Literature Review Handouts

Do uniforms make schools better?
www.greatschools.orgBy Marian Wilde
Teacher’s Summary
Popular opinion on the value of school uniforms is very divided. Research
similarly finds different results about the effects of school uniforms.
For the past decade, schools, parents and students have clashed over the issue of regulating student
attire. In 2007, cases involving an anti-Bush T-shirt in Vermont, an anti-gay T-shirt in San Diego and
Tigger socks in Napa, California, made their way through the courts, causing many to wonder whether
this debate will ever be resolved.
Meanwhile, researchers are divided over how much of an impact - if any - dress policies have upon
student learning. A 2004 book makes the case that uniforms do not improve school safety or
academic discipline. A 2005 study, on the other hand, indicates that in some Ohio high schools
uniforms may have improved graduation and attendance rates, although no improvements were
observed in academic performance.
What research says about school uniforms
Virginia Draa, assistant professor at Youngstown State University, reviewed attendance, graduation
and proficiency pass rates at 64 public high schools in Ohio. Her final analysis surprised her: "I really
went into this thinking uniforms don't make a difference, but I came away seeing that they do. At
least at these schools, they do. I was absolutely floored."
Draa's study concluded that those schools with uniform policies improved in attendance, graduation
and suspension rates. She was unable to connect uniforms with academic improvement because of
such complicating factors as changing instructional methods and curriculum.
University of Missouri assistant professor, David Brunsma reached a different conclusion. In his 2004
book, The School Uniform Movement and What It Tells Us About American Education: A Symbolic
Crusade, Brunsma reviewed past studies on the effect of uniforms on academic performance. He also
conducted his own analysis of two enormous databases, the 1988 National Educational Longitudinal
Study and the 1998 Early Childhood Longitudinal Study. Brunsma concluded that there is no positive
correlation between uniforms and school safety or academic achievement.
Meanwhile, the movement toward uniforms in public schools has spread to about a quarter of all
elementary schools. Experts say that the number of middle and high schools with uniforms is about
half the number of elementary schools. If uniforms are intended to curb school violence and improve
academics, why are they not more prevalent in middle and high schools, where these goals are just as
important as in elementary schools? Because, says Brunsma, "It's desperately much more difficult to
implement uniforms in high schools, and even middle schools, for student resistance is much, much
higher. In fact, most of the litigation resulting from uniforms has been located at levels of K-12 that
are higher than elementary schools. Of course, this uniform debate is also one regarding whether
children have rights, too!"
1

Uniform and Dress Code
centralhigh.centralcss.org
Teacher’s Summary
This is a very specific dress code that seems very controlling and kind of
mean.
Central Community School District Uniform and Dress Code for Central High School
The standard uniform includes the following:
Shirts
1. Shirts will be maroon in color. Shirts will have a collar and short sleeves. Shirts will be plain, with
no pockets, writing, emblems, or designs of any kind except a standard CHS logo. The standard CHS
logo ,as displayed, is optional. The logo will consist of white, three-quarter inch block letters, CHS
monogrammed on the left side. The Power Cat logo is also an exceptable logo. No other logos will be
used. Only plain white T-shirts will be worn underneath these shirts and will not extend past sleeve
length.
2. In addition to maroon shirt, seniors may wear a white shirt and may free-dress every Friday.
3. Shirts will be tucked in and must be long enough to stay tucked when the arms are raised above the
head. The style will be pullover with two, three, or four buttons at the top. Shirts will not be
excessively worn, faded, or frayed and will not have holes or cuts.
Slacks/Skirts
1. Slacks and skirts will be khaki in color and of the specified shade. The shade is khaki. They will not
be rolled at either the waist or the cuff.
2. Slacks are uniform. There should be no designer labels on slacks. Slacks will have belt loops and
will be worn with a belt. The belt will be brown, black, khaki or white and will be no wider than one
inch. Slacks will have two pockets in front and two in back. “Cargo” style pants are not acceptable.
Slacks will have finished bottoms. Cuffs are acceptable. There will be no flared or bell-bottoms. They
will not have holes, cuts, or be frayed. Slacks must be worn at the waist as designed. No jeans, bike
shorts, stretch pants, or sweatpants will be worn. NO CAPRI PANTS WILL BE WORN.
3. Skirts are acceptable if loose fitting and worn no higher than the top of the knee.
4. Knee length shorts (that meet the criteria of "Slacks" above) are acceptable.
2

Exceptions: JROTC uniforms, when directed to be worn by the Senior Army Instructor, are allowed
during regular school hours.
Also, approved school organization will be allowed to wear school approved non-uniform shirts on
special occasions. (The occasions will be approved by the Principal or his designee.) The rest of the
uniform policy and dress code would remain in effect of these days. For example, shirts would
continue to be tucked in and ID cards, where applicable, worn even though the shirt would be non-
uniform.
Dress Code
1. Caps, hats or head coverings are NOT to be worn during the school day, or inside the school day, or
inside the school building. DO NOT BRING CAPS OR HATS ON CAMPUS DURING SCHOOL TIME.
2. Male students are not to wear earrings (or straws to preserve the pierced hole). Girls are allowed
to wear two pairs of earrings. Body piercing is NOT allowed. Only simple jewelry may be worn.
3. Ribbons or bowsmust be marron, white, or grey.
4. Rollers, curlers, picks, rakes, forks, or combs in hair are prohibited.
5. Unnatural coloring of hair or cutting of symbols or designs in hair is not permitted.
6. Beards and goatees are NOT allowed. Sideburns (no longer than the bottom of the ear) and
mustaches are allowed and must be neat and well trimmed.
7. Sunglasses are not to be worn on school grounds unless prescribed for medical purposes and
verified with a doctor’s note, which must be presented to an administrator for approval.
8. Pictures or writing on book sacks, gym bags, jackets, etc. of and offensive, derogatory or obscene
nature is prohibited at school (e.g. alcohol, tobacco, drugs, weapons, blood, skulls, etc.).
STUDENTS WHOSE CLOTHING OR GROOMING IS INAPPROPRIATE IN THE OPINION OF THE
ADMINISTRATION WILL BE SENT HOME TO MAKE THE PROPER ADJUSTMENT. UNEXCUSED
ABSENCES WILL BE GIVEN WHEN STUDENTS ARE SENT HOME TO TAKE CARE OF ANY OF THE ABOVE
POLICES. STUDENTS WHO VIOLATE SET DRESS AND GROOMING POLICIES SHALL ALSO BE SUBJECT
TO DISCIPLINARY ACTION. (TOR OR SUSPENSION)

School Uniforms
By studymode, February 2002
Teacher’s Summary
A justification for school uniforms that makes dubious assertions.
A safe and structured learning environment is the first requirement of a good school. Children who feel
safe and secure will better learn basic American values. In return they will learn the basis of good
citizenship and become better students. In response to growing levels of violence in our schools, many
parents, teachers, and school officials have been forced to look toward school uniforms as one
potentially positive way to reduce discipline problems and increase school safety.
It has been observed that the adoption of school uniform policies can promote school safety, improve
discipline, and enhance the learning environment. The potential benefits of school uniforms include
decreasing violence and theft. Some instances involving designer clothing and expensive sneakers have
even led to life-threatening situations among students. Uniforms would also prevent gang members
from wearing gang colors and insignia at school. Uniforms would also teach students discipline and help
them resist peer pressure. Uniforms would also help students concentrate on their schoolwork and
would help school officials detect intruders who come unwelcome into the school. As a result, many
local communities are deciding to adopt school uniform policies as part of an overall program to
improve school safety and discipline.
3

The Benefits Of School Uniforms
Studentvoice.co.uk Posted by Rachel Roberts on 8 Aug 2012
Teacher’s Summary
Some common sense arguments in favor of school uniforms
For families with children in school environments, the issue of whether or not school uniforms
are appropriate or beneficial is always a prevalent one. Just about everyone you ask has a
relatively strong opinion regarding whether or not children should wear uniforms, and there are
certainly some strong arguments for either side of the debate. Typically, the main argument
against school uniforms tends to be that they make it more difficult for students to express their
individuality, which could conceivably be a bit harmful to personal development. However, this
is based more in speculation than fact, and when you consider several other points, it is clear that
there are actually several potential benefits to school uniforms. Here are a few specific benefits
to keep in mind.
Purchasing school uniforms can save a great deal of time and effort shopping. If you are
trying to fill out your childs wardrobe with individually picked pieces of clothing, you
may find yourself shopping for a whole week before school starts. However, if you
simply have to pick up uniforms you may just need to drop by the school or a designated
store like Marks & Spencer to pick them up.
Similarly, buying school uniforms can be a great deal cheaper for parents than
assembling individual wardrobes. One argument against uniforms tends to be that they
make it more difficult for families to rely on hand-me-downs from older siblings, but
when you think about it some of this difference is made up in the simplicity of uniforms.
Kids with the freedom to wear whatever they want often want expensive new styles, but
with uniforms you can buy a cheaper wardrobe without worrying about fashion.
Style is actually one of the biggest arguments in favour of school uniforms. Nobody is
under the impression that school uniforms always represent the height of fashion, but in
many cases thats exactly the point. If kids at school dress however they wish, then those
without the financial means to keep up with the latest styles, or those who simply dont
have strong senses of fashion, can often stand out in a negative way. School uniforms
help schools to avoid these issues entirely, and eliminate fashion-based judgments.
Finally, there is your childs focus to consider. There comes a point in life at which
fashion is, to some extent, important those who dress well tend to make better
impressions, etc. However, when your children are young and in school, you likely want
to do your best to discourage vanity and encourage focus on academics and social
development. School uniforms take style and fashion considerations completely out of
the picture and allow your kids to focus completely on what they should be learning in
school, but educationally and socially.
4

