data. As a backup, audio tapes were used (always with prior permission), to allow corroboration / checking of the written answers recorded on the questionnaires. Additionally – and providing a most valuable secondary source of information for the study – permission was given to this researcher to access data on in-school and out-of-school suspension rates before and after school uniforms were introduced. A third line of research was recording the personal observations of students both before and after the introduction of school uniforms.
In the case of the Dreilinger research (Study 2), she identified and compared prices of uniforms offered by different vendors, discussed the different fabrics used in their manufacture, and sought the views of affected parents as well as those of clothing vendors (uniform suppliers) and representatives of charities working to help low-income parents meet school uniform costs.
Research Results
Study 1:
Interview / questionnaire results produced some general differences in responses between those for students, teachers and parents. As regards the student outcomes, the majority of students (78 percent) thought that uniforms would be a bad thing, giving the main reason as a perceived restriction of self-expression and/or simply not wanting to wear clothes they considered boring or unfashionable (“uncool”).
For the majority of students surveyed, cost issues were not a high priority for them personally – most responded that cost was in the main an unknown quantity to them.
For the teachers surveyed, there was a small majority in favor of school uniforms (54 percent), most of those giving the reason that in their professional opinion it promotes better discipline (all students learning to conform as a prelude to the need to conform in adult society, where many jobs require a certain dress code to be observed), and some suggesting that compulsory wearing of uniforms eliminates peer pressure to always be wearing the latest (and expensive!) fashion clothing and accessories.
As might have been anticipated, the response by parents to the questionnaires focused primarily on the issues of cost of the uniform clothing. Although there was a majority (61 percent) in favor of uniforms, even many of those supporting the school uniforms policy expressed concern about the costs involved. And that was not just the costs of each individual item, but that introducing a school uniforms policy would mean purchasing entire outfits from scratch, plus a certain number of extra items to better facilitate the laundering process.
Of all the interviews undertaken and surveys completed, just a small minority – about eight percent (students, teachers and parents combined) – mentioned under “additional comments” that uniforms would help create a sense of pride in the school concerned.
It would appear from those figures that a school uniforms policy was causing an increase in suspensions of one form or another.
Study 2 (Dreilinger):
Dreilinger discusses issues of costs of the school uniforms, including why there are usually recommendations for what seems an excessive number of (e.g.) shirts, which usually have to come from a recommended supplier to ensure consistency of look and quality. She also reports that size labeling of those uniform clothing items seems inexplicably out of step with the sizing of “regular” clothing. However, she comments that supporters of a school uniforms policy agree that not only does a school uniform help unite the school community, but it can reduce distraction issues and creates a more professional environment for study with reduced clothing competitiveness and “peer judgment.” Those people also believe that – bearing in mind the high prices of the ever-changing fashion wear for young people – uniforms can in fact save parents some money overall compared with “normal” clothing.
However, as Dreilinger points out, those school uniform items are not cheap. She cites an example of a blazer for a private preparatory school in Uptown, New Orleans as costing $87 for the smallest size (from the recommended supplier). Not only that but even smaller clothing items like socks are often specified as needing to carry the school logo and must be worn with a specific shoe style like “saddle Oxfords” which further increases parents’ costs. A parent of a student attending that same preparatory school in Uptown is quoted by Dreilinger as agreeing that the clothing is not just pricey but “Very much. Very, very much,” which she is not happy about, though she does concede that the quality is good and that the clothes do seem to last. Those costs are even more of a concern for parents on a low income who manage to get their kids into private schools by means of vouchers funded by the state, as the parents are still responsible for the obligatory costs of school uniforms.
As regards uniforms in public schools, Dreilinger’s study reports that “plainness and affordability are more the norm.” She cites schools in the New Orleans parishes of St Tammany and Jefferson where parents make the choices of the uniforms1 the majority opting for polo shirts in the selected school color with khaki pants, with no requirement for the addition of an embroidered or printed school motif or rest that would increase the costs of those shirts. At schools where such a logo is required, the shirts cost between $10 and $15, although plain khaki pants can be bought from just about any store.
In contrast, reports Dreilinger, some schools go for uniforms that are truly individual, so that their students will stand out. She mentions items like “custom purple-and-yellow plaid”, “blue gingham smocks with red piping”, and other school-specific items, which all add to the expense for parents. Those smocks for example cost $45 each, and school skirts in the special plaid material can cost $40 a time.
According to one of the recommended suppliers quoted by Dreilinger, specifying a custom plaid means that they have to order six months ahead and the costs are higher because it is school-specific. As one parent states, because of the high costs of those school-specific items, she could afford only one uniform for each child, so had to wash the clothes every night.
