Do you ever find yourself torn between two sides of an argument?

I do not understand how it got to the stage that 200+ pupils had to be sent home. Either they had a uniform policy or they didn't. I think the head has lost a bit of respect in this.

Whatever the reason for wearing school uniform (I hated mine) it should never be a reason to send 200 students home. After all the children are at school and should be cared for in this time. You can't just send them home - some may not have a key to the house- before school is over.

In Germany there is no school uniform except of course jeans, and some students look terrible but it has no effect on how they feel about their school.

MargaretX When I was around 14 I became very good friends with a German girl who'd moved to England and came to my school. She was educationally miles ahead of me and everyone else and was very level headed and committed to her work. She told me that in Germany there was no school uniform and she thought it was really odd how important it seemed to be to people in the UK.

I liked my school uniform - even the beret! My friends thought I was a real hoot.

To answer the question - yes! Often.

I do think though, that people often dig themselves into a hole trying to defend the indefensible because they have stated a position and are then unwilling to concede that the 'opposing' point of view has some merit.

There a number of big issues where I think, as a general principle, a certain action or law or behaviour is what should obtain, but then individual cases and nuances make me not so sure.

With regard to uniform, it doesn't really bother me one way or the other, however, I always told my children that if they confirmed in matters of uniform, were polite and respectful of everyone, obeyed the school rules - even the ones they thought were silly - when and if there was a really important issue that needed to be addressed, they, (and us as parents) would be much more likely to be listened to. A pragmatic approach which was effective on the one occasion when it was needed.

To answer the question, yes, all the time. The world/human affairs/whatever does not come in black and white. It's very often quite grey.

So to speak.

Now I've read the OP actual post. I've had the impression that teachers want their pupils to argue—that is, engage in debate—while my kids have been at school. The only negative criticism I ever heard from DD2's teacher about her was that she didn't argue enough in class and that her views would have benefited other pupils. My response to that was that it was the teacher's job to find ways to benefit pupils and if DD2 wanted to stay quiet in certain circumstances, that was a valid choice. I got a funny look. Don't think the teacher understood at all.

I bet that's not the kind of arguing you mean though, eloethan!

I "answered back" at school when I though there was an injustice too. I never got the impression my teachers objected to this.

I don't know the whole story about this apparently silly HT, but on the surface it does sound as if she has decided to have a battle and the pupils have decided to fight back.

Are their absences counted as authorised? If not, who pays the fine? Not the parents who sent their kids to school, I hope.

Good points Eloethan I support any accessibly priced school uniform to prevent schools becoming fashion shows. However I suspect we all have rolled up the waistbands of skirts etc.

I wonder just how petty this head teacher was being. It sounds as if she had lost the plot about enforcing uniform rules.
Staff should build in a little leeway for tolerated variation. They know very well that all children will try to push at boundaries. Good staff should manage this.

I think it is very healthy for us to have conflicting view about various issues If we don't not we are probably going to be very bigoted. There are no simple solutions to most issues.

As for challenging teachers it is quite possible and reasonable to do it courteously with a good reasoned point, but not all people can do it in that manner without being aggressive or abusive.

Is the HT new at the school, and/or did the previous head not enforce the school uniform rules? That might explain why so many, especially if it's a big school.

So, my feeling is, if there's a school uniform and rules around that, then I would expect the staff to make sure the rules are followed. And as a parent I would do my bit too.

My only experience of school and "adapting" the uniform rules here, was my 14 year old niece taking so long to put her makeup on in the mornings, that she'd also be "adapting" her response to the school start time.

In response to the question, yes

I rarely find myself torn.
If I am, one side normally wins against the other pretty soon if I listen to some people's ideas about it, that I trust.

I always knew my own mind, even as a child apparently.
And I only have 1 thing I am really unsure whether I chose right or not.

I can be a bit of a pain to those around me because of my certainty about many things.

Is God allowed to be mentioned on Gransnet?
I have yet to work out whether it is polite to mention Him.
The Bible is clear on certain things, so long as the issues were the same 2000 years ago.
School uniform, not so much!

Eleothan, it seems you aren't alone in having the ability to see both sides of many arguments.

I watched the HT interviewed, and sadly, wasn't impressed by her. When challenged, quite appropriately, and not in a hostile manner about her view that pupils complying to uniform rules = academic success, she simply didn't respond convincingly. the interviewer made comparisons with Germany, where academic success is higher than in the UK, despite the fact pupils choose to wear what they like. My impression was this is a school that's been in special measures, and the head has been there over a year. She said the uniform policy is no different now than before she arrived, but is being enforced properly.

I've mixed feelings about uniform, I see the benefits of trying to avoid competition about dress but that seems to happen anyway. Children who come from families where there's more disposable income have more expensive footwear, shoes etc. They'll also have washing machines that work, and changes of uniform, so they don't look grubby by the end of day 2 as many of the poorer children I've worked with do.

Our local 6th forms are within the school premises, with pupils allowed to wear what they like. They seem to like jeans, jackets and jumpers. That'd do for me throughout school.

When my children were at primary school, the school had a determinedly non-uniform policy. There were rules governing what was - and was not acceptable school wear.

I seem to remember no jeans, track or sports shoes, no T shirts with slogans or pictures. It was the 1970s. The idea was that as children go through life they will need to learn that at times they will need to dress appropriately for the occasion and school is a good place to start.

A few years after they started school. It introduced a uniform policy. the Headmaster explained that although it was, educationally, one of the best schools in the area, parents judged a school by whether it had a uniform or not and the lack of a uniform was affecting school enrolments. As soon as the uniform came in enrolments went up!

Both DC were privately educated at secondary level. DS school had a policy a bit like his primary school; no official uniform supplier, broad rules - grey trousers and a pastel shirt, blazer or sweater and a school tie.

