Archives for November 2008

This paper was written in 1996 to give you a bit of perspective to its potential relevance today.

Whether it is a suit and tie at the office, a sports jersey during the big game, an apron for cooking, or fatigues for boot camp, uniforms have been a way of life for millions of people throughout the centuries. People wear uniforms whether they are required to or not and most of the time it is beneficial. It would make sense then to apply this practice to the public schooling system where the effects would be and have been proven to be beneficial. While many argue this to be a violation of constitutional rights; their freedom of expression is jeopardized, others say school is not about expression. Mandatory uniforms in public schools is about reducing the cost of clothing for families, slowing the amount of clothing related crimes, and improving the academics and achievement levels of students.

“LEGAL BEAT: COURT LETS PUBLIC SCHOOL REQUIRE UNIFORM,”

reports Margaret A. Jacobs, Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal. According to Jacobs, a Judge in Arizona recently ruled against the complaints of a parent who fought one of the school district’s policies that require students to wear uniforms. This is the first time that this issue has been upheld by a judge without allowing the parent’s denial. In Miami, Dallas, and other parts to eh country, many schools are pushing the same agendas, hoping to either mandate, or at least encourage the students to suit up in common attire.

What the could be considered ‘common attire?’ When most people think of uniforms, they probably remember scenes from movies such as “TAPS”, “Dead Poets Society”, and even the latest Sharon Stone film, “Diabolique”, all of which are movies that portray young boys in dark blue or black crested jackets, ties, white collared shirts, dress slacks, and dress shoes — rather unappealing. What schools are asking for is not an upper class recognition of formality, rather a sense of unity and pride through a common medium.

At All Saints Episcopal Day School in Phoenix, a typical parochial school, students wear uniforms. For the boys, white polo-style shirts with a school symbol above the heart, dark blue corduroy slacks with a black or brown belt, black or brown penny loafers or dress shoes, and a haircut above the ears is the required attire. The girls wear long socks that approach the knee, below-the-knee length plaid skirts or jumpsuits, white blouses, buckle shoes in black or brown, polished to perfection, and no pierced ears or clip-on earrings. During P.E. class, everyone wears the same clothing which consists of navy blue shorts, tennis shoes, and a white T-shirt and white socks. At All Saints, the students are required to provide their own uniforms which has raised the issue of cost. If schools did require students to ‘suit’ up, who would pay for it? It would make sense that the school districts would be responsible for providing the clothing, but that would mean raising some taxes. It is obvious that the parents should pride the clothing for their own children.

Clothing for school can be expensive, especially with the demand for students to impress their peers with the latest fashions. According to Philip Walzer, a columnist who writes for The Virginian-Pilot, a clothing store in Baltimore that specializes in uniforms for schools touts very reasonable prices for both boys and girls. Pants are priced as low as $7 and no higher than $13. Shirts, fitted for both boys and girls, are only $5 (4). While the average pair of Levi’s 501 jeans demands a whopping $25 to $30, it is obvious that uniforms are easier on the pocketbook. What about those who don’t have a pocketbook to begin with? Many parents maintain that school administrators neglect the fact that there are many families that can barely afford to eat, let alone afford uniforms for their children. Parents also believe there are additional costs involved that aren’t as apparent. They say that most kids won’t wear their uniforms after school, forcing them to purchase clothing that uniforms were intended to replace. According to the ACLU, the cost of one uniform for a girl is approximately $35 and there isn’t enough financial help (Jacobs, 2). With these problems at hand, certain individuals and groups have found ways to provide assistance to families who cannot afford to purchase uniforms for their children.

In Phoenix, Arizona Denis Wagner, Staff writer for the Arizona Republic reveals the existence of a private organization called the Stardust Foundation, headed by Jerry Bisgrove, president of Stardust Development, a company that purchases, reconditions, and resells land to prospective builders, purchases clothing for students at Phoenix Prep who otherwise could not afford them (1). One of Oakland’s districts has also found financial aid through a private organization willing to pay $15 to low income families with a maximum of two children and $30 for families that have three or more children. This fails to console Ann Brick, an ACLU attorney fighting against the prospect of mandatory uniforms. She says, “a single girl’s uniform costs $33 to $34 and the assistance is inadequate.” According to Jane Bond Moore, an Oakland Unified School District attorney, “the district will provide additional assistance to parents who are homeless or have other special problems.” (Jacobs, 2).

Long Beach, the only city in the United States that mandates uniforms in all of its public schools is still searching for a way to provide financial aid. According to state law, the Long Beach district is required to find ways to provide financial aid by finding clothing stores and charity organizations that are willing to offer discounts and even free uniforms to low income and homeless families (Jacobs, 2).

Even with finical aid from private and public organizations, there still won’t be enough money to support every student in America to attend a uniform school. We then would have to turn to additional taxes to help foot the bill.

