this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2024
29 points (82.2% liked)
Asklemmy
43863 readers
1629 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Lack of uniform harms under-privileged population. School provided uniforms make everyone look more the same and there's less differentiation based on how you dress and your ability to wear something new every day and still be fashionable. So no, it is not conservative where I am, even if some may support it for the wrong reasons.
Tldr: uniforms are an anachronism, used as means of constraining and controlling kids, and reminding them who is in charge.
Very long; reading if you like:
Using uniforms to disguise the differences between rich and poor was a post War idea that made a lot of sense in the UK. The introduction of public schools at the time brought kids together from a wide range of backgrounds just when those differences were very obvious. It all made a lot of sense. Also, English private schools had famously used uniforms as it created a certain image that they wanted. To a degree this is now true of public schools, and the "tradition" of wearing uniforms is often given as a reason to keep them.
In the UK, in 2024, there are always kids wearing uniforms that are unwashed, need repairing, or just the wrong size. But even without those signs the kids all know who is rich and who is not.
If you take kids out of their uniforms and let them wear their preferred clothes, the differences between become very hard to spot. Back in 1942 this was not true, but today you'd be hard pushed to tell who is rich and who is not making the original purpose irrelevant.
To setup a study of the impact of uniforms is logistically impossible, however all studies that look at educational outcomes found no correlation between uniform and exam results. This seems to disprove the claim that uniforms allow kids to do better in class.
Today, schools like to have uniforms for a few reasons. One, they claim it is part of the school identity, which is true to a degree. But it came about due to national hardship, and is a reminder of times we no longer need. Two, school rules on uniforms have always existed but have become more strict in recent years (speaking as a UK parent of 3 kids aged 12, 16, & 25). In the school my kids attend(ed), they will send letters home and punish kids for uniform related infractions the moment they happen. However, they don't do the same for education related issues. It took 2 years for them to report the issues my daughter was having, and they seemed more concerned with her earnings than her school work when we spoke with them.
Dropping uniforms would reduce the load on teachers who would not need to constantly monitor and punish kids for wearing the wrong shoes, or coats, or bags, or having earrings even. There would still be some rules but they would allow far more latitude for self expression and freedom that kids in 2024 require. And this is an important point. For good or bad, modern children are exposed to information, news, behaviours, and attitudes from around the world, from a very early age. They are also going through the universal issues of adolescence. We need to accept they need freedom to express themselves, not find ways to constrain them.
On a side note, it is my own view that some schools are scared of giving kids freedom to choose, and the uniform rules are intended as a way to make them "conform" to a conservative standard. Uniform rules are effectively a stick they can smack kids with. Take it away and you take their power.
Poorer people (especially kids) tend to over-compensate with buying designer labels to hide the fact that they're poor. This leads to worse outcomes for poorer kids who then prioritize income receiving work over their academic study to pay for these items. It also encourages dropping out of school to work and be cool by wearing the latest threads, neglecting their education for short term gain.
You can't just assume that because kids these days will all be wearing similar styles of clothing that there is no impact in dropping mandatory uniforms from schools. At least mandatory uniforms set a standard that parents must abide by or be forced to explain themselves to authorities when it comes to providing for their children.
Funnily enough one of the things you can be sure of, is girls all want to look the same, but also be somehow better dressed than their friends. You are right that kids want expensive stuff and parents try to provide where they can. Whether this leads to bullying depends on a bunch of other factors. Kids who bully will do so either way, uniform or not.
I'm not denying bullying won't happen however that's different to peer pressure and the need to fit in, particularly for adolescents. Peer pressure comes from even your own friends and the choices they make independent of anything you do.
Indeed. Uniform or, not, per person will exist. I just think we are better off without uniforms, and we should always work towards "no uniform".
Don't exist in my experience...
Your experience may not constitute a sufficiently large and representative sample
When I was homeless as a teenager my school gave me second hand uniforms for free at least.