Why Do We Make Our Kids Wear Uniforms?
http://www.optionality.net/mag/oct98a.html
Teacher’s Summary
A very opinionated, anti-establishment argument against school uniforms. The
author seems to believe that uniforms are an evil imposition from a overly-
controlling higher authority.
Training?
The 'training' argument says that when you are employed, you are likely to have to wear a uniform. Is
this true? What are the odds that children will wear a uniform later in life? Typically, the occupations
where people have to wear uniforms are the lower paid jobs, nothing to look forward to, really.
Generally, the more educated people are, the less they wear uniforms later in life. Look at teachers, they
don't wear uniforms! Well-paid work tends to reject uniformity, and for good reason, the demands of
the future include qualities such as assertiveness, creativity, individuality, originality, a spontaneous
personality, being a self-starter, taking initiatives, being able to cope with change, etc. And even the
people who do wear a uniform later in life are unlikely to accept such a silly costume as a school
uniform. What is the logic behind forcing children in uniforms? That children have to get used to
wearing a uniform, just in the unfortunate case that they will end up in such a job later in life? If we turn
around the same 'logic', students who are used to wearing uniforms would be insufficiently prepared for
plain-clothed work, if they did not wear plain clothes at school all the time. Similarly, students would not
be able to deal with people who didn't wear uniforms. It just doesn't make sense.
There is one deeper argument. It goes like this: students wearing uniforms will be accustomed to taking
a servile attitude which will help them find work later in life. Of course, the very opposite could be
argued with more reason. Does success in future demand a servile attitude? Or is it more helpful to be
creative, have a spontaneous and open personality, an inquisitive mind, be a self-starter who talks
things over, who has an independent mind searching for new ideas to make things work?
Equity?
The 'equity' argument goes like this: If children wear uniforms, they do not notice differences between
children from rich and from poor families. This 'equity' argument is often put forward by State Schools.
The reason for this may be that it is a purely socialist argument and it may be rejected for this reason
alone. In a democratic country, school should not indoctrinate children with a specific political ideology,
especially not a government-funded school. Interestingly, private schools typically are even more
fanatical about uniforms, but they are less inclined to use the 'equity' argument.
Anyway, even as a socialist argument, it does not make much sense. School uniforms may make all
students look alike. But why do the teachers not wear the same uniforms? Clearly, school does not like
any confusion as to who is the teacher and who is the student. The master-slave relationship that is so
obviously present at school is deliberately magnified by uniforms that emphasize this difference. The
teacher is allowed to dress casually, while the student has to wear silly clothes intended to make the
5

student look stupid.
Furthermore, there are often different uniforms for those in higher grades than for those in lower
grades, just like in the military a superior officer wears a less silly hat. This creates class differences.
Some will argue that this merely reflects existing differences. But the point is that if this were accurate,
it constituted an argument against uniformity. Moreover, school itself creates class differences. Class is a
trademark, if not an invention of school. Children are grouped together in classes according to age and
often according to gender and to perceived academic performance. Because parents want their children
to mix with children of their 'own class', they carefully select the neighborhood where they are going to
live. Houses close to private schools are often substantially more expensive than similar houses close to
state schools. On the street, children are identified by their uniform. 'Oh, you come from that poor
school, you dummy!' is an example of what children say to each other when they look at each other's
uniform. And even in the classroom, uniforms only accentuate differences in length, hair color and other
physical characteristics. Children consequently judge each other by their physical appearances. One can
argue whether it were better if children judged each other by their clothes instead.
Ease and Cost?
From a financial point of view, the socialist argument does not make sense either. School uniforms are
expensive, by their nature they are produced in limited numbers, they have to be special. Furthermore,
school uniforms are typically made of polycotton, because if they were made of pure cotton, they would
fade after a few washings and there would be color differences between the uniforms of various pupils,
which goes against the very idea of uniformity. Therefore, school uniforms are far more expensive than
the cheap cotton clothing people normally like to wear. The situation is also prone to exploitation by
unfair trade practices, unhealthy schemes, favoritism and cronyism, e.g. deals in which secret bribes are
paid for the privilege of exclusively and 'locally' producing and selling such school uniforms. One pays
the price for not being able to choose the often cheap imports from countries such as China and India.
Some parents argue that because of school uniforms, they do not have to buy many clothes for their
children, which saves them time and money. But most children will have plain clothes next to their
school uniform. The idea of a school uniform is that students wear the uniform at school, but do not
wear the uniform, say, at a disco or other events outside school. This effectively means that children will
need a double set of clothing.
The 'ease' argument says that school uniforms make it easier for students to choose what they are to
wear at school. But is it really a virtue of the school uniform that the 'choice' is made so easy? It would
be just as 'easy' for children to decide what to wear, if they only had, say, jeans and T-shirts in their
cupboards. This kind of 'choice' has nothing to do with wearing uniforms. If there are only jeans and T-
shirts in the cupboard, the child will have to wear jeans and T-shirts. The choice is easy, because there is
no alternative. If there were only a ski-outfit in the cupboard, the child had to wear the ski-outfit and
'choices' were equally 'easy'. The point is that the 'choice' is not so much made 'easy' by virtue of
uniformity, no, the choice is easy because there is no choice. If the kid-next-door happens to wear the
same clothes, say jeans, that didn't make the choice any easier for either of the children. One only has
choice if there is something to choose from. The real question is if choice is good for children. Taking
away children's right to choose what to wear does not make live any easier, it just makes children
accustomed to conformity, to following orders and walking in line without thinking, without making a
choice. This creates a huge amount of psychological problems later in life, it reduces the opportunity to

get good work, it reduces the overall quality of life, in some respects it is a form of child abuse to
systematically deny children choice.
As mentioned before, school uniforms are typically made of polycotton, as this keeps its color better.
Apart from being more expensive, polycotton is also very hot, which is a problem in hot climates. Special
sun-protective clothing is often too expensive, or cannot stand the frequent washing necessary as the
kids have to wear the same clothing every day. Uniforms tend to be uncomfortable - by nature a
uniform is a straightjacket that has been compromised in many ways in order to fit everybody. Uniforms
are far from easy in many respects.
The 'cost' argument is obviously a false argument. School uniforms do not keep the cost of clothing
down, because quite obviously all students also need plain clothes next to their uniform. When
compared to T-shirts and jeans, the school uniform is unlikely to be the cheap, comfortable, easy to use.
Private schools are even less likely to push the 'cost' argument, they deliberately choose for a rather
expensive outfit as a way to distinguish the students from 'poorer' schools. Obviously, the 'cost'
argument is inconsistent with the 'pride' argument that wants students to 'look well presented' even if
this comes at an extra cost. The very point of uniforms is that it is something that not everyone wears,
and this exclusivity obviously comes at a cost.
Pride?
The 'pride' argument goes like this: if students dress lousy, the school as a whole gets a bad name, which
diminishes the opportunity for all students to get a good job. Of course, this is just an argument against
dirty or otherwise less attractive clothes. Teachers may argue that school uniforms set a clear standard
of what the students are to wear, but school uniforms may just as well get dirty as any other clothes and
school uniforms may just as well tear apart after a fight or a fall. Having school uniforms does no
necessarily make it easier to see whether the clothes are dirty or ragged. Uniformity in itself is nothing
to be proud about. Note that students are not supposed to wear the uniforms at discos or other out-of-
school events. If the students were really supposed to be proud about their school, why are they only
supposed to wear the uniform at school? Note also that universities rarely demand students to wear
uniforms, yet few seem to be worried that this will make the students unemployable.
Safety?
The 'safety' argument is that school uniforms make it more difficult for unwelcome outsiders to infiltrate
the school grounds. But is 'safety' the real reason behind compulsory school uniforms? State schools are
typically huge with large numbers of teachers and other staff. Teachers are frequently ill or otherwise
absent, requiring relief-teachers to step in. The larger the school, the more difficult it is to know all
individual teachers and maintenance staff who might wander through the buildings. Students will not be
surprised to see an unfamiliar plain-clothed grown-up person on the school-grounds. They will not even
be surprised if such a person seems lost. If safety really was an important issue, then why are teachers,
maintenance staff and visiting parents not required to similarly wear the school uniform? Many people
come and leave the school grounds by car every day. Cars can often be driven right into the middle of
the school grounds, while it is virtually impossible to spot whether the occupants are wearing uniforms
or not. School uniforms in fact make it very easy for someone with bad intentions to sneak in, disguised
as a legitimate school student. Typically, anyone can buy second-hand uniforms at the school or at
nearby shops.

