Yes: School attire prevents distractions

Theft, competition, jealousy diminished

by Brittany Dail



Khaki slacks, polo shirts, knee-length plaid skirts and formal shoes could replace this year’s Rocawear tee, North Face jackets and snow boots to be considered next year’s most trendy school style.

All those who would enjoy a few extra minutes of sleep would enjoy wearing uniforms. Waking up is already hard enough; choosing clothing merely adds to the morning stress. With uniforms, students would not have to rush; they would already know exactly what they were going to wear.

Theft is a huge problem in our school. Students have had many of their valuables stolen. Most people who steal are those who cannot afford to buy the things that they take, like Coach purses, an Abercrombie & Fitch tee or a fresh pair of Jordans. If we had uniforms, there would not be an A&F tee or a fresh pair of Jordans in sight to steal.

Having uniforms in school would also minimize teasing, which would in turn, increase self-esteem. Less fortunate students, who cannot afford to buy the most expensive, most trendy clothes, would begin to feel better about themselves. It would be impossible to criticize someone’s else clothing if everyone wore the same polo shirt and slacks.

Some students even skip school to buy new clothes and shoes so they can “floss” their new style around their friends. But if we had uniforms, “flossing” would not be the case. When the new Jordans came out before Christmas break, students either skipped half of their classes or did not show up for school at all. Uniforms would also help them pay more attention in class, instead of talking about their name brand clothes.

It’s not like students could not spice up their uniforms. They could express their personality through hairstyles, accessories and attitude. They could even add a few pictures and stickers to their lockers to help. In school, students should be learning, not focused on dressing like supermodels and rock stars.

***

No: Uniforms harshly restrict individuality

Attempts at conformity fail to end prejudice

by G'Ra Asim



School uniforms are nothing more than a quick fix for a host of problems that are intrinsic to both public and private schools. Uniformity for uniformity’s sake is nothing to be proud of, and upon closer examination, few arguments in favor of uniforms withstand scrutiny.

Proponents of school uniforms have suggested that they are cost efficient for parents and create a sense of equity because children of even the most extreme ends of the socioeconomic spectrum are coerced into dressing alike. These supporters believe that uniformity in dress would significantly reduce bullying and the pressure to wear name brand clothing.

Sadly, the reach of schoolchildren’s prejudice extends far beyond the difference between Converse and Nike; if children cannot form cliques based on clothing, they are just as likely to discriminate based on height, weight, hair color, race, age or academic performance. Whether the purchase of a uniform would be less expensive than a casual wardrobe is immaterial, as parents would have to purchase the uniform in addition to casual dress for the weekend and summer.

Proponents of uniform use have cited increased pride and safety as positive evidence of their legitimacy. The attitude communicated when a student is forced to wear a uniform fosters more exclusivity than pride, servility than equity. The school uniform is more a tool of social control than anything else; as minds are being shaped to think homogeneously, acceptable forms of dress are used to reflect it.

Pride in one’s self constitutes a level of individuality that is rigidly restricted when conformity of dress is a demand. Pride in one’s nation constitutes cognizance of its values, two of which are championing diversity and freedom of expression without fear of retribution. Uniforms in public schools certainly don’t foster either of these kinds of pride.

Perhaps the most dangerous outcome is the implication that students must be made uniform to respectfully co-exist. If institutions of learning are designed to prepare youngsters for the adult world, such an implication is unacceptable. The individuals pupils will encounter in the workplace will scarcely reflect that conviction.

In the words of Jesse Jackson, “America is not like a blanket--one piece of unbroken cloth, the same color, the same texture, the same size. America is more like a quilt--many patches, many pieces, many colors, many sizes, all woven and held together by a common thread.”