DD's school had a rigid uniform policy and one supplier, who was very expensive, that is where subversion started. To begin with none of the approved Clark's shoes fitted DD, she has very wide feet so she had to have shoes (Clarks) but in another style. I found some bottle green gabardine that exactly matched the school colour, I bought enough for 7 years of school skirts and we made the simple A line skirt that was the uniform rather than paying an extortionate price to the school supplier.

She remained suitably subversive throughout her secondary education.

Yes - I often find I can see both sides.

But not on school uniform. I think it is an irrelevance and has the potential to be a focus for conflict, as has happened in this case. Dug herself into a hole indeed MiceElf and she needs to get back to the real priorities.

I like Flickety's "suitably subversive" as this sums up one of my DDs when it came to uniform - I used to say nowt, but stifling a chuckle the while!

All the time- perhaps because I come from a very multi-cultural background- multi nationalities, multi religions, multi types of education, politics, etc, etc. Much 'easier' to see things from one point of view if you've been brought up in a 'mono' background- you just can't 'fall back onto the norm' of your family, because there just isn't one. Can be uncomfortable at times- but makes life a lot more interesting.

Belonging is very comforting- but it also means excluding too.

Mishap, I confess she was following in a family tradition, I too was 'suitably subversive' in my day. Still am.

To answer the OP - yes, often.

However, I can see the merit of a school uniform. DC attended a fairly liberal primary school with no uniform. Whilst DS was fine and would wear what I put out for him, DD1 was fairly opinionated and at the age of 6 would argue each morning about what she was and wasn't going to wear to school. Some children seemed to compete with fashionable clothes and shoes or expensive trainers even in those days (which we could not afford). When other parents and I suggested to the headmaster that a uniform may be a good idea, he was vehemently opposed to the idea. As he was unmarried without children of his own he had obviously never had a battle with an intransigent six year old girl at 7 o'clock in the morning.

Dictating certain suppliers is not, I think, in the school's remit and as long as the pupils are tidy and wearing a 'recommended' uniform I think that is a good idea.

I understand that the majority of pupils returned to that school on the same morning dressed in what could be loosely described as 'school uniform'.

I confess I do not remember any competitive dressing when my children were at primary school. The school laid down broad parameters about what clothing was, or was not acceptable and the children and parents accepted it. No uniform, but not a free for all.

I always think that the idea that school uniform hides economic inequality is naïve. Shoes will always give a child's economic status away. Nicely fitted Clarks shoes v cheap trainers from the market. School uniform replaced as soon as it is beginning to be worn out or outgrown or uniform that was cheap to begin with and then in use despite increasing shabbiness and being outgrown.

DGC attend a school whose catchment area is divided equally between a council estate with many children from impoverished or deprived homes and an area of interwar semis. Just looking at parents outside school tells a lot. None of the parents, to my knowledge, are wealthy but the difference between those who struggle and those who have professions and can afford to buy a reasonable house and feed and clothe their children without economic distress is visible.

On a slightly flippant point, a secondary school in this area had a policy of shoes, not trainers which I fully support having seen the price of the 'right' trainers. Predictably, many pupils turned up wearing expensive trainers claiming they were their only footwear. Ok said the Head Teacher, no problem, and set up a system whereby trainers could be swapped for plimsoles ( those £2.50 a pair ones that used to be sold in Woolworths), and staff would meet the offenders at the door and swap the trainers. Surprisingly, nobody wanted to wear the uncool plimsoles and miraculously all found they did have the correct footwear after all.

It was the era when very expensive trainers first came in. Mine had properly fitted Clarks or Startrite shoes, but some of the boys had very expensive trainers which DS always envied. He would rather have gone without than wear M&S or Clarks trainers!
I was glad that the primary school they subsequently moved to and the secondary school both stipulated 'no trainers'.

I wonder if this is the school on tv [Educating Yorkshire]? If not, one very like it. I would tremble to be a teacher there.The girls were caked in make up, had bighair, and bad attitudes.I do think uniform is a good idea, but relaxed and comfortable uniform, girls should not have to wear a skirt, and a shirt and tie is certainly uncomfortable to wear.My own school uniform was horrendous. My DGS wears any grey trousers, a white polo shirt under a fleece top.The fleece has the school logo on it.They can wear their own coats in Winter.So cheap to buy , comfy, and easy to wash and dry.Without seeing this programme, it's hard to comment .

What a brilliant idea Gill57. I remember those days, as a teacher and as a mum. The Head announced in assembly before the Summer hols that rules re not wearing trainers, even the black or brown ones, after the hols. He insisted there would be no exception and that kids coming onto trainers would be asked to go home - the option you mention would have been much better. Letters were sent home too, insisting on the fact.

One 'notorious' family of course sent both boys in very expensive black trainers, with a note saying she was broke and could not afford both, being on her own, etc, etc. We Senior teachers met and one of us went home to discuss the issue and that we had a special fund- so to go and buy sensible leather shoes for the boys and the school would pay for them She sent a bill for 2 pairs of Timberland, at £90 each (in the 80s!!!) saying the kids would be emotionally traumatised to wear non label shoes.

What do you say?

Answering the OP, yes, all the time! I think the case of the headmistress is interesting because the news reports said the school is or has recently been in special measures and has had several heads in the last five years. Sounds to me as though she's picked the wrong battle. One advantage of no uniform is that you can easily identify your own clothes - my DDiL recently mentioned the rate at which school uniform sweatshirts go missing, even though name-tagged. I can see the point of rules about footwear because of the trainer issue and the dangers of heels, wedges, sling backs, flip flops and so on. But as for the idea that uniform is smarter! Have the people who believe that ever seen the kids on the way home?