Dreilinger mentions that because of those costs and the difficulties faced by many families in affording the uniforms, the Adopt-a-Family charity raises money to help needy parents in the New Orleans area. Kevin Buckel of the charity reports that whereas the $50 normally allocated per family was the amount set that originally could buy “two shirts, one or two pairs of pants and a belt” the situation now is that for some schools $50 now buys only one uniform per child, “even at a wholesale rate.” Buckel blames the charter board for schools which – as agreed by one of the clothing suppliers – “go over the top.”
Dreilinger reports other help for parents struggling to afford school uniforms in the form of layaway plans and “recycling” schemes – passing uniforms back through the school for re-selling at discounted prices, or simply passing them down through the family for the younger children.
Whilst many school authorities regard the uniforms as important contributions to discipline, Dreilinger notes that some extend that concept to bring in incentives such as having special uniform items for outstanding achievements, but conversely implement a penalty system for failing to wear the correct uniform items. One parent commented harshly on that policy, reporting that she was in tears one morning desperately searching for the mandatory black shoes to avoid her child incurring a disciplinary punishment. She said: “That sends a mixed message about what's really important in education.”
Discussion of the Findings
It was not unexpected to find that a school uniforms policy was generally favored by the majority of both teachers and parents (though with strongly expressed concerns by a considerable number of parents regarding the excessive costs of many items). That concern was very possibly the principal reason why those parents against school uniforms chose to oppose it. Nor was it a real surprise that most students were against school uniforms.
There may be several reasons for students opposing the idea of compulsory uniforms including the opinion that a school uniform represents a restriction on self-expression. The associated increase in suspension rates when schools had introduced and implemented a mandatory uniforms policy could also be due to a number of reasons such as parents who could not afford the clothing sending kids to school in non-uniform apparel.
Absenteeism causing suspension could also be due to extreme reaction to the uniforms on the part of some students. It was also felt from some of the student responses to the questionnaires that for a significant number of students, wearing the school uniform made them feel uncomfortable – psychologically rather than physically. There is of course the fact that the restrictive style of some uniforms – buttoned shirt collar and a tie for example – can feel physically uncomfortable for a young person whose own choice of clothing is loose-fitting open-necked shirts or tees. One of the reasons sometimes cited to support having a school uniforms policy is that in a non-uniforms environment, kids regularly get bullied if they are wearing (e.g.) the “wrong” trainers. The findings that suspension rates actually increased following introduction of school uniforms suggest that bullying – one of the principal causes of suspensions – was not affected, in fact may have increased. Wearing the same clothes as everyone else doesn’t affect someone’s basic character; a bully will still be a bully even in school uniform. In fact it could be argued that the average bully will need to increase his bullying tactics to make sure he’s noticed now that his clothing doesn’t mark him out as being different from the pack.
Recommendations
There seem to be three or four different ways forward that might help resolve the issues over school uniforms:
The first – and perhaps most extreme – would be to scrap the school uniforms policy altogether. That would resolve the issues of the high costs of specialist and school-specific clothing items like monogrammed shirts, but would not fit with the views of the majority of teachers and (albeit to a lesser extent) parents, especially those who feel that school uniforms are essential for reasons of discipline or freedom from distractions, etc.
A second possible course of action would be to introduce a mandated dress code for students, but which did not actually require the wearing of a uniform as such. Whilst that would go some way to preventing extremes of dress code among students such as excessively-revealing clothing for teenage girl students or “gang” clothes for the boys, it would again be unlikely to satisfy the pro-uniform groups as mentioned earlier.
Option three would be to continue with the school uniforms policy, but to drastically reduce the purchase costs of the uniforms. That could at least in part be achieved by “standardizing” the uniforms as far as possible, i.e. avoiding monogrammed clothing or clothing with logos, avoiding specifications requiring unusual materials or exclusive fabric designs, etc. By that means, costs could be considerably reduced through the benefits of bulk manufacture and production.
The fourth approach which would be an extension of option three, would be to actively extend the policy of recycling uniforms, so that more used but still in good condition uniform clothing becomes available at discounted prices to those parents who struggle to meet the costs of new items.
Conclusions
Further, whereas some supporters of school uniforms claim that dressing all students in identical clothing reduces distraction from the primary purpose of learning, it is quite probable that the converse is true; i.e. that concerns over having the right school uniform and about the affordability of the clothing are themselves unnecessary distractions from the primary goal of attending school to be educated. On that basis, it is difficult to see how making school uniforms compulsory has a positive impact on student development. In fact the data obtained on increasing suspension rates following introduction of a school uniforms policy suggests that if anything the reverse might be the case.
Works Cited:
Dreilinger, Danielle. (Aug 2013). The Times Picayune: Greater New Orleans. Web. 5 December 2013.