“if it means that teen-agers will stop killing each other over designer jackets then our public schools should be able to require their students to require school uniforms,” Bill Clinton stated in an article by Alison Mitchell in a February issue of The New York Times (1). If this is true then by all means increase our taxes. If it means we’ll have our children and not lose them to violence and chaos caused by the clothing worn these days then it should definitely be enforced. Many disagree, however.

William Green of Phoenix disagrees with the policy enforced by Phoenix Prep. He believes his 13 year-old son should not be required to wear a special uniform. Green served in the armed forces where he wore a uniform because he had to and he protested when students wore jeans and other inappropriate clothing to high school. Like many others, Green believes this to be a constitutional issue, claiming that students are losing their right to free speech and essentially freedom of expression. His son, Justin, has since changed schools where he is allowed to wear whatever he wants (Jacobs, 1). What Justin doesn’t realize is the value of these uniforms. Unfortunately, many students like Justin don’t care about the values.

A commentary by Kathleen Parker in a February issue of USA Today shows us some interesting facts about the effects of uniforms on students both individually and as a whole. Her primary interest lies within the Long Beach Unified School District, the first school district in the United States to require uniforms at ALL of its public schools. As more and more schools begin to require uniforms there will be a national decrease in problems with personal identities, an overall improvement in exam results, a higher attendance rate, and a better attitude. Some kids welcome the idea. If children are wearing the same clothing, at the same price, from the same source, none of them will know whose parents have more money. None of them will feel ashamed to approach ten groups of kids who have better clothing and live better lifestyles because there won’t be a defined line. If there isn’t a group to join, nobody will want to join it and nobody will be left out (Parker, 1).

As a result, students will get along, reducing the amount of clothing related violence. A disheartening statement is made in a U.S. News & World report article titled “Your Jacket or your life.” The author says, “in cities across the country, kids are wearing clothes to die for.” In Chicago, Calvin Wash died because he wore a starter jacket worth nearly $100. Other kids are dying because of the shoes they wear…shoes that represent major sports stars and usually cost more than the kids could ever afford legally (14). The determining factor behind all of the violence is the clothing. Kids pay way too much attention to clothing, often sacrificing their academic standings.

Many students aren’t interested in hearing about the positive effects of uniforms because most of them are wrapped up in their identities — too caught up trying to be a part of a certain crowd. Some are even alienated because they aren’t meeting the standards of their peers and are usually pushed into situations that aid in developing disciplinary problems. Because someone’s appearance clashes with that of another, a wall of tension is built forcing the child to resort to violence, or simply making him;/her feel like an outcast, damaging their self esteem (LaPoint, Holloman, Alleynek, 32).

A total disregard for the students’ seniors is often the result of select clothing that depicts a negative theme, reflecting on the horrors of life as glamorous, attractive, and cool. Not only that, but students are stereotyped by the clothing they wear, being placed in certain groups by even their teachers, nearly forcing them to lead lives they would otherwise choose not to lead. (LaPoint, Holloman, Alleyne, 32).

Maureen Dowd writes in an article, “School Uniform Blues” in a January 1996 issue of The New York Times about Charles Lewis Marsh, a 17-year-old who died waiting for a rid when he was attacked by two kids who wanted his jacket. In Jet, a monthly publication that targets the African American population, it is made clear that kids across the country are dying because of what they wear. The consequences of wearing expensive jewelry, “team” jackets such as “Raiders,” starter jackets, high tech high top sneakers, and hats embroidered with sports teams are staggering. In fact, they are dying because of these luxuries.

In Detroit, a $135 jacket claimed the life of a student. Another dies while wearing a pair of Nike’s. Old style leather jackets that fighter pilots wore during battle in WWII have driven the deaths of a group of teens in Newark.

The City of Angels found a young girl, age 6, dead from fatal head injuries inflicted by a gang because of her red sweater. Many of the country’s schools are enforcing the idea of a dress code to hinder the violence (Will Changing, 16).

President Clinton, who believes we need to put “discipline and learning back in our schools” ordered literature to be sent to all of the United States’ school systems which contains information for each district on how they can approach the issue of mandatory uniforms. “;If it means that the schoolrooms will be more orderly, more disciplined,’ Mr. Clinton said, ‘and that our young people will learn to evaluate themselves by what they are on the inside instead of what they’re wearing on the outside, then our public schools should be able to require their students to wear school uniforms'” (Mitchell, 1). Not only will the school rooms be more orderly, the streets will become safer because students will gain a higher level of education. The graph below illustrates the improvements in Long Beach from the 1993-94 school year through the 1994-95 year:

{graph not available}

Due to the benefits of wearing uniforms in public schools, financial, disciplinary, and academic, it isn’t fair to say policies that require uniforms are in violation of children’s constitutional rights since a solid education, one that will be had as a result of mandatory uniforms, is far more important than how a student looks, it is only obvious that everyone attending school should wear uniforms.

The foremost important goal in school should be learning. When there is a sense of unity, there is also a sense of pride, and morale is boosted, causing an intense focus on the same tasks, resulting in a better organized and accomplished institution both physically and mentally.