[For more of my best writing, including news of my book, The Meaning Of Children, please visit my other blog!]
A few years back, my then-high-school-attending son received a detention. Not for inappropriate language or behaviour, but solely because his shirt-tail was untucked. Although I allow some room in his narration of his universe for embellishment and even, at times, truth-twisting, I believed him on this one. And that is because, over the several years previous, I had become acquainted with the Uniformists.
My children all went to public schools, and their elementary and high schools promulgated strict dress codes. From the outset, I was never completely in favour of all this uniformity. Being a child of the 60s, I was required to wear a tunic for precisely one year, which was abandoned after it was “recognized” that this “stifled self-expression and creativity.” I use quotation marks because the received wisdom in these Oh-Oh years is quite different – now, uniforms are supposed to “create an environment conducive to learning,” a sense of “community among students,” and, not least, a muting of the intense competitive consumerism that lurks among the bad memories of we who are now parents ourselves. Fair enough; the schools my children frequented were good schools, and they were fixed (fixated?) on uniforms. So I could hardly join these communities hoping to make them conform to my thinking. But that didn’t mean I couldn’t ask questions. And, with that detention fresh in my mind, the question became: How uniform is uniform enough? One of the schools insisted on a certain type of shoe, the other that white oxford-style shirts or t-shirts are no longer acceptable, only polo shirts, with the knit collars and the three buttons. There was always some newer affectation, for example that shirts be monogrammed with the school name/logo.

Our high school is blessed to have a devoted cadre of volunteers who organized and ran the uniform store, generating tens of thousands of dollars a year, all of which was spent on the kids. These monies provide many bits and pieces which are really the school board’s sadly neglected responsibility (new musical instruments, a paint job more often than once every seven years, equipment for classrooms, computers, libraries, etc., etc.) and some true luxuries (lavish graduation exercises, an unbelievable number of academic prizes for graduates, international exchange trips). So uniforms also functioned as an invisible school fee, over and above the taxes that we all contributed. Fair enough, but maybe we should be more up-front about this. Maybe, too, we should organize to demand more money from our governments, or for better use of the existing funds from our school boards.
Another thing about these uniforms really bothered me -- their monochromicity. Why should our schools be sensory deprivation zones? Why white and grey? Why can’t a shirt style be prescribed, but blue, pink or yellow versions be permitted as well, in addition to the white? I never used bleach before my kids entered school! And though it was a minor concern on balance, I regret the environmental degradation these white shirts necessitated.
The truth that surprised me most was that nearly every parent I spoke with felt blessed by uniforms: they were relieved to be delivered from daily arguments about appropriate dress, or from the need to replace each fashion fad their children Exhausted. School officials wanted the monogrammed shirts in part, it seemed, because many of the young women at high school routinely buy extremely tight, skimpy versions of the currently requisite button-down oxfords. No one ever adequately explained to me why, beyond colour and low-heel requirements, a particular brand of shoe was necessary.
Why can’t we parents face head-on the challenges that uniforms are supposed to address? If we have a problem with the sluttish dress of some of our daughters, or the exorbitance of the latest trend in jeans, we should face these issues forthrightly, not cover them over with grey flannel! Buck up, I say! Learn to say “No, that is not appropriate dress for school.” No further explanation is necessary. Our authority can be as arbitrary as “We are teaching you how to live up to society’s expectations. When you are a responsible adult, you can chose to conform or not, but at least you will know how to dress like a middle class prig.” If our kids will not obey our edicts concerning tattoos, body piercing or outlandish hair colour, are we really doing them any favours by abdicating our authority in favour of the school bureaucracy?
Finally, let me tell you about an unfortunate secret truth which lurks beneath the thrall of the Uniformists: it is the way it makes public schools and their students resemble, in the most superficial of ways, the exclusive private schools that pepper my Montreal neighbourhood. And that is a value that I do not share. We should be proud that our kids go to public schools, where all races, religions and socio-economic groups are represented and form a community, just like the real world to which they aspire. If there are improvements necessary in our schools to positively influence behaviour and comportment, let’s make these changes deep ones, not as superficial as the clothes on their backs, or colour of their hair.