Debate.com “Should Students Wear Uniforms?
52% Say Yes 48% Say No
Yes, it can help with the bullying problem. It can
help the bullying problem because kids get picked
on for their clothes all the time, so if all the kids
had on the same clothes that problem would be
improved dramatically. Also, if kids wear regular
clothes, they basically have no restriction in how
they dress which leads to promiscuity. Promiscuity
can distract other students from paying attention
in school and maybe make them get lower grades.
That's why uniforms should be worn at all times.
Posted by: bengjsu
Bullying and gangs. With having uniforms you do
not have the discrimination of the different groups
and how the dress effects the people and how
they act. Without the uniforms kids can start gangs
and can start groups with the same sort of dress
they wear and while the uniform is restricting kids
from bullying it is also stooping the gangs
Posted by: cbrown
Yes, for practicality and unity I find it so much
easier in the mornings when I have something
specific to put on. It saves time and also money, as
I buy far fewer clothes than I would otherwise.
Having a uniform also closes the gap between the
different types of people, and I believe this is a
good thing.
Posted by: Duke Smith
Everyone should have the same right to
individuality. Kids shouldn't have to wear
uniforms. All it does is make school a dull and
lifeless place that no one wants to be in. Students
should be able to express their feelings and
emotions by wearing regular clothes. I'm a kid
myself, and actually, I couldn't care less about
them.
Posted by: anoymouse
Uniforms are wrong. You can't really be you when
you wear uniforms. It takes your individuality
away. We need freedom- it's America isn't it? We
have to stick up for who we are, and how we do
that is through our clothes. Whether we are
happy, dark, or crazy, we show it, without even
having to say it, through clothes.
Posted by: Anonymous
No nono. I do not think students should wear
school uniforms because kids express themselves
by what they wear and the colors they do, because
in other words it's freedom of speech. This is a free
country. Also some parents may not be able to pay
the amount needed for the uniforms.
No, everyone has the right to freedom of
expression. Kids shouldn't have to wear uniforms.
All it does is make school a dull and lifeless place
that no one wants to be in. Students should be
able to express their feelings and emotions by
wearing regular clothes. I'm a kid myself, and
actually, I couldn't care less about them.
6

SCHOOL UNIFORMS REDUCE STUDENT ABSENCES, DISCIPLINARY
PROBLEMS
April 5, 2010-Houston- Mike Emery
Teacher’s Summary
A study that finds improvements in student absences and disciplinary problems after
introducing uniforms, especially amongst female students.
Fewer schools are including "Best Dressed" as a category in their end-of-the- year student polls. As public schools
continue to adopt dress code policies, more students are unable to make individual fashion statements.
A recent University of Houston study suggests that this might be a good thing as school uniforms can positively impact
students' grades, attendance and behavior.
UH economics professor Scott Imberman and graduate student Elizabetta Gentile surveyed administrative data from 160
public schools in a large urban school district. This data included student demographics, as well as academic, disciplinary
and attendance records that had been filed from 1993 - 2006.
By applying econometric techniques - combining economic theory with statistics - Imberman and Gentile compared
students from schools that required uniforms to peers from non-uniformed institutions. They specifically focused on
student outcomes that emerged once a school required uniforms. Their study is documented in the paper "Dressed for
Success: Do School Uniforms Improve Student Behavior, Attendance and Achievement?"
Their findings show bolstered attendance, academics and behavior in middle and high school students once their schools
adopted uniforms. Imberman and Gentile noted that the biggest improvement was among female students.
"After uniforms were adopted, girls in middle school and high school missed one day less of school annually," Imberman
said. "That sounds like a modest improvement, but in terms of educational interventions, it is challenging to motivate a
progression in this area. This is fairly substantial."
They also found that once uniforms were mandated, the school district was more likely to retain its female students at all
grade levels.
"Often, parents withdraw their children from a school district due to dissatisfaction," Imberman said. "This data suggests
that uniforms helped schools increase parental satisfaction and encouraged students not to leave for charter or private
schools."
The quantitative nature of the study does not offer direct insight as to why uniforms produce such favorable results from
students. It does, however, point to the fact that students' attendance, test scores and behavior consistently improved
from the time uniforms were introduced.
"The benefits increased over time," Imberman said. "The effects were smaller during the first year uniforms were
adopted but grew in subsequent years. We interpret this as indication that there may have been an adjustment period.
7

The uniforms might have taken some time to have an effect and become ingrained within the schools' environments."

What a North Face jacket means in South Korea
Puffy down outdoor jackets are increasingly becoming symbols of class division and targets of school
violence
By Frances Cha
Teacher’s Summary
Expensive North Face jackets are a status (and gang) symbol for Korean high
school students. Incidents of violence, theft and bullying surround the jackets.
According to a Korean blog post that made the rounds late last month, North Face jacket wearers
can be immediately classified according to the type of North Face jacket they wear. This is
apparently a common phenomenon in elementary and middle schools in particular, where the
jackets are so popular they have been dubbed "the uniform worn over the uniform," or
"backbreakers," (thus called for the work put in by parents in order to afford the jackets for their
children).
The rankings also specify what type of student should be wearing which specific type of North
Face jacket.
At the bottom of the scale is the North Face Nuptse 2, cost ₩250,000 (approximately US$220),
which is generally worn by “losers" (찌질이).
Next on the list is the “common” Nuptse 1, worn both by “losers” and “gang members” (일진).
Two categories up is the Dry Loft, ₩470,000. "Losers don't wear the jackets starting from this
category because they're afraid of having them swiped by gang members."
At the top, priced at ₩700,000 is the “rare” Himalayan Down Parka, the most expensive model
worn by “the boss.”
As laughable as this list may seem, according to some students it simply puts into words what
remains unspoken in school halls.
“You can definitely label people according to what North Face jackets they wear,” says Park Jin,
14, who is the class president of his middle school in western Seoul.
“If you wear a really expensive one, then the iljin (gang members) in school come and take it from you.”
8

Bullying: What are the Differences between Boys and Girls?
education.com
Teacher’s Summary
Girls tend to bully each other with words and gossip, whereas boys use name
calling and physical attacks. Bullying in school can lead to long term bullying as
an adult. Parents can help their children cope with bullies by starting
conversations and discussing feelings honestly.
Bullying is defined as a form of aggression that is repetitively exerted against an individual who
feels unable to defend him/herself. This aggression may occur directly against someone in a
physical (for example, slapping, pushing) or verbal (for example, swearing, name calling)
manner. Bullying can also be indirect whereby the targeted person experiences the aggression
through others (for example, gossiped about, excluded from a social activity).
How are Girls Involved in Bullying?
Through Peer Group
Girls tend to bully other girls indirectly through the peer group. Rather than bully a targeted child
directly, girls more often share with other girls (and boys) hurtful information about the targeted
child. For example, a girl may tell a group of girls an embarrassing story about another girl. They
may create mean names, gossip, and come up with ways of letting the girl know that she is
rejected from the peer group (for example, saying mean things about her on social networking
sites such as Facebook or MySpace, using her email address to send harassing messages to
everyone on her email list, texting her a death threat). These are called “relational” bullying
because they attack relationships and friendships.
How are Boys Involved in Bullying?
Physical
In contrast to girls, boys of any age and ethnic group tend to be physically aggressive (e.g., hit,
kick, slap, push, or punch). Also, research shows that physical abuse tends to occur more often
among boys than girls at all educational levels (e.g., elementary, high school, college). In
addition, male college students tend to bully and be bullied through physical and verbal forms of
bullying (e.g., name-calling) more often than college girls.
Also boys may be more accepting of bullying, than are girls. That is, boys may like a girl even if
she bullies others and like other boys who bully. Girls may still befriend boys who bully, but
tend to dislike girls who bully. At the core of these differences are children’s and, indeed,
societal beliefs about acceptable behaviors for boys and girls. Many people may see bullying
9

among boys as “just boys being boys”. So, girls may accept this attitude and tolerate boys’
bullying. However, girls may be less accepting of girls who bully if it is seen as overly
aggressive.
Effects of Bullying: Signs That A Child Is Being Bullied
All types of bullying may have a tremendous impact on targeted children. They may feel
depressed, anxious, eat or sleep less or more, have difficulty concentrating on school work, have
trouble making friends with others, lie, steal, run away from home, avoid school or even consider
suicide. Children may not want to tell anyone if they feel they deserve this type of treatment,
caused it, or that telling would make it worse (which the bully may have threatened). There may
also be long-term effects of bullying on bullies themselves. Some children who bully at a young
age may continue to use aggression and control in other relationships as they grow older. For
example, boys may start dating earlier than other boys and be aggressive in these relationships.
Also, as adults they may be aggressive towards colleagues, use aggression with their own
children, and engage in criminal acts including sexual assault. Girls involved in significant
bullying in the early grade school years may experience depression over a long term, attempt
suicide, or develop an eating disorder.
Again, individual men and women, and boys and girls experience bullying in unique ways.
Research has documented some of the differences mentioned in this article. It is important to
keep in mind, however, that boys may also experience indirect forms of bullying, and girls may
experience direct forms. In addition, children involved in bullying may both be targeted and
exert aggression themselves.
The Importance for Parents: What Parents Can Do To Prevent Bullying
For parents, it’s important to recognize signs in their sons and daughters that they may be
involved in some or many forms of bullying and to address these experiences as soon as they
arise. For example, checking in with children at the end of the day can include conversation
about academic subjects as well as peer relationships. Questions such as the following, may
encourage children to discuss their friendship experiences with their parents:
1. ‘What did you do at recess today?”, or
2. “How is your friend (name) doing these days?”
When children express negative emotions about their peers it is helpful to acknowledge these
feelings, encourage them that it’s normal to feel this way, and to discuss practical strategies
together, especially those that the child considers most helpful.

