School Uniforms and Their Benefits, Research Paper Example

Introduction

According to the Research Brief on Student Dress Codes and Uniforms (Education Partnerships, 1), “most states have laws that permit schools to regulate student dress as long as the purposes of doing so are clearly connected to student safety and the maintenance of an orderly school environment” There is currently a debate among students and educators, related to regulation and unoiforms: some argue that they are useful for keeping dressing standards in place, and avoid dressing for impressing peers.Others, however – mostly students – say that uniforms are making one lose their personality and freedom to express themselves through their outfits. The author of the below essay will argue that uniforms are the best way to avoid peer pressure and make less affluent students less disadvantaged.

Arguments For School Uniforms

Middle school children (early teens and tweens) need to put up with a great level of peer pressure in schools. According to Mitchell and Knetchle, uniforms have a positive impact on curbing teasing. When everyone wears the same design of clothes and colors, bullying is reduced, as some related research shows. On the other hand, some authors argue that being made to wear certain clothes violates students’ First Amendment Rights to free speech and expression. Viadero also argues that when students are less “obsessed” with each other’s appearance, they are more likely to focus on academics. While the above statement is true, it is also important to note that students do tend to tease each other for several reasons: speech, accent, hair, or skin imperfection, therefore, believing that introducing uniforms would solve the problem completely would be naive.

While some studies, concluded among middle school students, showed no difference after the introduction of uniforms (Freeburg), other researchers found an improvement in outcomes. In the Long Beach Unified School District, in a 2-year longitudinal study, middle school suspensions declined by 36 percent, while the number of fights reduced by 51 percent. Further, battery dropped by 34 percent. Whether or not the policy changes related and unrelated to introducing compulsory wear of uniforms had an effect on the above results is not known, however, there seems to be a direct correlation between lower level of student violence and uniforms.

Wearing uniforms in school districts where the ratio of low socio-economic status children is high would be certainly advisable. Children who come from a disadvantaged background do not only face violence and bullying because of their clothes, but would also feel inferior to their peers who appear wearing the latest designs. While Freeburg criticizes the study design utilized by the researchers, the results are promising.

Another argument against school uniforms is related to constitutional rights. According to Freeburg, uniforms have a negative impact on children’s socialization, as they restrict their freedom to express themselves. While the freedom of verbal and non-verbal expression and representation of individuality is an important right to protect, the question is whether or not school is the right place for it. Indeed, policemen, army personnel, and even doctors and ambulance staff wear a uniform, and they do not complain about their First Amendment Rights. Some military men might not like the color of the uniform, and find the material uncomfortable, but they understand the purpose behind it, which is often not only the protection from the weather and spoilage, but also identify them as a member of a community or profession. Children who attend a certain school might believe that they are made to wear certain clothes that they do not like, but they will be more likely to identify themselves as one of the community. Therefore, uniforms would increase group cohesion, and make everyone appear equal.

Viadero argues that nearly all middle schools in the United States have some type of dress code that students have to adhere to. Dress code violations need to be monitored, and borderline cases are very common. When the uniform is given, only hair color and style, nails, jewelry,  and make up are the topic of discussion, therefore, educators can spend more time on teaching children and building communities, instead of dealing with dressing code violations. Therefore, restrictions in school systems already exist, even though they are not as strict as making uniforms compulsory.

There are, of course, other arguments related to school uniforms, as well, and most of them are based on practical considerations.  For example, when attending an event, teachers would be able to identify their students from their uniforms. When taking part in a concert, the students can represent their school by their appearance. When students appear smart, that increases the reputation of the school. On the other hand, some researchers believe that out-of-school behavior can be positively affected by wearing uniforms, as well. Students who walk to school can be identified when engaging in an antisocial behavior easier, therefore, uniforms can have a potential deterrent effect. As Viadero quotes school-improvement resource teacher of Decateur, stating that children are less likely to ditch classes and go home when they wear a uniform, as they are easier to spot.

Practical reasons for parents also exist regarding the compulsory wearing of uniforms. While children tend to be in a competition with peers in dressing when there is no school uniforms, parents find the most expensive outfits worn in school as a part of “teenager showing off” and often ruined, torn, or spoiled after only one day. Even though children are not concerned about the cost of the clothing items that they ruin, parents are. Most parents tend to like the idea of not having to compete with each other: who can buy the most expensive outfits for their children. This, in turn, will have a positive impact on family budgets, and parents can spend the money they save on other things, such as extra classes. This effect is greater among low socio-economic status families, though.

While many students quoted by  Viadero do not agree with the idea of wearing the same outfit every day for school, and find uniforms both dehumanizing and uncomfortable, they have their purpose. As the author argues, the first time uniforms for children were introduced was in the 16^th Century England, to signal children’s lower-class status. At the same time, several elite, religious, and private schools have uniforms to make pupils proud of representing the institution. Gentile and Imberman found that school uniforms have a positive impact on both behavior and avhievement. Therefore, the claim that uniforms are a form of negative discrimination is not confirmed.

Returning to the question of constitutional rights and the freedom of symbolic speech (Freeburg et al.), it is arguable that the selection of individual appearance and clothing constitutes for symbolic speech. However, dress codes are applied in every industry. There are already restrictions related to appearance in school. One could argue that dying one’s hair at the age of 13 purple with pink stripes would also constitute for symbolic speech. Does it mean that schools should allow students to attend school with purple and pink hair? It is not likely. A balance needs to be created in the practicality of the clothing for the purpose and individuality. The question is whether we look at schools as institutions for learning purposes, or places of socialization. McDonald’s workers are allowed to wear whatever they want to when they are not working, but the hat and uniform are required by their employers while at work. Reviewing the results of the Spence test (Freeburg et al.), there are no restrictions related to banning one type of clothing, but there are regulations to make one type of clothing compulsory. As the regulation of the school applies to all students and parents, it cannot be viewed as a type of individual discrimination. Indeed, in several countries, such as in Malta and the United Kingdom, school uniforms are required in the majority of schools. Student dress codes, however, can be viewed as a restriction of one’s freedom of speech more than the requirement to wear a school uniform.

Conclusion

Based on the above review of literature and arguments, it is evident that uniforms have more potential benefits for students, schools, and parents than disadvantages. It has also been found that having to wear a uniform is common in several professions, and even in private companies. Therefore, if one wanted to argue that this regulation of schools would affect children’s constitutional First Amendment Rights to the freedom of symbolic speech, they would also consider McDonald’s and the U.S. Army violating their employees’ rights. School uniforms have the potential to reduce bullying in middle schools, improve in-school and out-of-school behavior, and save parents money on entering the fashion race with each other. After all, children attend school to learn, and not to show off their latest outfits. School uniforms might be uncomfortable and unfashionable, but can increase group cohesion, while making it easier for educators to enforce dress codes, freeing up time for teaching. Introducing school uniforms would benefit schools more than it would disadvantage children.

Works Cited

Education Partnerships Inc. “Research Brief Student Dress Codes and Uniforms” 2009. Web.

Freeburg, Elizabeth W., Jane E. Workman, and Elizabeth S. Lentz-Hees. “Rationale for student dress codes: A review of school handbooks.”Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences 96.1 (2004): 77. Print.

Gentile, Elisabetta, and Scott A. Imberman. “Dressed for success? The effect of school uniforms on student achievement and behavior.”Journal of Urban Economics 71.1 (2012): 1-17. Print.

Viadero, Debra. “Uniform Effects?” Education Week, January 12, 2005,  Print.