Should school uniforms be abolished ?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 08-09-2011 12:53pm

cobear wrote: »

After 14 years of wearing a uniform at school, I have to say that they are the only way to go. Yes they are dear to buy initially and I agree with other posters that cheaper versions should be made available and schools should provide much more leeway in terms of crests etc. They are also often too hot in summer and too cold in winter but it's unbelievable the amount of stress they save you - not having to decided what to wear every morning. We had a few non uniform days in my school and there was definitely competitions and judging looks over what people wore, I couldn't see that going away because people were their everyday clothes to school!

You agree wit hschool uniforms, but then spend most of your post listing the problems?

Why was their compeition at your school / seems to be the exception (where did you go)?

How about a dress code inculding no brand names instead of a uniform?

flutterflye · 08-09-2011 12:57pm

How many of you who are blaming the parenting are actually parents yourselves?
Everyone is the perfect parent until they actually become a parent.

jester77 · 08-09-2011 1:01pm

Times were tough when I grew up. A lot of students had cheap jumpers with the crest cut out from an old jumper sewn in. No need to be spending silly amounts on these exclusive jumpers.

baltimore sun · 08-09-2011 1:23pm

They should go, teenagers and wee kids have enough stress in their lives without having to go thru it all lookin like dorks.......

that whole argument of "but if there's no uniforms then parents will ave to buy expensive clothes so their kids look cool" is utter bull****.
how come then that nations like Latvia, Estonia, Albania and Serbia aren't leading the way in fashion for teenagers.
Stupid stupid argument. Let kids wear what they want to school, nothing wrong with a bit of self expression and if you cant buy them expensive clothes then get them some cheap alternative on something called the internet, you may have heard of it, you're feckin using it.

RichieC · 08-09-2011 1:25pm

Iomib wrote: »

School uniforms are very expensive, Most secondary schools these days require crested jumpers that are €60 each, Skirts that are €50 each, This is huge burden on parents. Ireland must only have school uniforms because the uk have them, No country in mainland europe has school uniforms.

awful logic, it would cost more to keep a child in the latest fashions. now finish your homework.

analucija · 08-09-2011 2:05pm

FinnLizzy wrote: »

Also, the fashion issue is not as important as people seem to think, and there's a school of thought that if you're aloud to wear what you like in school, then there will be more distractions. It's the same argument with co-ed schools. If boys and girls are aloud to integrate, will they be riding left right and center?

I find uniforms a bit oppressive but I don't particularly object to them either. However saying that wearing whatever you want distracts you from school work is absolutely ridiculous. Nobody was overly worried what to wear. Most of us just wore jeans and some kind of top, jumper or hoodie. My school was co-ed which I believe also contributed to the fact that only a few girls wore make up. Almost nobody wanted to date or sleep with class mates, because you are stuck with them till the end of high school. We had two couples in the class over the years, one started dating two months before the end of high school. I'd say that another two or three people dated somebody else from the same school (out of 30 in the class). Most of us were pathetically single or dating people outside school.

Cost could be a valid argument in favor of uniforms but arguments about distractions or losing time trying to find something to wear is complete nonsense. However arguments against co-ed schools are just ridiculous and I actually can't find one good reason for anything but co-ed school.

FinnLizzy · 08-09-2011 2:31pm

analucija wrote: »

I find uniforms a bit oppressive but I don't particularly object to them either. However saying that wearing whatever you want distracts you from school work is absolutely ridiculous. Nobody was overly worried what to wear. Most of us just wore jeans and some kind of top, jumper or hoodie. My school was co-ed which I believe also contributed to the fact that only a few girls wore make up. Almost nobody wanted to date or sleep with class mates, because you are stuck with them till the end of high school. We had two couples in the class over the years, one started dating two months before the end of high school. I'd say that another two or three people dated somebody else from the same school (out of 30 in the class). Most of us were pathetically single or dating people outside school.

Cost could be a valid argument in favor of uniforms but arguments about distractions or losing time trying to find something to wear is complete nonsense. However arguments against co-ed schools are just ridiculous and I actually can't find one good reason for anything but co-ed school.

I went to an Educate Together primary school (co-ed, no uniforms) and a Catholic Boys secondary school. My appearance was made fun of more in the latter. If they can't discriminate based on clothes, they'll find anything! Like hair, shoes (before my school introduced a black shoe policy) and just the people you hang around with.