Pros and Cons of School Uniforms
By SarabethAsaff for kids.lovetoknow.com
Pros Cons
The commonly cited advantages of uniforms
are increased academic performance, reduced
behavioral problems, increased social
harmony, and reduced costs of clothing
students.
Academic Outcomes
Many educators believe that students who wear
school uniforms perform better academically in
school, and a study done in 1998 by Notre
Dame shows a slight statistical elevation in student
performance among students who wear uniforms.
Students are often so focused on their wardrobe
that it distracts them from learning.
Some experts believe that a mandatory uniform
policy will remove this distraction and improve
student attention, believing that uniforms set a
more serious tone within the school environment
that is conducive to learning and can improve
student performance. They also believe that
school uniforms improve student attendance.
Many parents report that their children spend a
great deal of time planning and choosing their
daily clothing and that uniforms allow students to
use this time to sleep or study.
Behavioral Outcomes
It is generally thought that students who wear
school uniforms behave more appropriately in
the school environment. They believe that
uniforms dictate a stricter atmosphere and that
students who wear uniforms are more likely to
follow school rules. The US Department of
Education maintains that the mandatory use of
standardized dress reduces violence within the
school.
Social Outcomes
Uniforms can be a social equalizer.
Self-Expression
Many educators and sociology experts
arguethat requiring children to wear
standardized uniforms stifles their self-
expression. Self-expression is an important
part of child development and some experts
believe that curbing it with uniforms can be
detrimental to children. Experts also believe
that students who are forced to wear uniforms
will only find other, less appropriate ways to
express themselves, possibly through
inappropriate use of makeup and jewelry.
Individuality
Some experts believe that public education
attempts to strip children of their individuality.
They believe that public education does not meet
the needs of children who do not fall in the norm,
and that uniforms attempt to force every student
into one mold. They see standard dress as yet
another way for public educators to remove
student individuality where they should be
embracing and celebrating diversity. Some experts
believe it is not in the best interest of the child to
try to control socialization, which is a part of
human nature. They believe that such use of
school uniforms does not prepare children for the
real world, in which they will be judged by their
appearance.
Cost
There are just as many experts who believe that
the cost of school uniforms is a negative factor as
those who see it as a positive factor. Some experts
believe that it increases the amount of clothing
parents will have to buy for their children because
the children will still want and need clothing for
the hours they are not in school. Uniforms can be
10

Some experts believe that, more than in any
other area, school uniforms improve the social
outcomes in a school environment. Clothing
and fashion are often at the root of social
conflict. Children are often ridiculed by other
children because of the way they dress. Many
children use clothing to express themselves
and to define themselves. This self-expression
and definition often leads to the formation of
cliques in the school environment. Many
students feel that they are judged according to
what they wear by other students, as well as by
teachers and administrators. School uniforms
remove these factors from the social
environment within the school, thus relieving
students from the pressure to fit in. Experts
believe that, by improving the social
environment through mandatory standardized
dress, both academic and behavioral outcomes
improve.
Cost
In some cases, the use of school uniforms is
more affordable to families because there is not
as much pressure to buy expensive, trendy
clothing. Uniforms are made to last, and can be
washed easily and frequently. After the initial
cost of buying uniforms, there is no need to
spend as much money on clothing.
more expensive for a family who buys from
second-hand stores or who relies on hand-me-
down clothing from friends and family. Some
experts believe the cost is a negative aspect of
school uniforms because there is no use for them
outside of school.
Comfort
Critics argue that different types of clothing
feel comfortable to different people. Some
children are more comfortable in a specific
material or style of clothing. Uniforms reduce
one's ability to choose clothing that fits
individual comfort needs. Experts believe that
children need to feel comfortable in order to
maximize learning, and that uniforms can, in
this way, deter academic success for some
children.
Delays Transition into Adulthood
Some experts feel that self-expression and self-
identification as a teenager helps prepare them
to make the leap into adulthood. By forcing
teenagers to wear school uniforms, it limits
their ability to express in this manner, which
may delay their transition into adulthood.
One study done in the state of Louisianafound
that the only benefits derived from school
uniforms ended once the students left middle
school, and that no benefits were found for
high school students.
Expert Opinions
Many educators and experts believe that, although in theory uniforms should improve academic,
behavioral and social outcomes, in reality they do not. These experts argue that the studies of
schools who initiate uniforms do not report improvement in any of these areas; therefore, if the
desired outcomes are not reached, there is no valid reason to standardize student dress.
There are also, of course, experts who maintain that uniforms do have advantages. Every school
district decides on this issue separately, usually following much debate surrounding the
advantages and disadvantages of requiring students to wear uniforms.

School uniforms are a bad idea
http://www.sd71.bc.ca/sd71/school/courtmid/_2006_student_web/7_6/2_c_Erica/s
chool_uniforms_are_a_bad_idea.htm
Teacher’s Summary
A list of speculative arguments against school uniforms
If school had school uniforms then the kids would have to wear something that they didn’t want
to wear.What about the kid’s individuality if they are confined to wear something they don’t
want to wear then that is destroying kids rights. “Just because we are kids that doesn’t mean
that we should not be ignored” “we have rights too”.
If school’s had school uniforms then it might cause problems in the student’s. Because the
student’s might rebel and start to do stuff that teacher’s do when they don’t get paid enough.
Go on strike or protest, a sit in that’s when kids and sometimes teacher’s sit in and refuse to do
work and they do that until they give in. so if they had school uniforms there might be problems.
If the school’s had school uniforms then there could be problems with the cost. If a family was
poor and The school just had a meeting about the students and them not following the dress
code so they have decided to put school uniforms in to actions. But what happens if they poor
family cant pay for the school uniforms. Will the kids get kicked out or will the kids get the
uniforms and the parents will have to work until they pay off their debt to the school or what.
If school’s had school uniforms then what would happen if the kids didn’t like them? Well the
kids might come back and refuse to wear them. They might have taken a sewing class so they
could make them different they would change them to look really good. Because some student’s
(like me) I would probably not like them, not want to wear them. So I would change them into
something tighter, shorter or twisting and winding them to make them look much better
If schools had school uniforms then the kids would probably not be happy. What if they just put
a dress code on? Then the kids would have guide lings but they would be ably top wear what
ever they want whenever they want. But with limits so they don’t go over bored and show un-
needed parts of your body. So they can’t all wear the same thing because that would be a
problem.
Just because some parents have to wear school uniforms doesn’t mean that kids should. Some
parents have to wear uniforms so they can think that the kids have to. Well that’s not right.
They chose to wear uniforms when they got a job ant they know that some have to wear
uniforms. So just because they have to doesn’t make use have to. We should have to wear
school uniforms when we are older when we get jobs.
I learned that children from kinder garden and up have to wear school uniforms. I mean like why
would they make children in kinder garden wear school uniforms they are not breaking any rules
they don’t wear inappropriate cloths they are being dressed by there parents maybe not all of
them but a lot of them are. But its not like they are buying mini skirts are tube tops they are
wearing overalls, dresses or shorts that like are so long they are like pants. So why make
children in kinder garden to grade tree have to wear school uniforms
11

Arguments Against School Uniforms
http://www.libertarian-logic.com/against-school-uniforms.html
Teacher’s Summary
A thorough and mostly convincing list of logical arguments against school
uniforms.
Let's examine the arguments against school uniforms in government schools.
Despite the enthusiasm for uniforms, there are plenty of good sound reasons to avoid them. As noted
in my discussion of the benefits of school uniforms in government schools, they are something that
could work well for certain individuals, but the idea that "one size fits all" just isn't appealing to this
Libertarian.
So let's start. Making the top of the list is the idea that this policy is a "one size" fits all, and we all
know that isn't true.
This is a common and irritating approach to government. Would you like it if a retail outlet treated
you like a shoplifter? Of course not, but that's exactly what a "one size fits all" approach to doing
business would have your local retailers doing.
1. We should have the courage to identify bad actors and implement measures directed at
them. Instead, we punish every student with a "one size fits all" mentality. If you look
closely at the overall student body, you'll likely find that there is a small percentage of
students that are gang members or drug dealers or miscreants of some sort.
2. Why not target these individuals for control measures instead of everyone? Why not target
these individuals for expulsion instead of treating the entire student body as if they were a
threat of some sort?
3. Our system of laws and regulations typically punish everyone for the actions of a few. It's
always the few who things for the rest of us because of our proclivity to broadly apply a rule
instead of taking the time to sort out who the trouble-makers are and deal with them
individually.
4. Before we further this discussion, perhaps you'd care to see a presentation from a school
"outfitter" named Michael Apfelberg to see what he thinks about the negatives of school
uniforms. His observations, as a provider of school uniforms, ought to be enlightening.
5. Wow, only three negatives from this school "outfitter." Imagine that! And, his negative
number 3 was pretty lame at that. It makes me think that perhaps he isn't all that willing to
look at the other side.
6. So, let's look at more arguments against school uniforms, and I'll dedicate reason #2 to our
friend from New Hampshire, Mr. Apfelberg, who can't seem to think of reasons why school
uniforms are a bad idea.
7. It creates yet another special interest group that wants to convince the government to do
something that is in their favor. Perhaps our "outfitter," Mr. Apfelberg couldn't bring himself
to create reasoning against his own special interest. After all, people like him will be
petitioning the government (perhaps at multiple levels) to endorse the idea of school
uniforms.
8. We don't need more special interest groups, and that's reason enough for me to be against
school uniforms.
12

