Sidwell - Dress Code?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The "student dress " discussion is interesting. I personally was very turned off when we toured schools by the student attire at GDS and Sidwell. I think sweats, torn clothing, worn and faded t-shirts, etc... are appalling attire for school. We did not end up applying to those schools but (of course) for much larger reasons, although that certainly fed into and from those reasons (philosophy, values, etc...). I think messy dress = a messy mind and messy behavior. To me, its disreputable and disrespectful. There is a time and a place for such clothing and school is not it (imho and I know many differ, which I respect). I found that the top schools (starting at N/PK) that seem to follow the "messy = messy" "neat = neat" idea/philosophy are St. Patrick's, WIS, and Beauvoir.

I am not denigrating others' choices, but I did want to say that I think the attire issue results naturally from pedagogical perspectives - that is, they reflect philosophical teaching principles and, as such, wider philosophical beliefs and personal values. Quite a bit can be determined by attending to student attire while touring a school.

That idea naturally leads to reflections on school uniforms and what they imply: hiding the true nature of the school/student or reflecting the deeply held belief that students must blend in fully and not demonstrate individuality. Since most NYC schools have uniforms, unlike Washington schools, and have higher name value and Ivy League acceptance rates one must wonder....but anyway.... I digress... I have just always found the NYC uniform thing odd when compared to WDC.

PP, OP here, thanks for this post. You really captured the concerns that I had when I saw the students' clothes. BTW, to address another PP's post, I was not suggesting that students wear designer "togs" to school - just clean. presentable clothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: BTW, I won't cross Sidwell off the list just beacuse of the clothes that the kids wear.

That's too bad, as it sounds like Sidwell might not be the right fit for you. You shouldn't try to force it just because of reputation of the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP--I don't mean this in an unkind way--I think you may end up preferring Beauvoir!

The kids at Beauvoir, esp. after 1st grade - dress just as casual......maybe the Pre-K and K-ers come a little more dressed up - because their moms and dads can still get them to wear the cute stuff.....! Once they hit 1st grade - they want to wear jeans and T's and whatever is comfortable!

[Anonymous]

On the flip side, I see some schools with ridiculous uniforms that are so impractical. This is no executive job. These are kids on a playground. I take issue with girls wearing skirts in freezing weather (while the teachers wear pants), boys with long ties that are choking hazards, stiff collars buttoned up, and hard leather dress shoes to skid all over the play ground.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:On the flip side, I see some schools with ridiculous uniforms that are so impractical. This is no executive job. These are kids on a playground. I take issue with girls wearing skirts in freezing weather (while the teachers wear pants), boys with long ties that are choking hazards, stiff collars buttoned up, and hard leather dress shoes to skid all over the play ground.

I agree!

[Anonymous]

It's due to the Quaker testimony of simplicity. What you are is not dictated by what you wear. I know I'll get comments that "that doesn't apply in the real world" but it is a Quaker testimony and therefore why the only dress code is to not wear torn or overly revealing clothes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Fuggs vs. Uggs is an issue at Sidwell too.

Yuck! Made in China with slave labor. Quaker values I think not.

[Anonymous]

OP, don't feel bad about having a reaction to how the kids at Sidwell or any other school are dressed. Whether or not a school has a dress code generally ties into the school's educational philosophy in some way, and it is just one of many pieces of information to weigh in the school choice process. Kids are quite resilient and generally adapt very quickly to dress codes (or lack thereof) so I wouldn't worry too much. But as an educator at a school that has a dress code and occasionally has days off from the dress code, I generally prefer the status quo so I don't have to teach a child wearing pajama bottoms (with or without UGGS). Good luck with the entire process -- I'm sure you and your child will end up with a school where your child will be happy.

[Anonymous]

So funny that the Fuggs vs Uggs issue is raised here because when I saw the subject of dresscode at Sidwell I wanted to share our experience. My daugher is in K and was a bit upset one day because another girl had told her that her Uggs were fake. The kids may dress down but trust me most of them know labels and love to brag about what they have. I assume this happens at most privates. We still love the school and we just tell our daughter that it doesn't matter what other people think of your clothes and to be yourself. I have no problem with her wearing polka dot pants with a stripe shirt if thats what makes her comfortable. Don't judge a school by the way the kids dress!!!!!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's due to the Quaker testimony of simplicity. What you are is not dictated by what you wear. I know I'll get comments that "that doesn't apply in the real world" but it is a Quaker testimony and therefore why the only dress code is to not wear torn or overly revealing clothes.

From experience with a few area public and private schools, I'd say that the urge among pre-teens and teens to look sloppy is nearly universal. Perhaps Sidwell doesn't clamp down on the sloppiness as much as some other private schools, for which I give them credit. Self-expression is important. But let's not deceive ourselves, there's still plenty of competition even in the run-down clothing arena (FUGGS vs. UGGS at DC's private, whether those sloppy boys' shirts come from that skateboarder's label, I forget his name). So I guess I'm not convinced that it's all down to quaker values, unless the sloppy clothes actually come from a thrift shop, and/or there's also no competition among the kids in other areas -- vacations, cars, et cetera.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP--I don't mean this in an unkind way--I think you may end up preferring Beauvoir!

The kids at Beauvoir, esp. after 1st grade - dress just as casual......maybe the Pre-K and K-ers come a little more dressed up - because their moms and dads can still get them to wear the cute stuff.....! Once they hit 1st grade - they want to wear jeans and T's and whatever is comfortable!

LOL - I have one of those older kids at the LS at Sidwell who refuses to wear dresses or skirts and I smile when I see the little girls in PK/K with bows and tights on... sigh, only t-shirts and pants these days for my daughter! Makes PE days easy and after school sports but just once in awhile dressing up would be nice! But I have learned to fight the fights that matter... she loves going to school and wears what is comfy! The nice Hanna Andersson stuff I bought last fall still has its tags on...she says even the fleecy top is 'too fancy' oh well!