And the argument that the freedom to wear whatever you want in class is invalid, considering the amount of time wasted in my school on: uniform checks, detentions because of improper uniform and speeches about wearing uniform with pride.

lawhec · 08-09-2011 2:41pm

FinnLizzy wrote: »

Also, the fashion issue is not as important as people seem to think, and there's a school of thought that if you're aloud to wear what you like in school, then there will be more distractions.

It's a perfectly valid one in my opinion, teenage children especially can be influenced quite easily by vanity and peer pressure - a standard uniform takes some of this pressure off.

FinnLizzy wrote: »

It's the same argument with co-ed schools. If boys and girls are aloud to integrate, will they be riding left right and center?

I remember a report up north here a few years back that mentioned in terms of academic achievement that girls did better in single-sex schools while boys did better in co-ed's. It seems that girls in the classroom helps bring boys results up while boys in the classroom brought girls results down.

ChairmanCow · 08-09-2011 3:00pm

I wish everyone had to wear a uniform in adult life too. Loved the ease of just rolling out of bed knowing what to wear. Its far too much hassle these days having to look for decent clothes to buy that suit me then worrying what they look like and so on...

cowzerp · 08-09-2011 3:02pm

fluffyorganic1 wrote: »

FFS, I used to have a penguin bar for lunch now and again at school and it never killed me.

Yeah but are you fat?!

Generic uniforms i say

analucija · 08-09-2011 3:03pm

lawhec wrote: »

It's a perfectly valid one in my opinion, teenage children especially can be influenced quite easily by vanity and peer pressure - a standard uniform takes some of this pressure off.

Gee, how do teenagers cope with the pressure during weekends and holidays when they don't wear uniforms.

lawhec wrote: »

I remember a report up north here a few years back that mentioned in terms of academic achievement that girls did better in single-sex schools while boys did better in co-ed's. It seems that girls in the classroom helps bring boys results up while boys in the classroom brought girls results down.

That is perfectly possible but academic achievement should not be the only thing that matters and secondly because boys mature latter they are handicapped in comparison to girls anyway. It makes sense to level the field a bit. In my experience there are still a lot more girls than boys getting into high point courses. I come from a country where almost all schools are co-ed and they were still thinking about positive discrimination to get more boys studying medicine.

christina_x · 08-09-2011 3:05pm

Iomib wrote: »

School uniforms are very expensive, Most secondary schools these days require crested jumpers that are €60 each, Skirts that are €50 each, This is huge burden on parents. Ireland must only have school uniforms because the uk have them, No country in mainland europe has school uniforms.

You think thats expensive? Try buying them new clothes at the same price every few weeks... thats expensive!
There's enough pressure without the whole "what will I wear??" shoite ontop of it!

tfitzgerald · 08-09-2011 3:07pm

I think that uniforms are cheaper in the long run than having to buy new outfits for school it would turn into an expensive fashion show especially for teenage girls Jesus at the moment I have two teenage girls in secondary school and there make up bill is frightening .

Shenshen · 08-09-2011 3:10pm

I think the argument that if there weren't any uniforms, parents would spend a fortune dressing their children is pushing it a bit... As far as I know, most children will wear the uniforms only to school. After school and at the weekends, they will still wear whatever fashion the parents pick or can afford.
So the uniforms are an additional cost, nothing else.

I grew up in a country where school uniforms are unknown, and guess what? That country and its children are doing just fine. there are very few cases indeed of parents filing for bankruptcy due to the cost of dressing their little gems up for school.
In fact, whenever I tell them what parents here have to fork out in order to buy additional clothes for their children to wear for school, the reactions are usually disbelieve and shock.

lawhec · 08-09-2011 3:15pm

analucija wrote: »

Gee, how do teenagers cope with the pressure during weekends and holidays when they don't wear uniforms.

Maybe these same teenagers don't hang around the same people when they are not in school, therefore would feel less pressured or burdened at weekends and holidays compared to school days where they pretty much have to sit alongside them?

analucija wrote: »

That is perfectly possible but academic achievement should not be the only thing that matters and secondly because boys mature latter they are handicapped in comparison to girls anyway. It makes sense to level the field a bit. In my experience there are still a lot more girls than boys getting into high point courses. I come from a country where almost all schools are co-ed and they were still thinking about positive discrimination to get more boys studying medicine.