9. Implementing a school uniform program by itself reinforces the idea that simply changing
what students wear will make a difference in their behavior. It's a type of "preventive law." A
restriction that is supposed to stop some undesirable behavior.
10. The fact that we try it in the first place gives it some level of credibility as if student dress is
really the root cause of poor behavior and lower performance in school. It's not, so it's
reasonable to be against school uniforms because there isn't a cause and effect relationship -
something else is causing the violence, bad behavior and poor performance.
11. It's an idea for fixing problems that allows us to conveniently avoid proper analysis that
would identify causes of student violence and poor performance, and create appropriate
solutions.
12. First and foremost, we need to clearly identify the problems. Then, we need to identify the
immediate causes of the problems. Only then can we target "fixes" that address the causes. If
we effectively address the causes, then the problems will be reduced or eliminated.
13. I'm against school uniforms simply because a lack of school uniforms isn't what's causing all
the problems. As George Carlin once said: "We don't have time for rational solutions."
14. If everyone wears the same clothes, that doesn't transform individual students into
wonderful community members with like minds and spirit. There needs to be more at work
to create such "oneness," and it takes years to build such a culture.
15. This type of thinking is a typical American "drive through" and "just add water" approach that
imagines such transformations could be created by quick and simple methods.
16. It's very much like our foreign policies, we forget about the culture of others and how that
can't be changed overnight, no matter how much we wish it to be. We apparently have the
same arrogance when it comes to the culture of communities and individuals.
17. Requiring uniforms isn't the role of government, unless that same government organization
is providing uniforms for their troops, and history shows that some countries have done just
that. Listen to observations from George Carlin who was also against school uniforms.
18. If we allow school officials to prescribe school uniforms, then we can expect rules on hair
styles, makeup, deodorant, dental hygiene, fingernail length, shoes and so on. I don't like to
let the "camel's nose under the tent," so I'm against school uniforms as a broad brush
approach to solving problems.
19. Following the lead from George Carlin, I believe it's very likely that forcing kids to dress alike
will only help create more followers than leaders. If you become accustomed to being told
what to do, then how do you handle it when you finally graduate and you're placed in an
environment where you're not told what to do?
20. I think school uniforms set some students up for failure when it comes to making their own
decisions about who they are and how they're going to present themselves to the world.
21. If you're in favor of individual responsibility, then you're likely to be against school uniforms
because such rules don't foster individuality or individual responsibility, they diminish it.
22. Unless you're going straight from a government school into the military,the idea of a dress
code isn't the way the real world works. People in a free society dress they way they would
like to. Especially in America, the melting pot, we have all manner of dress that originates
from our cultural differences.
23. I thought we were supposed to be inclusive, accepting and tolerant.
24. Self-image can be adversely affected by forcing someone to wear something that they
dislike. Just think of all the unusual clothes that some people wear - baggy pants, jackets with
arms too long, long legged pants that stack up around the ankles, hats on backwards and
sideways, and blue jeans that are washed out and torn at the knees. We're talking about
personal choices in dress here.

25. Now, imagine that parents forced their kids to go to school with worn out, ripped and
misfitting clothes that were placed on them backwards or inside out. This wouldn't be
personal choice, but it could be viewed as quite uncalled for.
26. I could envision a lot of conflict arising from forcing a child to wear something they dislike.
The same would be true if government officials from the school system told you how to dress,
and that's why I'm against school uniforms.
27. If you think baggy pants allow students to bring weapons to school, then I suggest that clothes
aren't the cause of weapons, it's something else. Let's focus on logical cause and effect
relationships, not band-aids like school uniforms.
28. School uniforms diminish free expression at a time when young people are trying to establish
who they are among throngs of others. There is such a thing as distractions in the classroom,
but that can be handled on a case-by-case basis or with a reasonable dress code.
29. Punishing free expression by everyone because of the actions of a few is a bad precedence.
It's not what freedom is all about.
30. Uniforms cost money, and that's an additional financial burden placed on families. If a family
would like to purchase a set of clothes for their children to wear to school - "school clothes" -
then that's just fine.
31. Requiring a uniform to be purchased from a supplier isn't the business of school authorities,
and the additional cost isn't justified. It's just another example of government mandates that
aren't funded.
You get the idea. I'm against school uniforms, and I think most freedom-minded people are too.
America is strong because we are composed of individuals who are allowed to be leaders and
innovators. We're strong because our government is supposed to be limited in scope and depth.
I'm against school uniforms because it's more government, less freedom, less individual decision-
making, and there is no clear link between school uniforms and causes of problems in schools. I went
to government schools that didn't require uniforms, and it didn't seem to affect our performance one
little bit.
If you believe that a lack of school uniforms is the cause of troubles in government schools, then you'll
also likely believe that disease is caused by a lack of medication. And, this begs me to repeat this
important point: this Libertarian is against school uniforms because we haven't done our homework
to show that trouble in school is caused by a lack of school uniforms.

An Argument Against School Uniforms
By Joel M., Hinckley, UT
teenink.com
Teacher’s Summary
An eighth grader’s persuasive essay about why he does not want school
uniforms. Good primary source.
There is an ongoing discussion in this nation about school uniforms, whether or not they help with
behavior problems, and increase test scores. As an eighth grade student at Delta Middle School, I do
not want school uniforms. In this paper I will present the argument against wearing school uniforms. I
will include personal opinion and will also cite research.
Kade A., a sixth grade student, when asked about school uniforms said, “No, I don’t like them,
because they are uncomfortable, and make you feel like you are in your church clothes all the time.”
Daycen J., another student said, “I don’t like school uniforms because they take away student’s
individuality.”
Dr. Alan Hilfer, senior psychologist in Brooklyn’s Children’s and Adolescent Unit at Maimonides
Medical Center states:
"Clothes are a source of expression for children, and as kids get older, they become increasingly
resentful of uniforms….By instituting a uniform policy, schools are taking away kids’ individuality---
schools need to decide if that sacrifice is worth making.”
Dr. Hilfer is talking about whether taking away student’s individuality is worth the payoff of decreased
behavior problems, and increased test scores. A study done by David L. Brunsma , University of
Alabama and Kerry A. Rockquemore of Notre Dame, entitled Effects of Student Uniforms on
Attendance, Behavior Problems, Substance Abuse, and Academic Achievement, showed that uniforms
did not lead to an improvement in these areas. Their conclusion was:
“Student uniform use was not significantly correlated with any of the school commitment variables
such as absenteeism, behavior, or substance use (drugs). In addition, students wearing uniforms did
not appear to have any significantly different academic preparedness, proschool attitudes, or peer
group structures with proschool attitudes than other students.”
One area that might be of concern is the lessening of gang related problems, and fashion wars. A
study published in 1995, by Lillian O. Holloman, a clothing and textiles professor at Virginia Polytechic
Institute and State University, entitled Violence and Other Antisocial Behaviors in Public Schools: Can
Dress Codes Help Solve the Problem? explores the problems the students can get into because of the
way they dress. The study says:
“Gang colors and insignias, whether worn intentionally or unintentionally, can get a student jumped
or worse. Status clothes, such as team jackets of professional sports teams, leather coats and designer
13

sneakers, have led to thefts, sometimes by knife or at gunpoint.”
This may be true in some areas of the country, such as low-income, inner city areas, but I do not
believe this to be true in the Millard County School District. I cannot recall any accounts of violence
against students caused by a student’s clothing selection. I believe that before you put into action a
school uniform policy based on such fears, you need to take into account the area the school is in, the
economic level of the population, the number of people involved in gangs and the amount of gang
related activity in the community.
Most of the articles that I have read about whether wearing school uniforms changes behavior and
increases test scores, are inconclusive. Most of the time other rules are put into place along with the
school uniforms, which may lead to a desired behavior. However, the uniform itself cannot be entirely
responsible for the change.
Middle School/ Junior High is a time of maturing, physically, mentally, academically, and emotionally.
Schools need to create an environment that encourages students individuality and motivate them to
challenge themselves and inspire self confidence. I feel that school uniforms diminish creativity and
self expression.

