Tracksuits To Become Standard School Uniform?

welbeck

OP sounds like rage bait.

Correct, welbecky! It worked in your case, didn't it?

I am struggling to think of any jobs which require smart uniforms. Nurses don't dress like maids of all work anymore, they wear scrubs. Our local police wear loose trousers and flack jackets and fire and ambulance crews wear something similar. Maybe the armed forces wear smart uniforms still.

When GD started at the local grammar school, they could wear either skirts or trousers.

No way did she want to wear a skirt when she was 11.

Fast forward to her being 18 and in the Upper V1, or whatever it’s called nowadays.

She now wears the kilt-like pleated uniform skirt, (which I always liked), reasonably short but not too short, with I think navy tights.

Looks so smart and sensible.

(Why now, is it because the Sixth Form lads prefer to see the girls in skirts, I wonder?)

🤷‍♀️

Some schools have gone the other way. Our local comprehensive has very strict uniform rules. Blazers to be worn at all times. Plain dark coloured coats, no logo or pattern. They now have to pull up their trouser legs in registration to show that they are wearing plain black socks with no other colour or pattern. This seems ridiculous if the socks cannot otherwise be seen.

Sigh. If schools adopt the tracksuit on a very large scale then all the big supermarkets and clothes outlets will soon be selling the bottoms as cheaply as possible, and local outlets the top with a badge on asap. They wont cost anymore than the current polyester trousers and sweat tops/polo tops.

Mollygo

MartavTaurus

And also school tracksuit bottoms in Marks for £14 - £20 a pair depending on size. I don't consider that expensive. They come in 3 different colours.

Astitchintime
£14 - £20 for kids tracksuit bottoms?! That’s IS expensive, particularly when they’d need more than one pair and had siblings needing them too! Get real MartavTaurus!

Yes

MartavTaurus
Did you read a pair? That's £7 each. The price of M & S trousers are exactly that too, so no difference. I expect the likes of Asda are even cheaper.

That’s a load of bull! 🐂
A pair of trousers or a pair of tracksuit bottoms each mean one item. If you mean the cost for two, then say so.
Going out to buy a trouser or a tracksuit bottom woukd be weird.

Okie Dokie
A pack of two pairs, that's two individual items of clothing! So as little as £4 or £5 a garment if you purchase the pack in some supermarkets.

Allira

ViceVersa

No idea where people get the notion that a tracksuit would be expensive. We're not talking about brand labels here - many schools don't allow those in any case. As someone else has pointed out, you can get tracksuit bottoms very cheaply in most supermarket clothing ranges.

No doubt, if this was adopted everywhere, they would have to be specific to each school, the correct colour, complete with logo, obtainable from the school uniform suppliers at three (or even four) times the price of M&S, Tu, George etc!

Not if you just stuck to a school sweatshirt with plain coloured bottoms, which you could get anywhere. That's pretty much what most of the schools around here have in any case. Sweatshirts and polo shirts - you can buy them with the school logo on or just have plain ones - then just plain coloured trousers or tracksuit bottoms.

MartavTaurus

Certainly no logos needed on bottom gear whatever the choices. No one is likely to walk round in their knickers or pants, (hopefully), other than changing for PE, so logos only need appear on jumpers, polos, sweatshirts.
Personally I found logos very useful on school trips too, especially when taking pupils abroad, as you can spot them more easily, (getting up to no good!).

GSs school introduced logos on skirt waistbands I assume as a way if avoiding the rolled up skirt and backside on show. Uproar about the sexism so it was introduced for trousers as well.

Chestnut

I think at the age of 16-17 I wanted to look good and would have been mortified having to go out in a baggy old tracksuit. So just wondering what the girls think about this.

At my school in sixth form you could wear a twin set in your house colours with a school skirt. Might have been trendy when introduced jn the 50s but by the mid 60s no one wanted to wear a twin set with or without pearls.

Chestnut

I think at the age of 16-17 I wanted to look good and would have been mortified having to go out in a baggy old tracksuit. So just wondering what the girls think about this.

If you look about and see what girls in late teens and early 20's are wearing, trackie bottoms are very on trend indeed atm. They don't need to have the gathered ankle, or course, for a school uniform.
Really, is it very different from the polyester trousers in uniforms atm?

I think uniforms are great, all in same no discrepancy between pupils etc.
But!!
Since seeing and going through the ritual of seeing my gson who has adhd getting dressed every morning it is like a military operation. If his tie is not performing the correct way, if his sleeves are not the right length, if his shirt collar is sticking in his neck.....the list goes on.

But if track suits available then yes good idea but maybe if they are certain colour n possibly with smart logo on and good quality and decent polo shirt then maybe.
Then of course you have the trainer debate. Colour style logos.etc

Witzend

Part of me thinks at least they’d be an improvement on uniform skirts so short (probably turned over at the waistband) that you can almost see the girls’ knickers. Not to mention the sight of them on fat girls with legs to match - and no, I really don’t care if this is a ‘fattist’ comment.

