Where do we mount on a propagandize uniform debate? – Sunday Post
September 13, 2016 - School Uniform
HEAD clergyman Matthew Tate sparked a charge final week after promulgation 50 pupils home from Hartsdown Academy in Kent for not wearing a scold uniform.
Some relatives were mad while others suspicion he was “doing a right thing”.
It’s a discuss that has raged during schools for years – yet is a intelligent income on uniformity, or is a particular proceed cold for school?
Somewhere in an aged card box in a dim sideboard lies a photograph, twisted during a edges and lonesome in dust.
It’s a propagandize print display a 1980s initial year category organised in 3 neat rows.
Pupil after student is embellished out in a intelligent black blazer and black and white striped tie. All solely one.
At a behind stands a gangly twerp with a haircut that looks some-more like a outcome of a critical attack than a revisit to a barber.
He’s wearing a white T-shirt with a trademark “Minolta Cameras” opposite a front, underneath a wonky black and red anorak.
That twerp is me.
So we have personal knowledge of being a child who didn’t go down a propagandize uniform route. we was that scabby soldier.
I don’t consider we ever wore a propagandize tie. Blazers brought me out in hives.
But somehow wearing Dunlop “green flash” gutties instead of glossy black brogues didn’t lead me into a life of contemptible disaster and destitution. we have never been to jail or spiralled into a drug hell. we possess my possess home and teeth.
Don’t get me wrong we get where a headie down in Kent is entrance from, and we sympathise with some of a arguments in foster of propagandize uniforms.
It’s good that pupils demeanour smart, yet possibly or not it instils a legendary “school pride” is open to debate. I’m not wakeful of any justification or studies that infer this.
Nor have we come opposite any reports that support a oft rolled-out evidence that carrying a sweeping uniform process stops bullying. Bullies will bully, that’s what they do – it’s in a pursuit description. If they don’t brag a child about his trainers, they’ll find another excuse.
It’s also common to hear a refrain, “Ahhh, yet it prepares them for a universe of work”.
That’s excellent if they’re off to be a soldier, nurse, military officer or other uniformed professional, yet many workplaces don’t send their staff home if they’re not wearing EXACTLY a same suits and ties or overalls.
I’m peaceful to accept that if kids were to stone adult to a propagandize gates wearing glittery hotpants and china boob-tubes or cowboy outfits or onesies, it could be a bit distracting.
But we don’t buy a suspicion that firm consent is a best approach to ready teenagers for a large far-reaching world.
There contingency be a happy medium. Ask kids to dress smartly and appropriately, yet let them demonstrate themselves. Most employers these days wish people with celebrity and individuality, not diminutive robots (unless a employer is a producers of Star Wars, in that box being a diminutive drudge would be a large advantage).
And if we wish explanation that being loose about uniforms doesn’t reason we back, I’m essay this while wearing a hedgehog-skin loincloth, wellies and an huge tip hat.
It’s all about being individual, after all . . .
EVERY year, it’s a same. Kids go behind to propagandize after a summer holiday.
Most of them demeanour good in their new uniforms.
They competence not like it. But they get on with it, anyway. There are always some, though, who consider it isn’t good adequate for them.
The ones who get incited away, or told they can’t continue to wear a trainers/trousers/short skirts as they don’t approve with uniform policy.
Then they stand adult in a media, with their capricious parents.
Looking put out. Hard finished by.
Boo hoo, my heart bleeds for you.
This week it’s been headmaster Matthew Tate in a banishment line.
OK, he’s taken a hardline stance. Sending a student home since her flat, lace-up boots were suede and not leather does seem a small extreme.
But a indicate is Mr Tate is a lerned clergyman who’s reached a top.
These people are experts in a children’s education.
If they contend that they trust a despotic uniform process helps to foster a certain atmosphere for learning, prevents bullying and improves examination results, shouldn’t we let them get on with it?
Instead, we have a approach of relatives bleating about a misapplication of it all and melancholy to repel their small darlings from school.
Oh gie’s peace.
Schools emanate uniform guidelines. It isn’t a guessing game. How do so many relatives get it so wrong? My theory is there’s utterly a lot of provoke energy by a kids going on.
And relatives give in for assent – that is cracked on a initial day of term.
OK, kids have always attempted to pull a boundaries. we suspicion we was utterly a insurgent by carrying my tie tangle too big.
And my groovy suede Hush Puppies were navy, not black.
But if I’d been sent home? There’s no approach my relatives would have corroborated me adult instead of a school.
Something seems to have changed.
These relatives certainly don’t realize a emanate isn’t usually about uniform.
It’s about scheming kids for life.
And they could only be in for a startle when they get into a workplace and realize there are manners there, too.
Then they won’t have Mummy and Daddy to arrange it out for them.
A crony told me schools in Finland frequency have uniform, and their formula are improved than ours.
Hmm. They substantially don’t have a miss of cash, uninterrupted contrast and exploding schools, either.
Wearing uniform is a pain in a neck. But it teaches we there are some-more critical things to concentration on in life.
Darn it. Why didn’t we realize this when we was during propagandize messing around with my tie knot? My examination formula would have been amazing. we could have altered a universe if my boots had been black not blue!