Scientific School Uniform Research
Teacher’s Summary
A California school district was claiming that a new uniform policy improved
crime and drug rates by 50-100%. The researchers did not believe that, so
they did a study and found that uniforms did not impact attendance or
grades, and actually made students’ behavior worse.
The scientific research on uniforms is just starting to come in. The following discusses a paper from
The Journal of Education Research (Volume 92, Number 1, Sept./Oct. 1998, pp. 53-62) by David L.
Brunsma from the University of Alabama and Kerry A. Rockquemore of Notre Dame:
Effects of Student Uniforms on Attendance, Behavior Problems, Substance Abuse, and Academic
Achievement
This study showed that uniforms did not lead to an improvement in attendance, behavior, drug use,
or academic achievement.
Here's the abstract from their study:
Mandatory uniform policies have been the focus of recent discourse on public school reform.
Proponents of such reform measures emphasize the benefits of student uniforms on specific
behavioral and academic outcomes. Tenth grade data from The National Educational Longitudinal
Study of 1988 was used to test empirically the claims made by uniform advocates. The findings
indicate that student uniforms have no direct effect on substance use, behavioral problems, or
attendance. Contrary to current discourse, the authors found a negative effect of uniforms on
student academic achievement. Uniform policies may indirectly affect school environments and
student outcomes by providing a visible and public symbol of commitment to school improvement
and reform.
Brunsma and Rockquemore wanted to investigate the extraordinary claims being made about how
wonderful school uniforms are, particularly from the Long Beach California. It was being claimed that
mandatory uniform policies were resulting in massive decreases (50 to 100 percent) in crime and
disciplinary problems.
It is typically assumed, as exemplified in Long Beach, that uniforms are the sole factor causing direct
change in numerous behavioral and academic outcomes. Those pronouncements by uniform
proponents have raised strident objections and created a political climate in which public school
uniform policies have become highly contested. The ongoing public discourse is not only entrenched in
controversy but also largely fueled by conjecture and anecdotal evidence. Hence, it now seems critical
that empirical analysis should be conducted to inform the school uniform debate. In this study, we
investigated the relationship between uniforms and several outcomes that represent the core
elements of uniform proponent's claims. Specifically, we examined how a uniform affects attendance,
behavior problems, substance abuse, and academic achievement. We believe that a thorough analysis
of the arguments proposed by uniform advocates will add critical insight to the ongoing debate on the
effects of school uniform policies. (Brunsma and Rockquemore, 1998, pg. 54)
14

The authors point out that if uniforms work, they should see some of the following trends in schools
with uniforms:
1. Student uniforms decrease substance use (drugs).
2. Student uniforms decrease behavioral problems.
3. Student uniforms increase attendance.
4. Student uniforms increase academic achievement.
They suspected that whenother variables affecting these four items were accounted for, it would be
shown that uniforms were not the cause for improvement.
How They Did Their Study
They used data from the National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), and three follow-
up studies. These studies tracked a national sample of eighth graders (in 1988) from a wide variety of
public and private schools and followed their academic careers through college. Some of the data
collected in the studies included uniform policies, student background (economic and minority
status), peer group (attitudes towards school and drug use), school achievement, and behavioral
characteristics (how often did each student get into trouble, fights , suspensions, etc.). The authors
concentrated on data from the students 10th grade year.
Some of the independent variables they considered were sex, race, economic status, public or private
school, academic or vocational "tracking", rural or urban district, peer proschool attitudes, academic
preparedness, the student's own proschool attitudes, and most importantly, whether or not the
students wore uniforms. The researchers wanted to determine if there was a tie between these
variables and desirable behavior by the students. The areas that they were looking for improvement
as a result of the previous variables included reduced absenteeism, fewer behavioral problems,
reduced illegal drug use, and improved standardized test scores. The researchers considered this
second group of variables to be the dependent variables. The goal of their study was to determine if
there was any relationship between the independent variables (particularly uniforms) and the
dependent variables.
The authors took all of the data for these variables from the NELS:88 study and performed a
regression analysis to see if any of the independent variables were predictors of any of the dependent
variables. If there was a strong tie in the data between any two variables ( uniforms and absenteeism,
for example), it would show up in the study as a correlation coefficient close to 1 or -1. A correlation
coefficient near 0 indicates no relationship between the two variables. So, if wearing uniforms had a
large effect on behavior, we would expect to see a correlation coefficient of say 0.5 between uniforms
and measures of good behavior. If we see a very low correlation coefficient between these two, then
we know that wearing uniforms has no real effect on behavior.
Results
The only positive result for uniforms that the study showed was a very slight relationship between
uniforms and standardized achievement scores. The correlation coefficient was 0.05, indicating a very
slight possible relationship between the two variables, but showing that uniforms are a very poor
predictor of standardized test scores and that the relationship is much weaker than has been
indicated in the uniform debate. Notice that 0,05 is much closer to 0 than to 1. Other than this one
weak, possible relationship, uniforms struck out. In the authors own words:
Student uniform use was not significantly correlated with any of the school commitment variables
such as absenteeism, behavior, or substance use (drugs). In addition, students wearing uniforms did

not appear to have any significantly different academic preparedness, proschool attitudes, or peer
group structures with proschool attitudes than other students. Moreover, the negative correlations
between the attitudinal variables and the various outcomes of interest are significant; hence, the
predictive analysis provides more substantive results.
In other words, the authors saw no relationship between wearing uniforms and the desirable
behavior (reduced absenteeism, reduced drug usage, improved behavior). They did, however, see a
strong relationship between academic preparedness, proschool attitudes, and peers having proschool
attitudes and the desirable behaviors. Furthermore, they saw no relationship between wearing
uniforms and the variables that do predict good behavior (academic preparedness, proschool
attitudes, and peers having proschool attitudes).
Conclusion
Based upon this analysis, the authors were forced to reject the ideas that uniforms improved
attendance rates, decreased behavioral problems, decreased drug use, or improved academic
achievement. The authors did find that proschool attitudes from students and their peers and good
academic preparedness did predict the desired behavior. They saw that wearing uniforms did not lead
to improvements in proschool attitudes or increased academic preparation.

School Uniforms: Panacea or Band-Aid?
http://www.educationworld.com/a_admin/admin/admin130.shtml
Teacher’s Summary
Uniforms alone do not have all of the magical effects some school districts
promise. However, a school uniform can be one of many factors that could
contribute to improved school performance and safety.
Does requiring students to wear uniforms directly affect school environment and
student achievement, or is it the equivalent of painting the walls of a crumbling
building -- merely cosmetic? What does the research say? What do students, teachers,
and parents say?
Shopping for back-to-school clothes was just a little different this year for gap-toothed third grader
AdiSirkes, who needed new clothes after his school adopted a uniform dress policy. Next year, he'll go
to a different school, one that mandates different uniforms -- and that will mean yet another whole
new wardrobe.
"My son's an unusual size," his mother Irit told Education World, "so it's hard to find him clothes
anyway. Limiting what I buy to certain colors makes shopping for him not only more expensive but
that much harder."
"My fifth-grade daughter used to like school," added Connie Terry, "but last year, her school switched
to uniforms. Now when I ask her how school is going, the first thing out of her mouth is she hates
uniforms. Even during the summer time, she'd say, 'I hate to wear uniforms.' My daughter likes to be
individual, to wear what she wants. She doesn't want to have to wear what everyone else is wearing.
It doesn't make her feel good about herself; it doesn't make her feel special."
Despite complaints like these, public schools throughout the United States are adopting uniform dress
policies. In 1994, the Long Beach, California, school system began requiring that students wear
uniforms. The system recorded a drop in suspensions, assaults, thefts, vandalism, and weapon and
drug violations and an increase in attendance. Ten states -- plus scores of individual communities --
followed suit and adopted some type of school uniform regulation. Included in those ranks were
schools in Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, Los Angeles, Miami, Nashville, New Orleans,
Phoenix, Seattle, and St. Louis. This school year, 550,000 New York City elementary students are
wearing uniforms.
Although most evidence is anecdotal, the Long Beach schools weren't the only schools to note
improved behavior. Chicago school officials found a drop in gang violence after adopting school
uniforms. Birmingham schools reported a drop in weapon and drug incidents, and Houston schools
reported a decrease in violent crime. Miami-Dade County schools, however, found that fights nearly
doubled at their middle schools after the school district adopted a uniform policy.
"Many schools here draw from varied socioeconomic levels," Bev Heller, a teacher at Fienberg-Fisher
Elementary in Miami-Dade County told Education World. "Wealthier students may own every uniform
accessory and wear designer bracelets or shoes that light up; others -- if they do own uniforms -- have
15

very basic ones. Adopting uniforms certainly did not blur the socioeconomic lines in our student
body."
"Our school has had a mandatory uniform policy for three years," she continued. "There is a big sign
in our school, 'Uniforms Mandatory,' but not all the students wear them. Our student body is
transient, and purchasing different uniforms every time a student moves can be very expensive.
Requiring school uniforms could be a hardship, especially on students who frequently move."
HOW TO ADOPT A UNIFORM POLICY
Because of results like those in Long Beach, Chicago, and Birmingham, many schools are adopting
uniform dress policies. Experts offer advice to those schools on how best to initiate it. Among the tips
included in the U.S. Department of Education's manual are the following:
Involve parents and students from the beginning, including getting their input on what the
uniform will look like. Students are more likely to wear a uniform they think is attractive than
one they hate. Make sure there are choices for types of tops and bottoms and perhaps even
colors so the uniform looks good on different body types.
Decide what the ramifications will be if a student does not wear a uniform. Will the school
overlook it? Will the child be sent home? Will your school give the child a uniform from an
available supply and assess one fee if it is not returned and a smaller cleaning fee when it is?
Decide in advance how your school will deal with this issue.
Include an arrangement for students who cannot afford or choose not to wear uniforms.
Some school districts collect old uniforms to distribute to needy families. Some distribute
donated money so parents themselves can select their children's uniforms. Others permit
students who do not wish to wear uniforms to transfer to a school that does not require
them, and some school districts have an opt-out policy.
"Before initiating a uniform policy, administrators need to investigate options and select the ones that
best meet the individual school's needs," states the manual. "As the courts have yet to decide if a
public school district can make students wear uniforms, some sort of opt-out policy is definitely
desirable."
WHY UNIFORMS?
Proponents of school uniforms believe that in addition to reducing assaults, thefts, vandalism, and
weapon and drug use in schools, requiring students to wear uniforms
increases security by making it obvious who is not supposed to be on campus;
helps parents by reducing the cost of being fashionable;
helps students resist peer pressure;
blurs socioeconomic lines because people cannot judge others by their clothes;
reduces arguments over clothes because kids have no reason to fight over or steal one
another's clothes;

