Why is Diversity Important? At this ruling, the school district appealed. Private schools determine which uniforms their pupils wear. These reforms encouraged schools to implement uniform codes which were similar to other schools. Girls who choose to wear the pinafore, especially those attending co-ed schools, usually wear shorts under their pinafore to allow for carefree movement as the skirt only covers up to the knee.
Des Moines Independent Community School District , the Court ruled that upon entering school, students do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech. Internationally, there are differing views of school uniforms. In the Australian state of Queensland, Ombudsman Fred Albietz ruled in that state schools may not require uniforms.
In Scotland, some local councils that have responsibility for delivering state education do not insist on students wearing a uniform as a precondition to attending and taking part in curricular activities. In the Canady v. Bossier Parish School Board lawsuit in , a Louisiana district court ruled in favour of the school board because it did not see how the free speech rights of the students were being violated due to the school board's uniform policy.
Even though the plaintiff appealed the decision, the Fifth Circuit Court also ruled in favour of the school board after implementing a four-step system that is still used today. Firstly, a school board has to have the right to set up a policy. Secondly, the policy must be determined to support a fundamental interest of the board as a whole. Thirdly, the guidelines cannot have been set for the purpose of censorship. Finally, the limits on student expression cannot be greater than the interest of the board.
As long as these four policies are in place, then no constitutional violation can be claimed. In the Forney Independent School District of Forney, Texas in , the school board decided to implement a school uniform policy allowing the students to wear a polo shirt , oxford shirt or blouse in four possible colours, and blue or khaki pants or shirts, a skirt or jumper.
While there was some flexibility with shoes, certain types were prohibited along with any sort of baggy clothes. The parents of the Littlefield family requested that their son be exempt from the policy, but were denied. In response, the Littlefields filed a lawsuit against the school district, under the pretenses that this uniform mandate infringed on their rights as parents to control how they brought up their children and their education.
They even went as far as to cite an infringement on religious freedom, claiming that opting out of the uniforms on the grounds of religion allowed the school to rank the validity of certain religions. Before trial, the District Court dismissed the case, so the family appealed. Ultimately, the Fifth Circuit Court ruled that the students' rights were not being violated even though the claims presented were valid.
They ruled that school rules derived from the education would override the parents' right to control their children's upbringing in this specific situation. As far as the religious freedom violation accusations, the court ruled that the policy did not have a religious goal, and thus did not infringe on religious freedom rights. In , Liberty High School, a school of the Clark County School District in Henderson, Nevada , implemented a uniform policy of khakis and red, white or blue polo shirts.
A junior by the name of Kimberly Jacobs was suspended a total of five times because she wore a religious shirt to school and got cited for uniform violations. Her family sued the Clark County School District under the claims that her First Amendment rights were being infringed upon and that the uniform policy was causing students to be deprived of due process.
The plaintiff's requests were for injunctive relief, the expunging of suspensions from Jacob's school record and awarding of damages. The injunction was granted to the family meaning that the school could no longer discipline her for breaking the uniform policy. At this ruling, the school district appealed.
The next court ruled on the side of the school district as it determined that the uniform policy was in fact neutral and constitutional, and it dismissed the claims of the plaintiff. In , a Nevada public elementary school of the Washoe County School District decided to add the school's motto, Tomorrow's Leaders embroidered in small letters on the shirt.
In response, Mary and John Frudden, parents of a student sued the school district on the basis of it violating the 1st Amendment. The court ultimately dismissed the case filed by the Fruddens over the uniforms. However, the family appealed, and two years later, a three-judge panel of the 9th U.
Circuit Court of Appeals heard the case. The court ruled to reverse the previous decision of dismissing the case, and also questioned the apparent policy for students that were part of a nationally recognised group such as Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts who were able to wear the uniforms in place of the school ones on regular meeting days.
The 9th circuit panel ruled that the school had not provided enough evidence for why it instituted this policy, and that the family was never given a chance to argue.
There are several positive and negative social implications of uniforms on both the students wearing them and society as a whole. One of the criticisms of uniforms is that it imposes standards of masculinity and femininity from a young age. Uniforms are considered a form of discipline that schools use to control student behavior and often promote conventional gendered dress. They are also often required to have their hair cut short.