None of what you say there explains why boys seem to do better in co-ed schools compared to single sex schools while it's the reverse for girls because if boys are handicapped by maturing later, does it really matter if they are being taught in a single sex or co-ed school?

Shenshen · 08-09-2011 3:37pm

lawhec wrote: »

None of what you say there explains why boys seem to do better in co-ed schools compared to single sex schools while it's the reverse for girls because if boys are handicapped by maturing later, does it really matter if they are being taught in a single sex or co-ed school?

Maybe it's just a matter of goalposts?
In co-ed schools, expectations would be raised due to the standard set by the girls, which would encourage the boys to perform better than in single sex schools?

Just a thought, really, I haven't spent much time thinking about it.
But from experience I have to say that boys tend to be competitive, whereas girls are networking.
So mixed schools would work as encouragement for boys, they would reduce the number of available networkers for girls.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 08-09-2011 3:38pm

lawhec wrote: »

Maybe these same teenagers don't hang around the same people when they are not in school, therefore would feel less pressured or burdened at weekends and holidays compared to school days where they pretty much have to sit alongside them?

I can assure you they socialise and mix a lot more at the weekends and it still doesn't explain why kids in other non-uniformed countires are more open-minded.

Seriously, the peer-pressure excuse is a non-starter for so many reasons expresse in this thread.

None of what you say there explains why boys seem to do better in co-ed schools compared to single sex schools while it's the reverse for girls because if boys are handicapped by maturing later, does it really matter if they are being taught in a single sex or co-ed school?

Boys tend to be more creative and expressive, whereas girls are more intellectual and rational. It's just a case of the education system suiting girls more than boys. Nothing to do with single-sex v mixed.

analucija · 08-09-2011 3:40pm

lawhec wrote: »

None of what you say there explains why boys seem to do better in co-ed schools compared to single sex schools while it's the reverse for girls because if boys are handicapped by maturing later, does it really matter if they are being taught in a single sex or co-ed school?

If you think that separating one gender from another so they wouldn't harbor any sinful thoughts and god knows whet else is a good idea... It matters because both genders are used to converse with each other and hang out. My group of friends consisted of 4 girls and 4 boys and I probably got on better with boys (never dated one). I do think that some practices that are (were) significantly influenced by catholic church do more harm than good.

Now regarding the point above... My high school was 50/50, my brother was going to a school that was predominately but not exclusively male and I have some friends who went to predominately female school. My school was a bit more academically demanding but in comparison to other schools girls were in general a lot less worried about their appearance and there was less (almost no) violence in comparison to my brothers school. And thank god no farting jokes. I think that discipline in classroom was better which helped boys but there will be always a bit of gender bias, no matter what kind of a school it is. Comparing the schools, the quality of teaching and entry selection were a lot more significant for the results than gender balance.

lawhec · 08-09-2011 5:28pm

Shenshen wrote: »

Maybe it's just a matter of goalposts?
In co-ed schools, expectations would be raised due to the standard set by the girls, which would encourage the boys to perform better than in single sex schools?

I think there's something to that - the girls "encourage" the boys to pick up their standards but conversely the boys bring down the girls to some extent.

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

I can assure you they socialise and mix a lot more at the weekends and it still doesn't explain why kids in other non-uniformed countires are more open-minded.

I've worked at several schools over the last few years and there is a common theme locally here of students having strong cross-school friendships in different fields. Also what evidence do you have of countries which don't have a prevalence of uniforms being "more open-minded"?

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Seriously, the peer-pressure excuse is a non-starter for so many reasons expresse in this thread.

Anyone who dismisses peer pressure when it comes to debating the interests and lifestyles of children, especially teenagers, has their head buried in the ground.

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

Boys tend to be more creative and expressive, whereas girls are more intellectual and rational. It's just a case of the education system suiting girls more than boys. Nothing to do with single-sex v mixed.

Possibly. In the past the methods of teaching, access to subjects and ways of examination favoured boys more than girls. But I feel there is definitely an environmental cause when you are at an age where your hormones run riot, going by my own experiences of going from a co-ed school to an all boys school.

analucija wrote: »

If you think that separating one gender from another so they wouldn't harbor any sinful thoughts and god knows whet else is a good idea... It matters because both genders are used to converse with each other and hang out. My group of friends consisted of 4 girls and 4 boys and I probably got on better with boys (never dated one). I do think that some practices that are (were) significantly influenced by catholic church do more harm than good.