facilitates school pride, improves school climate, and sets the tone of the classroom as a
serious place for learning;
increases attendance and academic achievement;
reduces gang violence.
CAN UNIFORMS REALLY BRING ABOUT THE KINDS OF IMPROVEMENTS THAT
PROPONENTS CLAIM?
Sociologists David Brunsma and Kerry Rockquemore discovered that requiring students to wear
uniforms had no direct effect on substance abuse, behavioral problems, or school attendance. They
used data on approximately 5,000 U.S. sophomores who were part of a 1988 National Educational
Longitudinal Study at the University of Alabama at Huntsville. The results of that study are
documented in The Effects of Student Uniforms on Attendance, Behavior Problems, Substance Use,
and Academic Achievement, published in The Journal of Educational Research.Brunsma told Education
World that the tenth-grade students who were required to wear uniforms actually scored slightly
lower on standardized achievement tests than did a comparable group not required to wear them.
"They think uniforms will solve every problem, but don't they understand being forced to wear
uniforms could make rebellious teens even more rebellious?" 13-year-old Emily Granen asked
Education World. Rebellious teens forced to wear uniforms might be even less inclined to do well.
Some people think that making kids wear uniforms will reform schools is the equivalent of painting
the walls of a crumbling building -- merely cosmetic.
Long Beach Unified School District public information director Dick Van Der Laan, speaking about the
successes achieved after initiating a uniform policy, says in the Manual on School Uniforms, "We can't
attribute the improvement exclusively to school uniforms...." What has been found to decrease
vandalism, school crime in general, and fights is using a combination of initiatives, one of which could
be requiring students to wear uniforms.
"Uniform policies may indirectly affect school environment and student outcomes by providing a
visible and public symbol of commitment to school improvement and reform," Brunsma told
Education World. "They are not the sole factor responsible for the numerous behavioral and academic
outcomes attributed to them."
Schools that include, among other initiatives, see-through plastic or mesh book bags, metal detectors,
aggressive truancy-reduction initiatives, drug-prevention efforts, student and/or athlete drug testing,
community efforts to limit gangs, a zero-tolerance policy for weapons, character education classes,
and conflict resolution proposals -- plus the uniform initiative -- frequently do improve school
discipline and safety.
Although not a panacea for rectifying educational issues, students who wear uniforms may engender
positive changes in themselves and in schools. Teacher Kathleen Modenback of Northshore High
School, a school in Louisiana that adopted a uniform policy this year, told Education World, "I've never
been concerned with what my students wear. Supervising uniforms and dress codes only lengthens
the long list of parental jobs that educators have taken over in recent years. Uniforms, which are
economical and easy for parents, are sometimes looked on as a solution to the atmosphere of

impending danger that has settled on schools nationwide.
"However, after seeing our students in uniforms for the last two weeks, I see an almost magical
change in the student body. My seniors talk of the ease with which they dress in the morning, and all
the kids seem calmer and more mild-mannered. Almost all the students were wearing the uniforms
although the deadline for wearing them was weeks away. Maybe there's something to them. Perhaps
they draw us all into a sense of false security and well-being that only conformity can give."

Argumentative Essay: School Uniform
www.scholaradvisor.com
Teacher’s Summary
Anecdotal thoughts on why school uniforms are good.
The idea of school uniforms seems like an antiquated concept for many North
Americans. Unless a child attends private school, it is not normally practiced by children and families.
Yet around the world, wearing school uniforms is the norm. Students studying in schools requiring
school uniforms generally perform very well academically and seem happy wearing the same outfit
every day. There are many benefits to wearing school uniforms that schools in Canada and the United
States should incorporate into their public schools.
One of the biggest concerns in schools these days is bullying. Students are harassed physically,
verbally, and socially. The latest trend in bullying is cyberbullying. Often, the cause of bullying stems
from people being different for not wearing the “right” clothes. If someone looks richer, most people
feel like they have a higher social status or more power. To the contrary, uniforms allow children to
learn on a more level playing field, with less judgment about clothing choices, brands of clothing, or
physical appearance.
A lot of students who wear uniforms claim that they feel more proud of their school. Wearing school
colors gives students a feeling of being more connected to their school and classmates. If there is a
sense of community and connectedness among the students, the use of foul language, gang behavior,
and crimes like vandalism are largely eliminated. Wearing school uniforms can also help people gain
more self-confidence because they know they are a part of something bigger.
One of the main concerns people have about wearing school uniforms is conformity. People fear that
by making children look the same, their individuality will be suppressed. However, this is not the case.
Accessories, such as bracelets and hair clips, can jazz up a school uniform. Besides, students can wear
their own clothing after school and during weekends. An individual’s personality is not wholly
expressed by fashion alone. Personality is determined by the way a person moves, feels, thinks, and
talks. Wearing a school uniform neither defines a child’s personality nor erases it.
There are even more advantages to wearing school uniforms in public schools in addition to those
previously mentioned. It means lower costs for parents during back-to-school shopping. However, the
idea that bullying might be alleviated is the leading reason why schools should implement the wearing
of uniforms. The other is the fostering of school pride. Students will not lose their personality but will
merely learn new ways to express themselves.
16

History of School Uniforms
kids.lovetoknow.com
By Jodee Redmond
Learning something about the history of school uniforms can help parents and students gain some
perspective on whether they are in favor of them or not.
School uniforms worn by students tend to be conservative in style. For boys, they may be made up of
dark pants and a light colored shirt. A tie completes the outfit. School uniforms for girls may be made
up of a blouse worn with a skirt, culottes, a jumper, or a dress. Some schools will allow female
students to wear pants. A jacket may be worn by both genders.
History of School Uniforms Over Time
The history of school uniforms can actually be dated back to the fall of the Roman Empire when
formal education also stopped for young people in the West. Boys were sometimes chosen to attend
song schools to prepare them for the priesthood. They may have worn similar clothing while
attending classes.
In the Middle Ages, priests often took on the role of teacher. Boys were the only ones offered an
education, since educating girls wasn't considered a priority at that time. Students attending secular
schools probably didn't wear uniforms while attending classes, which could be for up to 12 hours a
day.
School Uniforms in England
Most students attending elementary and secondary schools in England are required to wear uniforms.
Policies vary from school to school as to how strictly the wearing of the uniform is enforced.In the
past several years, a trend has emerged where school uniforms are more modern. Instead of the
traditional uniform (including a blazer and tie) in a thick fabric, T-shirts, polo shirts and sweatshirts in
school colors may be worn. Plain colored pants or jeans may be worn at some schools.
This policy was adopted to modernize the apparel of students and also to help families who were
finding it difficult to afford the standard school uniform. Another consideration is the fact that schools
are now using central heat in the winter, which means the temperature during colder months is much
easier to control. Students no longer need to bundle up in old-style uniforms to stay comfortable
while attending classes in winter, and these styles are not the best choice during summer months.
Some schools in England are bucking the trend toward more modern school uniforms, and instead
have chosen to go back to more traditional ones. Administrators want students to have a more
conservative look and feel that having students wear uniforms will help to combat bullying.
School Uniforms in the United States
Most public schools in the U.S. don't require students to wear uniforms; however, the number of
schools that require pupils to wear uniforms has been on the rise. Those children attending private
schools are likely to be required to wear uniforms when they go to school. Catholic schools in
particular expect students to dress in a certain way.
Options Instead of School Uniforms
Instead of setting a policy that students are required to wear a uniform, many school districts decide
on a standardized dress code instead. These may be adopted in an attempt to keep "gang clothing"
17

out of schools and to reduce pressure on students (and their parents) to buy certain brands of
clothing in order to fit in or be popular.
The dress code may specify that certain parts of the body must remain covered while on school
property (stomach and back). Most schools would not encourage students to wear T-shirts with
violent messages or offensive language on them. Some dress codes may be quite specific about the
style of dress that students are allowed to wear, while others give pupils a certain amount of leeway.
Students and their parents may be told that they are expected to wear clothing that is clean, neat,
and that covers them appropriately.
These recent developments will form part of the history of school uniforms, and we can look back to
see how the popularity of school uniforms changes with time.

