Subscriber OnlyOpinion

The Debate: Are school uniforms an instrument of positive discipline, or an outdated concept?

Creating school conditions for happy pupils and achievement is a multifaceted project that can include uniforms, but we also prioritise inclusion, and these garments can be at odds with that goal

Uniforms are a rather easy, visible and low-stakes way to cultivate an element of social cohesion and much-sought-after 'harmony'. Some claim they are a great leveller, ensuring there is no differentiation between the haves and the have-nots, but this ignores the fact that life is crueller than that, and that uniforms alone cannot mask this. Photograph: iStock
Uniforms are a rather easy, visible and low-stakes way to cultivate an element of social cohesion and much-sought-after 'harmony'. Some claim they are a great leveller, ensuring there is no differentiation between the haves and the have-nots, but this ignores the fact that life is crueller than that, and that uniforms alone cannot mask this. Photograph: iStock
Finn McRedmond
Jen Hogan
Tue Aug 06 2024 - 07:00

Finn McRedmond: Yes – uniforms impose discipline, equalise the social realm, and remind children that they will not always get their way

The Michaela Community School – in North West London – subjects its students to a collection of Dickensian rules. Pupils must walk in single file, eat in pre-assigned lunch groups of six, not talk in the corridors, and must follow a punishingly strict uniform policy. Katherine Birbalsingh, the school’s principal, believes discipline is the key to social harmony. Without it, teenagers can be volatile, rude and exclusionary.

Social harmony is a worthy enough end in itself. But it is also a route to academic success (hard to achieve in an unharmonious school environment). We can refer back to the Michaela Community School here: one quarter of the pupils receive free school meals but it sends students to top universities in numbers far higher than the national average. In short: this is a subversion of demographic expectations. It is self-evident that Michaela School is doing something right.

We should not overstate the role of school uniforms, of course. Creating the conditions in school for happy pupils and academic achievement is a multifaceted project. But uniforms are a rather easy, visible and low-stakes way to cultivate an element of social cohesion and that much-sought-after “harmony”. Everyone wears the same thing every day, and whoever fails in this simple task is correctly reprimanded. As disciplinary overtures go, it hardly gets more straightforward than that.

[ School uniforms costing parents €211 on average at secondary level – survey ]

The uniform – mine was bottle green and tartan – is also the great economic equaliser. School is a socially competitive and frequently hostile place; teenagers establish hierarchies quickly and tyrannically. Clothes have always been an avenue for status signalling – a kind of crib sheet for people to understand who belongs in what social category. It is much more difficult for schoolchildren to taxonomise one another into different economic groups if you remove personal style from the equation. And, any bid to defang teenagers’ worst and most exclusionary instincts seems worth implementing. The logic is so patent it is hardly worth stating.

READ MORE

All too often, the uniform argument falls to woolly notions of self-expression and the importance for teenagers to develop and cultivate distinct personality. Sure, of course it is needlessly haughty to preclude teenagers from all self-expression. But I suggest we have a rather low opinion of teenagers if we think their only means of cultivating their personality is via the clothes they wear. Students can express themselves with language, through the books they read, the instruments they play, the subjects they are drawn to. The case that uniforms limit self-expression reveals a very shallow understanding of what self-expression is (and the guises it can take). And besides, children can wear what they like on the weekend.

Smashing up long-held social convention – when there is no good reason to – is not a good or honourable instinct

Schoolchildren may dislike the uniform – declaring it uncomfortable, limiting, or uncool. But there are plenty of things we deny teenagers no matter their preference (as a group they have not historically possessed solid nor reliable ideas about what is best for them). And, reminding them of the unfortunate fact of life – that we all have burdensome responsibilities, whether we like it or not – seems a worthwhile lesson. If it can be conveyed with something as low-stakes as a school uniform, then that is all the better.

All of this is just a roster of utilitarian functions of the uniform: they impose discipline, they equalise the social realm, they do not actually impose strictures on adolescent personality, they remind children that they will not always get their way. But like all things worth defending, the uniform has greater value than just these practical things. There is value inherent to tradition. And smashing up long-held social convention – when there is no good reason to – is not a good or honourable instinct. In a world and educational realm utterly upended by technology (and subject to the whims of mercurial government policy), some vestiges of the past are worth preserving.

Jen Hogan: No – these expensive, restrictive, cumbersome, overly formal, ridiculously priced garments are an outdated concept

There was a time I could have been convinced of the merits of school uniforms. Tradition will do that to you, you see. Blindly following without questioning... (see also the practice of giving primary school children homework). I wore a completely impractical wine and grey uniform in primary school, moving to an equally impractical but snot-green coloured one in secondary. And no ever questioned the cumbersome pinafores, skirts, stiff formal shirts, ties and hard black shoes that we were to learn and play in. Or the gaberdine coats that offered no heat or protection from the rain. Or the knicker shorts for PE that struck fear into teenage girls at all times, but especially when we had our period. Because that was just the uniform.

Fast forward some years and I can even see the merit in not having to plan what clothes to put on my own children each day. But that’s largely where it stops. That’s because expensive, restrictive, cumbersome, overly formal, ridiculously priced, impractical uniforms are an outdated concept.

[ More than one in four parents in debt to cover back-to-school costs ]

As the back-to-school period beckons, Barnardos has published a report which reveals that just 30 per cent of parents find back-to-school costs manageable, with 81 per cent saying their children’s school did not offer an affordable uniform option.

That is in spite of a Department of Education circular issued in 2017 detailing measures to be adopted by schools to reduce the costs of school uniforms and other costs.

We lament the challenges our children are facing with fundamental movement skills, and dress them in clothing that is totally unsuitable for yard time play, or even for cycling to school

“All elements of a school uniform should be purchasable from various stores” and “only ‘iron on’ or ‘sew on’ crests should be used”, the circular states. Yet here we are, seven years later, with many parents still having to fork out excessive amounts of money for crested jumpers, tracksuits, ties, polo shirts and coats, because schools haven’t taken these measures on board. There’s little regard for the fact that children have a tendency to lose, rip and outgrow these expensive items on a regular basis.

But there are other considerations in addition to the cost. “Be authentically you, but look the same as everyone else,” we tell our children and teenagers as we force them into stiff collars, slacks and skirts – clothes wholly unsuitable for children. This is the sort of formal dress that went out with the pandemic as we adults moved to far more comfortable offerings. There is no room for self-expression, or authenticity.

We lament the challenges our children are facing with fundamental movement skills, and dress them in clothing that is totally unsuitable for yard time play, or even for cycling to school. And we justify it with a claim that uniforms are a great leveller, ensuring there is no differentiation between the haves and the have-nots, ignoring the fact that life is crueller than that, and that uniforms alone cannot mask this. Nor do we acknowledge that uniforms can even be indicative of status, in some demographics in particular. Or that even with uniforms, we still have a massive problem with bullying in our schools.

[ Secondary schools relying on parents to prop up finances, says managerial body ]

We talk about inclusion, and yet have formal uniforms that are totally at odds with it. For children with additional needs who struggle with sensory overwhelm, itchy jumpers, stiff collars and hard shoes can be particularly challenging. Offering an alternative, such as allowing them to wear a tracksuit while other children wear their formal uniform isn’t inclusion – it’s othering. Children need more than lip service.

And let us not forget our senior students. Grown men and women, in their final year at school. Allowed to vote or go to the pub at the weekends should they so choose. Sitting in class in uniform during the week. “You’re adults now. Take responsibility for your lives,” we tell them, as we infantilise them with these stiff outfits.

It’s time for common sense to take the wheel.