School uniforms

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Uniforms in public schools are for poor urban kids. MCPS parents wouldn’t want anything those kids have!

They cost more.

No they don't. They can be cost effective and less would buy fast fashion. Better yet if uniforms could be bought from sensible soured materials on a mass scale.

I have a kid who doesn’t care about brands so it’s more expensive if you have to buy through specific stores. If you don’t like how your kid dresses do something about it.

Here's that poster who thinks on a micro level. Could having uniforms help reduce clothes going into landfill? Just a thought outside the "if you don't like how your kid..." blah blah blah

No, and I donate, give to friends or sell the clothes. It’s not wasted. I would not dress my kid in someone else’s worn out uniforms.

Yet you're fine to give to friends or sell, presuming that is clothes that have already been worn, to friends. Hmmm...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A few years ago there was an article in the NYTimes about mandatory uniforms at NY schools in the 70s or 80s.

It was a leveling socially. Everyone's grades picked up, as did attendance. Then for some reason, the mandate was dropped and yes, the grades went down and so did attendance.

I don't have a link to this to hand, but I'm sure you can find it on google / the NYTimes website.

You must be at a rich school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Uniforms in public schools are for poor urban kids. MCPS parents wouldn’t want anything those kids have!

They cost more.

No they don't. They can be cost effective and less would buy fast fashion. Better yet if uniforms could be bought from sensible soured materials on a mass scale.

I have a kid who doesn’t care about brands so it’s more expensive if you have to buy through specific stores. If you don’t like how your kid dresses do something about it.

Here's that poster who thinks on a micro level. Could having uniforms help reduce clothes going into landfill? Just a thought outside the "if you don't like how your kid..." blah blah blah

No, and I donate, give to friends or sell the clothes. It’s not wasted. I would not dress my kid in someone else’s worn out uniforms.

Yet you're fine to give to friends or sell, presuming that is clothes that have already been worn, to friends. Hmmm...

And? I get great deals. So, no we don’t need used clothing but most is in like new condition so happy to pass the better stuff on to friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A few years ago there was an article in the NYTimes about mandatory uniforms at NY schools in the 70s or 80s.

It was a leveling socially. Everyone's grades picked up, as did attendance. Then for some reason, the mandate was dropped and yes, the grades went down and so did attendance.

I don't have a link to this to hand, but I'm sure you can find it on google / the NYTimes website.

I always laugh when folks think that uniforms are leveling socially. They are not. There are other ways in which class difference will avail themselves. The shoes kids wear, their bookbag, the trips for break, etc.

The uniforms do not level socially they just remove some distraction from students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few years ago there was an article in the NYTimes about mandatory uniforms at NY schools in the 70s or 80s.

It was a leveling socially. Everyone's grades picked up, as did attendance. Then for some reason, the mandate was dropped and yes, the grades went down and so did attendance.

I don't have a link to this to hand, but I'm sure you can find it on google / the NYTimes website.

I always laugh when folks think that uniforms are leveling socially. They are not. There are other ways in which class difference will avail themselves. The shoes kids wear, their bookbag, the trips for break, etc.

The uniforms do not level socially they just remove some distraction from students.

The entire NYtimes article demonstrated that exactly that, it was socially leveling and academically boosting. You can argue with the. NYTimes all you like and their research and ALL the schools which took part. Personally, I find them more compelling than your whining.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I went to school in England and wore a uniform. My kid was in mcps thru 2nd and is now in private. They have a uniform. It’s a polo shirt with school emblem and then any khaki or navy pants they like. I get her pants from the thrift store, the shirts are about $20 each. It’s not expensive to me, including the PE uniform it’s about $100 every 2 years.
I’d love to see all kids in uniforms, itll never we happen here though.

In England state schools (that means public here, but public schools in England are private) require expensive uniforms with very specific requirements. It’s not just a polo shirt and trousers of a certain color it’s a full blazer, dress shirts, ties, skirts, shoes that meet certain requirements (formal, black, leather) and a detailed PE kit. There are school colors and scarfs and even requirements about socks. For girls there is also a summer uniform that is distinct from winter. You are expected to buy your uniform from a specific supplier and it is VERY expensive. The blazer alone for one kid is around $100 at my nieces school. I know that because I paid for the uniform because it was completely out of reach for my single mum sister.

Unlike here, there are no provisions for families who can’t afford the uniforms and there is also no tolerance of anything that doesn’t meet the dress code. I had a cousin who was sent home in the midst of exam season for wearing the wrong color socks.

Not all schools are like this but very many are and schools have got stricter on uniforms in the past few decades. The high school I attended didn’t have uniforms in the 80s and 90s, for example but now requires the full blazer and tie (which is essentially business attire).