"School Uniforms: Prevention or Suppression?"
by Raymond F. Felch III
Teacher’s Summary
School uniforms attack individuality, something especially important to
teens. Gang violence is too big of a problem for school uniforms to solve.
Uniforms possibly infringe on USA Constitutional rights. Certain studies on
school uniforms are unreliable.
Consider the following excerpts from the President’s Radio Address to the Nation;
"This morning I want to talk with you about what we can do to break hold of gangs and violence in our
schools and what we can do to create an atmosphere in our schools that promotes discipline and
order and learning ... I believe we should give strong support to school districts that decide to require
young students to wear school uniforms. We’ve all seen the tragic headlines screaming of the death
of a teenager who was killed for a pair of sneakers or jewelry or a designer jacket. In Detroit, a 15-year
old boy was shot for his $86 basketball shoes. In Fort Lauderdale, a 15-year old student was robbed of
his jewelry. Just this past December in Oxon Hill, Maryland, a 17-year old honor student was killed at a
bus stop, caught in the cross fire during the robbery of another students designer jacket" (Clinton,
"Transcript," 1-2).
Why are we proposing to mandate school uniforms for all elementary and middle schools students,
while at the same time excluding high school students? Is it not obvious, by the President’s own
accounting, that the problem group is teenage students ages 15 and older? Moreover, is there any
indisputable evidence that school uniforms can help cure society’s violence and disciplinary
problems? How reliable are the statistics that show the short term implementation of school uniforms
in a select group of elementary and middle schools prevents violence? Knowing all of this, are we still
willing to freely give up more of our God given constitutional rights? Worse yet, by accepting this
proposal, are we saying that we are in favor of stifling the creativity and individuality of our children?
The Department of Education, in consultation with the Department of Justice, and under the direction
of President Clinton, has developed the Manual of School Uniforms. On February 24, 1996, President
Clinton signed a directive to distribute this manual to the Nation’s 1600 public school districts
(Clinton, "Text," 2). Furthermore, the leaders of our schools appear to have hastily embraced this new
proposal. A recent national survey of 5,500 secondary school principals shows that they feel school
uniforms would help eliminate violence (Tousignant 1). Shawn Ashley, principal in the Long Beach
Unified School District, claims there have been fewer incidents of fighting since they imposed the
mandatory school uniform policy one year ago. Ashley reports that incidents of fighting has dropped
from 1,135 in the 1993-94 school year, to only 554 for the 1994-95 school year (Kennedy 1). Clearly,
this is an issue that affects parents across the nation, and should be carefully examined before giving
our unconditional support. I believe that any proposal is dangerous if it fails to address the real
problem, threatens to diminish our constitutional rights and has been promoted by using misleading
statistics.
There is no question that school uniforms can instill a feeling of school spirit, school pride and social
18

acceptance. When compared to designer clothes and name brand basketball shoes, school uniforms
can also be a cost effective solution to school wear. Surely, this is an appealing benefit to those
families that find it difficult, if not impossible, to afford such luxuriance. Certainly, parents will find
that it is easier to shop for their children’s school attire, and the students will be able to quickly
choose their outfits for school in the morning.
Unfortunately, as well served as this proposal may appear, school uniforms can not solve the nation’s
problems of gang violence. Clearly, these deeply rooted problems are well beyond the scope of any
school uniform policy. Furthermore, mandating this policy only at the elementary and middle school
level does nothing to curb gang violence occurring at the high schools across our country. As Loren
Siegel, Director of the Public Education Department, ACLU, points out, school administrators and
teachers have been reluctant to impose the school uniform policy on high school students, because it
most certainly will cause the teenagers to rebel (Siegel 1). Cecilia Smith, a guidance counselor at
Forestville High School in Prince George’s, tells of how teenage students rebelled when school
uniforms were tried at their school. Smith explains that the teenagers were rebelling because they
were afraid that "it was going to take their individuality away" (Tousignant 2).
Also, Siegel argues that younger children can be persuaded to wear school uniforms. Some children
may even like the idea of school uniforms and the feeling of being part of the school community.
Unfortunately, teenagers are at a point in their lives where expressing their individuality is extremely
important. She describes teenagers as young people that are striving to express uniqueness in many
different ways. Siegel cleverly shows that the teenagers are already in uniforms of their own choosing
-- baggy pants, T-shirts and baseball caps worn backward (Siegel 1). Clearly, there is no way that
school administrators, teachers and parents could expect the proposed school uniform policy to be
imposed at the high school level.
Up until now, we have discussed why a school uniform policy is futile in preventing gang violence in
our schools. This however, is not the only problem with the school uniform policy. We still need to
examine the effect that such a proposal would have on our constitutional rights.
Recently, the A.C.L.U. represented twenty-six families in a school uniform lawsuit against the Long
Beach Unified School District. Although the case resulted in an out-of-court settlement, and both
sides tentatively agreed to certain provisions, this case raised important issues concerning our legal
rights. Barbara Bernstein, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, reaffirmed the
opinion of the A.C.L.U. when she stated that requiring school uniforms is not only illegal, it is not the
solution to the school system’s problems. Clearly, Bernstein was in favor of President Clinton’s goal,
calling it "admirable;" however she pointed out that it should not be "accomplished at the expense of
constitutional rights" (McCarthey 2). Surely, the Long Beach lawsuit has been instrumental in raising
the public’s awareness of the legal ramifications associated with adopting the school uniform
proposal.
One important aspect caused by the litigation surrounding the school uniform policy is the "opt out"
provision. As a condition of the Long Beach settlement, the school district will attempt to improve the
communication with parents and provide improved exemption procedures. The relevance of this
provision is clearly demonstrated by the reference made in the Manual of School Uniforms, Item #5:
"When a mandatory school uniform policy is adopted, determine whether to have an ‘opt out’
provision" ("Manual" 2). The reference in this manual instructs the school administrators on how to
provide parents with an exemption from the policy. In some cases, the parents can "opt" to have their

children go to another school. In the case where all of the schools in the district require uniforms, as is
the case in the Long Beach Unified School District, the parents can "opt" to send their children to
school without uniforms ("Manual" 2). In any case, the inclusion of this provision in President
Clinton’s Manual of School Uniforms shows a genuine concern that a mandatory policy may infringe
on our constitutional rights.
Obviously, one would have to agree that a school uniform policy can do little to fight gang violence in
our schools. Furthermore, we should all be in agreement that a mandatory school uniform policy is
considered unconstitutional. These issues however, are not the only ones surrounding the school
uniform proposal. To gain an overall understanding of the problem, discussion of the misleading
statistics used in promoting this policy is necessary.
In order to emphasis his position on the school uniform proposal and its apparent effectiveness,
President Clinton draws attention to the Long Beach Unified School District as the model system. As
Siegel points out, in an obvious attempt to demonstrate its success, President Clinton misleadingly
reports the Long Beach School’s self-generated data showing decreases in student misconduct.
Unfortunately, there was no mention of the other steps taken by the School District to improve school
behavior during the experimental year. Siegel reports, at the same time the school uniform policy was
implemented, the District began "increasing the number of teachers patrolling the hallways during
class changes" (Siegel 1). Clearly, no one can be sure which change had the most effect on student
behavior. Furthermore, we need to remember who the gate-keeper of this conclusive data is. Could
the school administrators, in an attempt to promote the effectiveness of their new policy and in light
of the national attention it had drawn, have possibly overlooked certain infractions during the year?
Whereas, the reliability of the Long Beach case study is clearly questionable, we must also examine
the effects of other changes made at the state level across the nation. Craig Donegan, editor for
Congressional Quarterly, reports a 1995 survey by the National Conference of Mayors indicating there
has been an increase in the number of youth curfews by 45 percent since 1990. Donegan also
acknowledges that a recent National Governor’s Association (NGA) report states that between 1992
and 1994 there have been 27 states that have passed laws making it easier to prosecute children as
adults (Donegan 2). In addition, Senator John Ashcroft enacted the Violent and Hardcore Juvenile
Offender Reform Act of 1995 (Donegan 1). Ashcroft also indicated that he wants the funding of the
Juvenile Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 to be contingent upon states prosecuting juveniles age
14 and up as adults. Many cities and states have adopted laws that hold the parents of delinquent
children accountable for their chldren’s behavior (Donegan 2). Clearly, there have been many changes
made at the national, state and local levels which have been attributed to having a positive effect on
juvenile violence. Regardless of these changes, there is very little correlation between requiring
school uniforms at the elementary and middle school levels, and the recent reduction in teenage
violence at our high schools.
In conclusion, the failure to address the real problem of violence in our schools, it’s impact on our
constitutional rights and the misleading manner in which it has been proposed, clearly illustrates why
we should avert from an unconditional acceptance of the mandatory school uniform policy. It is very
clear that we have a serious juvenile violence problem in our country, and positive efforts are
constantly being made to alleviate the problem. However, we should not fall victim to the illusion that
requiring school uniforms for children under the age of 14 can prevent this teenage violence.
Likewise, we need to remember that our constitution insures our right to creativity. We have an
obligation to insure that our children are allowed to grow, to be creative and to be independent

thinkers. Finally, there has not been any official case studies conducted that prove that school
uniforms can prevent teenage violence. The disseminated and relaxed data, which has been so
cleverly capitalized upon by our administrators, is inconclusive at best. Our tendency to
unconditionally accept a school uniform proposal is just one more example of society’s apathetic
approach to problem solving. We all need to take a more active role when addressing issues that
concern the rights and welfare of our family.

Literature Review Handouts

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Destaque

Destaque (20)

Mais de Sam Landfried

Mais de Sam Landfried (12)

Último

Último (20)

Literature Review Handouts