Now regarding the point above... My high school was 50/50, my brother was going to a school that was predominately but not exclusively male and I have some friends who went to predominately female school. My school was a bit more academically demanding but in comparison to other schools girls were in general a lot less worried about their appearance and there was less (almost no) violence in comparison to my brothers school. And thank god no farting jokes. I think that discipline in classroom was better which helped boys but there will be always a bit of gender bias, no matter what kind of a school it is. Comparing the schools, the quality of teaching and entry selection were a lot more significant for the results than gender balance.

Personally I am actually for co-ed schools more than single sex schools because I feel that co-ed schools allow students to socialise better during a significant part of their lives at that time. There are plenty of people who would disagree with me though - in recent years some single sex post-primary schools in Strabane and Dungannon have merged to become co-eds and in particular the latter had some quite hostile opposition to it but it still went ahead. From my own experience being in a co-ed secondary school was that the girls actually did better than the boys academically. When I went to an all boys school after my GCSE's the difference was a bit unnerving - the atmosphere was more demanding and less relaxed than my old school and there was much more of a macho culture involved. I just couldn't settle, it affected my studies and one night I just broke and said "screw it!"

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 08-09-2011 6:13pm

lawhec wrote: »

I've worked at several schools over the last few years and there is a common theme locally here of students having strong cross-school friendships in different fields. Also what evidence do you have of countries which don't have a prevalence of uniforms being "more open-minded"?

Anyone who dismisses peer pressure when it comes to debating the interests and lifestyles of children, especially teenagers, has their head buried in the ground.

Possibly. In the past the methods of teaching, access to subjects and ways of examination favoured boys more than girls. But I feel there is definitely an environmental cause when you are at an age where your hormones run riot, going by my own experiences of going from a co-ed school to an all boys school.

Personally I am actually for co-ed schools more than single sex schools because I feel that co-ed schools allow students to socialise better during a significant part of their lives at that time. There are plenty of people who would disagree with me though - in recent years some single sex post-primary schools in Strabane and Dungannon have merged to become co-eds and in particular the latter had some quite hostile opposition to it but it still went ahead. From my own experience being in a co-ed secondary school was that the girls actually did better than the boys academically. When I went to an all boys school after my GCSE's the difference was a bit unnerving - the atmosphere was more demanding and less relaxed than my old school and there was much more of a macho culture involved. I just couldn't settle, it affected my studies and one night I just broke and said "screw it!"

1 - Have lived and worked with kids in France and Scnandanavia and lived in Germany. The kids in all those coutries ar more "childlike" and less fshion conscious that the irish kids *I put that down to less American culture influence as well, though)
"Open-minded" was perhaps the wrong word to use - I meant more tolerant and less likely to hone in on differences in clothing.

2 - I would agree, but that's not waht I said.

3 - Kind of agree, but the environment, in my opinion, should be kept as natural as possible (i.e. not artifical - you don't ge men-only or women-only offices) leads on to point 4 which I agree with. There is mroe to a school than just academic results.

Shenshen · 11-09-2011 2:54pm

lawhec wrote: »

Anyone who dismisses peer pressure when it comes to debating the interests and lifestyles of children, especially teenagers, has their head buried in the ground.

I most certainly wouldn't dismiss it, far from it.
But I do think that trying to take away all manifestations of it in an attempt to make everybody "just the same" is not going to address the problem, it'll just hide the problem from sight for outsiders.

The limited experience I've got with school uniforms leads me to believe that rather than doing away with the competition of who looks best, it actually makes it far more acute by focusing it on all aspects not covered by the uniform policies.
It suddenly becomes an issue of who's got the coolest stationary, school bags, coats, shoes, hairstyle, lunch money/lunch and in the most worrying cases it can even turn into a competition on who is the skinniest.

Using uniforms to try and take peer pressure away from children is a bit like a doctor treating a symptom without even looking for the cause.

Crann na Beatha · 11-09-2011 3:03pm

This post has been deleted.

Resi12 · 11-09-2011 3:04pm

I would but I would also like to see the uniforms maybe done up a bit, the one's in England and America are much nicer. Actual blazers and everything.

People with their "BUT THE KIDS WANT DESIGNER" stuff make me laugh. You can say no and unless your child is attending private school then that is not an issue. Every kid wants designer something or other regardless.

