Perspectives on school uniforms as a social issue

School uniforms were once the trademarks of private and parochial schools. Nevertheless, the number of public schools that have either adopted or are considering imposing uniforms has been increasing steadily over the last decade. Many large public school systems are adopting either mandatory or voluntary uniforms as part of a set of policies aimed at improving school safety. According to a 2000 National Association of Elementary School Principals, approximately 10% of the respondents reported that their school had a uniform policy, and a similar percentage was considering adopting one. The main argument that principals offer in support of the uniform policy is that the latter only brings benefits to the students. The same survey showed that principals who had adopted this policy in their schools noticed that students were able to focus more on their studies. Another finding was that student attendance improved. (NAESP Survey in Eppinger 2001).

As with any major issue, there are both pro and opposing views. In most of today's public schools students are allowed to wear whatever they want as long as it is not indecent or provocative. In reality, this is a very frail limit, and what is considered indecent by some can be perfectly acceptable by others. The restraints are mostly theoretical because in practice, dying one's hair pink or wearing visible body piercing for example, are widespread fashion trends that one is bound to see in most American schools. Supporters of the uniform policy claim that such behavior is not conducive to learning and that schools must be based on iron discipline and morality. Others, who claim the uniform policy infringes upon students' individuality, argue that personal style is merely a form of expression. In order to formulate a valid opinion, it is important to know all the facts whether in or outside the school system. Thesis: This paper strives to illuminate both points-of-view by analyzing their arguments in respect to the uniform policy.

The main argument of the supporters of the uniform policy is that adopting uniforms from elementary school to the final year of high school would increase student safety by limiting gang membership and activity. Supporters argue that standardized school clothing diminishes the rate of violent acts and that students are more inclined towards learning and following school rules. They claim statistics are positive and encouraging. For instance, they could resort to the statistics published by Education Week regarding the drastic decrease in school assaults recorded by the Long Beach Unified School District in California since they implemented a system-wide mandatory uniform policy in 1994 (Knowles: (http://speakout.com/activism/issue_briefs/1080b-1.html).They also claim that school intruders would be more easily recognized (Forbes 1994 in Eppinger 2001).

Another argument is that uniforms would reduce peer pressure among students. This argument is based on the idea that in schools, and especially in high school, there is a tendency for clothing trends to lead to the appearance of fashion cliches that may put pressure on the students who either cannot or do not want to conform to them. Also, there is the financial aspect which cannot be overlooked. With the high cost of clothing, children who come from economically challenged families are prone to feel marginalized and discriminated against by their peers. On the other hand, the cost of uniforms is more affordable and it diminishes the pressure of buying expensive clothing.

Standardized clothing for children and teenagers is, according to the supporters of the uniform policy, conducive to learning. Children who wear uniforms are more focused on learning. Supporters also believe that students who worry about their outfit tend to become distracted and lose interest in studying which eventually leads to poor academic results and low attendance. On the contrary, students who wear uniforms are more keen on academic pursuit and do not spend time and energy planning and choosing their clothing for school, but on studying and sleeping which results in overall better academic performance. They also claim that the latter is directly influenced by a sense of belonging to a group, a team which is generated by wearing a uniform in school.

There are also voices who oppose the uniform policy. Their strongest argument is that standardized clothing leads to conformity which hinders individuality and creativity. They argue that by wearing uniforms, students would all be forced into one mold when in fact schools should support diversity, and encourage each child to express his/her creativity including through clothing.

As far as the economic argument, reality tends to disagree with the supporters of uniforms since children would still need clothing for outside school. Also, the problem of peer pressure remains as children have friends and are subjected to the same pressure to conform to certain standards as far as fashion trends and outfits.

Most importantly, violence cannot be reduced by introducing mandatory uniforms. The contrary effect might be achieved in the sense that gangs would still exist, and would probably benefit from standardized clothing since they would be harder to identify by parents and teachers. Furthermore, counselors and educators would not be able to address problems that might be troubling students and whose best visual clue could be an extreme change in clothing. As a matter of fact, self-chosen clothing can illustrate feelings and can be a signal as to potential problems especially in the case of teenagers. This advantage educators have would be annihilated in the case of uniforms (King 1998 in Eppinger 2001).

Dennis L. Evans, now director of credential programs in the Department of Education, University of California, Irvine, has over 20 years of experience as a high school principal. He argues against the uniform policy because "Young people are not 'uniform,' and we cannot categorize them as academically inclined or not merely by looking at their attire. The cheating scandals at U.S. military academies clearly demonstrate that uniforms have little to do with creating an environment conducive to genuine scholarship and academic achievement." (Evans: 139).