The discussion I linked is quite long, and unsurprisingly contains lots of points of views. I wasn’t really meaning to replicate it here, but, in summary:
The Sutton Trust is adamant there is no robust evidence that uniforms improve academic performance. If they are wrong and this evidence exists, I’d love to see it.
Finnish schools have no uniforms, yet are considered among the best in the world. Finland too far and different? OK, how about the Honeywell primary, in Balham. They have a dress code but no specific uniform. Is there any specific evidence that behaviour and academic performance are in any meaningful way different from those of the nearby schools, serving a comparable demographic, which do have uniforms?
I am not against all uniforms or dress codes. I think they can remove one reason for bullying, and relieve pressure off the poorer kids to follow the latest fashion trends – all the more important here, a much more unequal society than in Finland and other Nordic countries.
However, I am against capricious rules enforced anally.
Some rules put financial pressure on some families for no reason. Why be forced to buy black trousers from the designated shop? Why not buy cheaper ones elsewhere – how different can they be? Why not sew the logo on but be forced to buy clothes from that one shop?
Some rules and/or their enforcement may be inadequate for weather conditions. There are schools where pupils were punished for wearing the school-chosen coats indoors. Is being cold a crime? Or schools which confiscated non-compliant coats and forced children to walk home with no coat. Or schools where the summer uniform is too hot. Yes, heatwaves never last the whole summer but, still, why sweat like a pig?
Some rules are simply capricious. In fact, the huge disparity in uniform rules is a strong indicator of how subjective the matter is, and how there is no universally accepted notion of what a neat and tidy uniform should look like.
Lining up pupils in the rain to check whether trousers are the right shade of grey? Does wearing pantone cool grey 11 vs 11p (
https://www.pantone.com/color-finder?q=grey ) have a massive impact on… what, exactly, and why? Is 11p the colour of gansters and 11 the colour of mature, well-behaved professionals?
I can understand punishing children who show up with broken denims, t-shirts with offensive text, etc. But how is checking for the right shade of grey a good use of anyone’s time? Any school that does it is a huge red flag for me because, like I said, it suggests they have their priorities upside down.
Another problem is that any person or institution which imposes useless, capricious rules loses credibility. How can pupils believe that other rules are there for a reason if they were punished for wearing the wrong shade of grey?
We’d do our children no favour bringing them to passively accept rules “because rules are rules”. There is nothing wrong with asking why, and a lot wrong with not asking it. Note that this has nothing to do with brining up spoilt brats: parents can still be very strict on behaviour, academic results etc, yet bring up their children to ask why. If everyone followed the ‘rules are rules; brigade, we’d still live in the middle ages.
And, before anyone brings up the workplace: most workplace dress codes are way more relaxed than those of most schools. Life is full of things which may not be fair and make little sense, and one must pick his battles – true, very true. What one should never do, though, is switch off his brain and say ‘rules are rules’.
I strongly hope these things are exceptions. But they do happen, and I find it perfectly reasonable to try to research the matter to make sure that, to the extent possible, our child doesn’t end up in one of these schools.
Re-reading this, I realise it’s gone quite off-topic. Maybe open another thread if you want to continue?