When your 16, Juicy Couture is/was a big thing. Then you graduate and see it's tack. You do not have to buy designer clothes to look nice at all.

Mike 1972 · 11-09-2011 5:17pm

hondasam wrote: »

NO because there would be to much competition on who was wearing what everyday.

Because teenagers/schoolkids NEVER meet up outside of school ?

TheDriver wrote: »

imagine the burden on parents when Johnny comes home looking for expensive gear because everyone has a tommy shirt on.

Imagine they might actually need a new word to add to their vocabulary.

cobear wrote: »

We had a few non uniform days in my school

Kinda rendering the whole thing rather pointless -no ?

cobear wrote: »

and there was definitely competitions and judging looks over what people wore

And you reckon this would still be the norm once the novelty wore off ?

Noo wrote: »

I finished 6th year wearing the same uniform I wore on my first day in 1st year, best damn investment my mother ever made!

You were the same height at the end of sixth year as the beginning of first year ???

Helix wrote: »

but would you not end up spending as much, if not more, on other clothes in place of the uniform over the course of the year if they didnt have the uniform?

Given that theyre going to be changing into "other clothes" as soon as they get home..........

cobear wrote: »

but it's unbelievable the amount of stress they save you - not having to decided what to wear every morning.

Stress -seriously ????

However did you cope after you left school given that you never had the opportunity to develop the life skills to cope with such an -er stressful routine ?

jester77 wrote: »

No need to be spending silly amounts on these exclusive jumpers.

The Problem: Kids under pressure to wear branded clothes -tis terrible Joe
The Solution: Make them wear OUR brand ?

lawhec wrote: »

Personally I am actually for co-ed schools more than single sex schools because I feel that co-ed schools allow students to socialise better during a significant part of their lives at that time. There are plenty of people who would disagree with me though - in recent years some single sex post-primary schools in Strabane and Dungannon have merged to become co-eds and in particular the latter had some quite hostile opposition to it but it still went ahead.

Most people have come to the realisation that segregating kids by skin colour is not a particularly good idea.

A few people are starting to come to the realisation that segregating kids by their (parents) religion is not much better.

Yet segregating kids by gender is still viewed as fine and dandy ?

Helix · 11-09-2011 5:52pm

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

whereas girls are more intellectual and rational.

HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!

starlit · 11-09-2011 6:11pm

Yes and No. While a student you'd wish they were but when you aren't you think they shouldn't. Its better to conform to just a uniform and same uniform to all students as well as being provided by a school approved school bag provided by the school as well, less competition who has the nice clothes/bag or eliminates competition and showing off!

Less pressure for parents. Though costly you get more wear out of a uniform than some clothes so best to stick with a bit of order, less likely to end up going to school with drastic dress sense at least everyone be wearing the same thing.
It's how they wear the uniform will vary the sense of style for students! They can be creative like that!

I be more in keeping that girls wear trousers than skirts though or at least get the option of wearing a trousers even if they are hideous but get to wear a trousers that be suitable enough for school but would still be considered stylish. The long skirts are awful though but then again a short skirt isn't classy in between is fine so think trousers be a better option all round! At least the kids wouldn't be wasting time in the morning getting ready - 'what I wear!?' unless the parents pick it out that's fine but if its them picking it out think the uniform is a better option! There is a time and place for certain clothes like.

The only time to choose own clothes is when kids are grown up and choose so for college/work at least be more sensible than teenagers! Fair enough teenagers choose what they want to wear outside school but there are certain clothes that aren't appropriate for certain ages that should only be applicable to adults.

Down with the nunnery clothes but up with the right to wear a uniform makes for a better classed and sophisticated educated society!

hondasam · 11-09-2011 6:13pm

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Because teenagers/schoolkids NEVER meet up outside of school ?

I'm sure they do but what has that got to do with wearing a uniform at school.

phasers · 11-09-2011 6:32pm

I think that crested uniforms should be made illegal tbh, but I think uniforms should be kept purely because it's a pain in the arse trying to choose an outfit first thing in the morning every morning, especially when you're a hormonal 14 year old having a fat day.

holystungun9 · 11-09-2011 6:34pm

of course not. how will i know which kids are sexier?

Richard Dower · 11-09-2011 6:52pm

Children should be abolished.

Should school uniforms be abolished ?

Comments