My kids love their schools. And I’m grateful for all the hard work put in by the decimated custodial staff, the devoted teachers, concerned administrators and dynamic parent volunteers. I know by the middle of high school, my son shouldn’t be wandering about with his shirttail hanging out. But can you blame me if I wish the administration was more concerned with the originality of my kids’ minds, and less concerned about the conventionality of their dress? In the final analysis, shouldn’t their education be more about content, and less about form?
Bev Akerman was a research scientist when she wrote this; she is now a writer in Montreal. The Meaning of Children, her first short fiction collection, has just been published by Exile Editions.
Tweet(Versions of this essay were published in The Montreal Gazette, Maclean's Magazine, March 7, 2005, and in Cynthia A. Bily, (Ed.) Students’ Rights. Introducing Issues With Opposing Viewpoints. Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press. 2009)
[For more of my best writing, including news of my book, The Meaning Of Children, please visit my other blog!]









Salon.com
Comments
There seem to be varying degrees of how strictly the uniform policy is enforced from school to school, and whether things like socks, shoes, coats, and backpacks are regulated, but they've pretty much all got a policy.
Overall, I think it's a good thing. Used to be that kids had "school clothes" and "play clothes" that they would change into when they got home from school. I do think that having a uniform helps set that distinction in the kids' minds--when they're at school, they're there to study and learn, not to goof around. It also gives the students a good litmus for what constitutes "dressing professionally" once they get out into the work world--not that you're going to wear your school uniform to a job interview or anything, but wearing something of similar formalness and conservativeness is probably good for most entry-level jobs. (You really should see some of the stuff the kids here wear when they're NOT in school...Oh. My. No one is going to hire them dressed like that, and the kids have no idea why.)
Now of course, the school administrators shouldn't be total dicks about the uniform--enforcing uniform standards to the extent that they spend more time on that than they do actual learning--but in general I think that school uniforms are a good thing.
Your mileage may vary.
I LOVED IT. For the first time in my life, I didn't have to worry about having the wrong socks/shoes/pants/shirts. I didn't have to worry about what my mom wouldn't pay for. I had the same ugly uniform as everyone else. Everyone universally hated it. I secretly loved it. I loved the anonymity of it, that at least in one way I could fit in with everyone else.
I never, ever won the high school, junior high, or elementary school fashion parade. And for one blessed year I didn't have to play. It was heaven.
Of course, it makes things easier in the morning, but also it's a great neutralizer when a school embodies students of different socio-economic backgrounds.
I actually wrote this several years back; after it was published, my son told me a little more about that detention: the teacher who handed it out? It was the second time that afternoon she'd caught him with his shirt untucked...but still.
Thanks for taking the time to share your stories (LeedsJr, I'm not going there!)
Still, as a teacher who's worked in more school environments than most--public, private, charter, all mixed in uniform requirements--I can say with complete confidence that focusing on uniforms as either an answer or an obstacle to a child's or school's success is simply fruitless. I can't emphasize it enough. It doesn't matter. They get used to it and it becomes a non-issue.
As for the bit about parents' abdicating their authority on this issue, well, I would put that under the umbrella of "Pick your battles." There are so very many complex issues during the school career of a child that a sweeping requirement for uniforms simply offers room for more important conversations.
In certain groups there was a first-day-ninth-grade ritual of removing the light/dark tan saddle shoes to scrape and scuff them thoroughly on the sidewalk. How long could you go without cleaning/pressing the wool, knife-pleated skirt? How many cigarette burns could you accumulate, strategically placed to escape notice of the nuns? I never could bring myself to wear an un-ironed blouse - all cotton, of course - but some girls did. Being a slob was an advantage of the all-girls' school and the only one of uniforms.