DGD's school insists on trousers for girls but they are a soft type of pull-on trousers, a kind of cross between leggings and trousers. They look very comfy. Available from school uniform supplier, of course!

I think at the age of 16-17 I wanted to look good and would have been mortified having to go out in a baggy old tracksuit. So just wondering what the girls think about this.

ViceVersa

No idea where people get the notion that a tracksuit would be expensive. We're not talking about brand labels here - many schools don't allow those in any case. As someone else has pointed out, you can get tracksuit bottoms very cheaply in most supermarket clothing ranges.

No doubt, if this was adopted everywhere, they would have to be specific to each school, the correct colour, complete with logo, obtainable from the school uniform suppliers at three (or even four) times the price of M&S, Tu, George etc!

What does what people wore for school decades ago have to do with what children should wear nowadays?

I never understand why people use their own experiences from a very different time to justify their opinions on what happens today. Things change, for better or worse. Why should clinging to the way things used to be be an end in itself?

Family life is different now - more mothers work, and don't have time to launder pleated skirts and iron cotton shirts. Newer fabrics allow clothes to be machine washed and dried - a luxury many older people wouldn't have had. There are fewer constraints on what people wear in general (how many of our grandmothers wore jeans, for instance?), and fewer people put surface 'respectability' before comfort. Girls' and boys' clothing is less rigidly defined, which gives girls more freedom to play. We are not living in the 1950s any more.

Part of me thinks at least they’d be an improvement on uniform skirts so short (probably turned over at the waistband) that you can almost see the girls’ knickers. Not to mention the sight of them on fat girls with legs to match - and no, I really don’t care if this is a ‘fattist’ comment.

MartavTaurus

And also school tracksuit bottoms in Marks for £14 - £20 a pair depending on size. I don't consider that expensive. They come in 3 different colours.

Astitchintime
£14 - £20 for kids tracksuit bottoms?! That’s IS expensive, particularly when they’d need more than one pair and had siblings needing them too! Get real MartavTaurus!

Yes

MartavTaurus
Did you read a pair? That's £7 each. The price of M & S trousers are exactly that too, so no difference. I expect the likes of Asda are even cheaper.

That’s a load of bull! 🐂
A pair of trousers or a pair of tracksuit bottoms each mean one item. If you mean the cost for two, then say so.
Going out to buy a trouser or a tracksuit bottom woukd be weird.

My understanding from the article is that this was the preferred choice of parents.

No idea where people get the notion that a tracksuit would be expensive. We're not talking about brand labels here - many schools don't allow those in any case. As someone else has pointed out, you can get tracksuit bottoms very cheaply in most supermarket clothing ranges.

I was always an advocate of a good smart school uniform, but at the end of the day, what they wear makes no difference to the way that learn and the cost of a blazer et al can be a burden for some parents. If this is less of a financial burden so much the better. I’m sure DGS would have hated having to wear a blazer and tie at secondary school. It was hard enough to persuade him to wear trousers and not shorts even in the winter. His school, one of the top ten secondary schools in the North of England, had a sweatshirt and polo uniform. In the sixth form you could wear what you liked.

Things change. Look at the armed services. Everyday working uniform for men and women now is camo battle dress or fatigues. I’m told it’s very comfortable, and it’s unifying. No skirts for women unless for formal occasions. What we would have given to be free of the strictures of the two piece uniform, shirt, detachable collars (a real pain) and tie! We all threw our hats in the air when shirts with collars were issued!

Our high school had beret’s as essential, to be worn as we travelled to and from school. We folded them neatly to measure as little width as possible, then used hair grips to pin them on the back of our heads. Hair then back combed to cover as much of the beret as possible.
As other posters have pointed out, other countries don’t have the British devotion to school uniforms and their children’s behaviour isn’t affected.

Certainly no logos needed on bottom gear whatever the choices. No one is likely to walk round in their knickers or pants, (hopefully), other than changing for PE, so logos only need appear on jumpers, polos, sweatshirts.
Personally I found logos very useful on school trips too, especially when taking pupils abroad, as you can spot them more easily, (getting up to no good!).

Language is always changing and adding new words to the vocabulary, otherwise we would all still be speaking 4th century Anglo-Saxon.

AS I have pointed out. In the past, even now schools set pointless rules that best students honed their skills in getting round. These students were usually the ones that proved the most successful in later life.

theworriedwell

So trackiedaks is just a modern made up word? Wouldn't have been acceptable at my grammar school with a strict anti slang pro uniform policy.

You forgot the laughing emoji 😂

How many logos do you need to feel you belong? Off the top of my head GS has logos on jumper, polo shirt, trousers, rain jacket, all PE stuff. Bit over the top. Girls also have them on skirts.