Some critics allege that this uniform is associated with the dress of a professional business man, which, they claim, gives boys at a young age the impression that masculinity is gained through business success. Skirts are seen by some critics as a symbol of femininity because they restrict movement and force certain ways of sitting and playing. Uniforms often start to increase in popularity around middle school in the United States , when students begin going through puberty.
Uniforms can be seen as a way to restrict the sexualization of girls rules on hems of skirts, no shoulders. Uniforms take the focus away from sexuality and focus it on academics in a school setting for girls. Miniskirts have been very popular in Japan, where they became part of school uniforms, and they came to be worn within the Kogal culture.
In some cultures, the topic of school uniforms has sparked a multitude of controversies and debates over the years. In the United States, the implementation of school uniforms began following ten years of research indicating the effectiveness of private schools. Some state-school reformers cited this research to support policies linked to private and Catholic school success. However, within the Catholic school literature, school uniforms have never been acknowledged as a primary factor in producing a Catholic school effect.
This is based on the assumption that uniforms are the direct cause of behavioral and academic outcome changes. Another area of controversy regarding school uniform and dress code policies revolve around the issue of gender. Nowadays, more teenagers are more frequently "dressing to articulate, or confound gender identity and sexual orientation ", which brings about "responses from school officials that ranged from indifferences to applause to bans".
Instances include the following: Although not all schools in the United States are required to wear school uniforms, the United States is slowly adapting the use of school uniforms.
In some areas uniforms have become essential due to the poverty level that the schools reside in. Stephanie Northen of The Guardian wrote that school uniforms are less controversial in the United Kingdom compared to the United States and are usually not opposed on free speech grounds.
Advocates of uniforms have proposed multiple reasons supporting their implementation and claiming their success in schools. A variety of these claims have no research supporting them. Some of these pros include the following: Advocates believe that uniforms affect student safety by: Kathleen Wade conducted an experiment to see if bullying and gang presence was higher in uniform or non-uniform schools. The research was done with multiple schools where she gave a questionnaire to both students, and faculty to see if there was a significant difference.
Her results showed that bullying and gang presence significantly decreases with students wearing school uniforms. Wearing uniforms leads to decreased behavior problems by increasing attendance rates, lowering suspension rates, and decreasing substance use among the student body. Proponents also attribute positive psychological outcomes like increased self-esteem, increased spirit, and reinforced feelings of oneness among students to wearing uniforms. Additional proponent arguments include that school uniforms: Currently pros of school uniforms center around how uniforms impact schools' environments.
The opposing side of uniforms have claimed their ineffectiveness using a variety of justifications, a variety of which have research supporting them. Some of the cons to school uniforms include the following legal, financial, and questionable effectiveness concerns: Clothing is viewed as a mean of expression — making all students wear the same clothes or limit them to what they can wear can disrupt their sense of identity. One of the main controversies can lie within Dress Code Policies vs.
In short, the purpose of a school uniform is to promote team spirit and discipline, and enhance equality among all students. Though uniforms have helped to wipe out the discrimination meted out to the weaker section, critics have a different story to say. According to them, uniforms have no such great impact on the mindset of students. These standardized dresses have not helped to remove any barriers and are adding costs to the parents. Introduction of school uniforms was meant to inculcate a work-like environment, generate discipline, and help students to concentrate, so as to excel in academics.
Benefits of School Uniforms. Facts Against School Uniforms. Facts About School Uniforms. Why Students Should Wear Uniforms. Why Students Should not Wear Uniforms. School Uniform Pros and Cons. Popular French Last Names. Effects of Human Trafficking. Pros and Cons of Mass Media. Pros and Cons of Globalization. Social Issues in the United States. Positive Effects of the Media. Effects of Black Market on the Economy. Ways to Raise Money for Charity. Pros and Cons of Capital Punishment.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Democracy. Why is Culture Important? Education Problems in Public Schools.
The first school district in the United States to require all its K-8 students to wear uniforms was the Long Beach Unified School District, CA, in Jan. Later the same year, California Governor Pete Wilson signed a bill officially allowing schools to implement mandatory uniform policies. A school uniform is a uniform worn by students primarily for a school or otherwise educational institution. They are common in primary and secondary schools in various countries. School uniform is a practice which dates to the 16th century in the United Kingdom. It is believed that the Christ's Hospital school in London in was the first school to use a uniform for its students.