The minute the 3:15 bell rang, while running to our lockers, we un-tucked our shirts and rolled the skirts at the waist to make them as short as possible. Jackets and shoes were always left in the locker, no one with any regard for cool would wear them outside school. Of course, the shoes worn out the door, jackets, sweaters, (oh my gawd, she's wearing a hat, what a simp.)
Senior year I put my foot down and switched to public school where, we had always been warned, clothing pressure would be extreme. Trapped in the cool girls clique, I was willing to take my chances, thinking it couldn't possibly be worse. A poor kid, I had five adequate outfits, including those of my sister's I could wear. I rotated, one for each day of the week: Monday dress, Tuesday dress, Wednesday skirt & sweater, etc. No one noticed. No one cared. No one made fun of me. A large part of the school was as poor as I was. All those years our parents and the nuns had lied to us.
The experience wasn't the same for everyone, I'm sure, but it was there, it went on.
My philosophy for my kids' school clothes was that they were work clothes, I would never worry if they got paint on them, tore them on the playground or suffered any other mishap. They looked fine, were cared for but, in the end, they had to be work clothes. That's what they went to school for.
But, and you don't mention this at all, the plaid skirt and white shirt, for most men, just reads Sex. It is a look that is consistently fetichized and sexualized. It made me cringe, to the point that I eventually won the battle of getting her to wear her jeans and change into her uniform at school. I hated the idea of her walking around in that uniform. She graduated last year. I can exhale.
My parents scrimped and scraped to afford our tuition, and the last thing on which they had extra money to spend was clothing. Our navy jumpers and white blouses (I can't remember what the boys wore) were inexpensive, and easy, and we all looked the same. I knew girls whose dads were doctors, lawyers, cattlemen or oilmen; but every day we pretty much all looked alike: there was no catty competition over who looked better than whom. We all looked like geeky kids, and we all dressed alike, so we pretty much got to know each other for who we were, not for our outer appearances.
By the time we got to high school -- where no uniforms were required -- differences based on looks, clothing, etc. did start to emerge; but by then we had already formed our friendships and alliances based on other things, and we didn't become fractured by such superficial differences. By then, it didn't matter that I was a nerdy, unattractive kid from the wrong side of the tracks; I could still be friends with the glamorous cheerleader who wore Jantzen sweater sets because we had become friends back in the days when we liked each other without being so aware of our differences.
LOVE uniforms! I wish I could still have one, as it would make my life so much simpler ;-)
@Dienne: I currently teach at a school which does not have a uniform policy, and I can assure you that tats and piercings are very common. There's absolutely no correlation between uniforms and those items.
I couldn't agree more with your thought that parents should be facing the problems head on with their children that school uniforms are meant to address. Such parental failures, and others, have forced schools into the business of parenting well beyond what should be demanded of any educational process or institution. Correct this one defect in many of the children who attend our schools and there would certainly be far less insistence on uniforms in schools and a far more effective educational system in America.
Then, if there's a uniform for the day, there's usually a gym uniform, too.
If you move and change schools, all the old school uniforms are useless and you need a new set.
In short, you spend a lot more on clothes (and mostly clothes your kid won't be caught dead in the minute they're not forced to) than you would with no uniforms.
We opted out of our public schools years ago (didn't want to, but they are, unfortunately, inadequate). Both of our children are in private school and wear uniforms. We actually spend less on clothing now. And thank God, the emphasis is off the latest label, brand name this and that.
Uniforms set straight priorities, and even the playing field.
Freedom of expression? If the only way kids can express themselves is through trendy an unique clothing, it's a very sad world. And if true, please - there's plenty of time for that outside of school. In any event, I think kids have better ways (and less shallow) of expressing themselves - which is something they can certainly do in school.
Praise the uniform!
Also, it has been my experience that uniforms -- and the culture of uniformity they inspire -- just cause kids to be even more nitpicky about perceived differences. If they can't pick on your brand of shoe, they'll pick on the way you comb your hair.
Uniforms are a signal to kids that authority disapproves of even small deviations from the norm, so it's okay to pick on other kids for any difference you can spot.
If school uniforms helps with this, more power to them.