No. Definitely not a good idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to school in England and wore a uniform. My kid was in mcps thru 2nd and is now in private. They have a uniform. It’s a polo shirt with school emblem and then any khaki or navy pants they like. I get her pants from the thrift store, the shirts are about $20 each. It’s not expensive to me, including the PE uniform it’s about $100 every 2 years.
I’d love to see all kids in uniforms, itll never we happen here though.

In England state schools (that means public here, but public schools in England are private) require expensive uniforms with very specific requirements. It’s not just a polo shirt and trousers of a certain color it’s a full blazer, dress shirts, ties, skirts, shoes that meet certain requirements (formal, black, leather) and a detailed PE kit. There are school colors and scarfs and even requirements about socks. For girls there is also a summer uniform that is distinct from winter. You are expected to buy your uniform from a specific supplier and it is VERY expensive. The blazer alone for one kid is around $100 at my nieces school. I know that because I paid for the uniform because it was completely out of reach for my single mum sister.

Unlike here, there are no provisions for families who can’t afford the uniforms and there is also no tolerance of anything that doesn’t meet the dress code. I had a cousin who was sent home in the midst of exam season for wearing the wrong color socks.

Not all schools are like this but very many are and schools have got stricter on uniforms in the past few decades. The high school I attended didn’t have uniforms in the 80s and 90s, for example but now requires the full blazer and tie (which is essentially business attire).

No. Definitely not a good idea.

Actually the UK state schools uniforms are often very generic and you can get them from a variety of places very cheaply.
I grew up partly in the UK (uniform) and partly in the US (no uniform). I hated my uniforms with a vengeance. All of them were hideous, uncomfortable and usually required skirts which meant cold legs in winter. Horrid horrid horrid.

I still believe they can be beneficial in inner city schools, however. Both sides of the Atlantic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A few years ago there was an article in the NYTimes about mandatory uniforms at NY schools in the 70s or 80s.

It was a leveling socially. Everyone's grades picked up, as did attendance. Then for some reason, the mandate was dropped and yes, the grades went down and so did attendance.

I don't have a link to this to hand, but I'm sure you can find it on google / the NYTimes website.

I always laugh when folks think that uniforms are leveling socially. They are not. There are other ways in which class difference will avail themselves. The shoes kids wear, their bookbag, the trips for break, etc.

The uniforms do not level socially they just remove some distraction from students.

The entire NYtimes article demonstrated that exactly that, it was socially leveling and academically boosting. You can argue with the. NYTimes all you like and their research and ALL the schools which took part. Personally, I find them more compelling than your whining.

It doesn’t do that. Let’s be real.

[Anonymous]

Every couple years someone posts about this, and to let you know it's not going to happen, EVER.

[Anonymous]

School uniforms are awesome. My mom sent me to a Catholic MS and HS. I think I had maybe 4-5 uniforms and it was so easy. No clothing arguments, etc. My mom used the money she saved on clothing to pay the tuition.

[Anonymous]

If OP and others want uniforms, go pick out some for your kids and have them wear it. Done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If OP and others want uniforms, go pick out some for your kids and have them wear it. Done.

Typical answer from poster unwilling to think about anyone but them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If OP and others want uniforms, go pick out some for your kids and have them wear it. Done.

Typical answer from poster unwilling to think about anyone but them.

Demanding everyone buy uniforms/kids wear them as its easy and what you want is someone who only thinks about themselves. Lands end and those uniform stores are $$$. I buy what's cheap and on clearance so what I buy costs far less. I looked at privates and some of the uniform costs were outrageous - $30-50 per shirt and pants, $80 for shoes... no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Except for mandated PE uniforms (80s and 90s), they never had school uniforms.

I attended MCPS from late 80s to mid 90s (middle and high school) and never had mandated PE uniforms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Uniforms in public schools are for poor urban kids. MCPS parents wouldn’t want anything those kids have!

They cost more.

No they don't. They can be cost effective and less would buy fast fashion. Better yet if uniforms could be bought from sensible soured materials on a mass scale.

I have a kid who doesn’t care about brands so it’s more expensive if you have to buy through specific stores. If you don’t like how your kid dresses do something about it.

Having taught in public schools with uniforms and sent my kids to parochial schools with uniforms, uniforms can absolutely be cheaper. Public schools usually don’t say you need to go to a certain store. They say buy a blue shirt and khakhi bottoms of your choice, and those things turn up in Target and Walmart because demand = supply.

Then, after a year or two they start turning up in the used clothing stores, and the school’s donation cupboard, and the sack of hand me downs from the neighbor. Plus wearing from those sources is less stigmatizing when it all looks the same, as is only owning 3 shirts or whatever.