[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Livia

It's brilliant prep for going to work. If you have to wear a uniform for work and decide to express yourself by wearing funky shoes, someone else will be doing your job by the end of the week. You have to follow rules in the workplace, unless you intend to be long-term unemployed, and then you can wear pretty much what you want and express yourself all day long.

I tackled this point earlier because I knew it would come up.

There aren't many workplaces that would care about what the shoes look like as long as they are black. None of the shoes in the pictures are at all 'funky' and few employers would bat an eyelid at them. Sending pupils home on a pedantic technicality does not prepare them for working life at all. It's silly to say so.

The Headtwat is being a pedantic mess to try to flex his authority and send a message but all he has done is bring bad press to the school and antagonised the parents and pupils because he's focusing on the insignificant details when he should be focused on doing his job and ensuring these kids get an education.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I tackled this point earlier because I knew it would come up.

There aren't many workplaces that would care about what the shoes look like as long as they are black. None of the shoes in the pictures are at all 'funky' and few employers would bat an eyelid at them. Sending pupils home on a pedantic technicality does not prepare them for working life at all. It's silly to say so.

The Headtwat is being a pedantic mess to try to flex his authority and send a message but all he has done is bring bad press to the school and antagonised the parents and pupils because he's focusing on the insignificant details when he should be focused on doing his job and ensuring these kids get an education.

I totally agree.

It is bad enough that some in Education allow children to be branded failures as to not learning quickly enough.
Here now to actually make an issue out of wearing a kind of black shoes, when all that was stipulated was that they needed to be black as to the uniform, and thereby by his actions now possibly affecting learning is just plain ridiculous.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I tackled this point earlier because I knew it would come up.

There aren't many workplaces that would care about what the shoes look like as long as they are black. None of the shoes in the pictures are at all 'funky' and few employers would bat an eyelid at them. Sending pupils home on a pedantic technicality does not prepare them for working life at all. It's silly to say so.

The Headtwat is being a pedantic mess to try to flex his authority and send a message but all he has done is bring bad press to the school and antagonised the parents and pupils because he's focusing on the insignificant details when he should be focused on doing his job and ensuring these kids get an education.

My three nieces were doing quite badly at their local school and my brother and his wife decided to send them to private school. They're not wealthy, they have good jobs and they've given up moving, holidays, an extension and all kinds of other stuff they were planning to send them to this new school. The old school was really lax about uniforms... the new school, you have to wear exactly what the school dictates, including shoes. My nieces are thriving... and their parents are paying. No one moans about the shoes. No one moans that they are not being allowed to "express themselves", on the contrary they are encouraged to follow their passions... my eldest niece is barely in her teens and is doing extra-curricular film studies and one of the others is learning street dance. But the uniform is non-negotiable. The school doesn't see uniform as an insignificant detail. They have all sorts of kids there, kids who have wealthy parents, kids who have parents working hard to pay their fees and kids on scholarships. They all wear the same. They are all equal. I see that as a positive thing.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Livia

My three nieces were doing quite badly at their local school and my brother and his wife decided to send them to private school. They're not wealthy, they have good jobs and they've given up moving, holidays, an extension and all kinds of other stuff they were planning to send them to this new school. The old school was really lax about uniforms... the new school, you have to wear exactly what the school dictates, including shoes. My nieces are thriving... and their parents are paying. No one moans about the shoes. No one moans that they are not being allowed to "express themselves", on the contrary they are encouraged to follow their passions... my eldest niece is barely in her teens and is doing extra-curricular film studies and one of the others is learning street dance. But the uniform is non-negotiable. The school doesn't see uniform as an insignificant detail. They have all sorts of kids there, kids who have wealthy parents, kids who have parents working hard to pay their fees and kids on scholarships. They all wear the same. They are all equal. I see that as a positive thing.

I'd say their success is more to do with little things like a higher quality of teaching rather than what they are wearing.
Uniforms only benefit the school, it doesn't benefit the students and it benefits NO ONE AT ALL to pick over the smallest details of someone's shoes when they fit the basic criteria of what's asked of the students.

The headteacher is being a snob that is abusing his authority for no good reason. He needs to remember that he is an educator and not a detective for the Fashion Police.

Uniforms in most schools are just a ****ing racket to squeeze money out of parents anyway.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I'd say their success is more to do with little things like a higher quality of teaching rather than what they are wearing.
Uniforms only benefit the school, it doesn't benefit the students and it benefits NO ONE AT ALL to pick over the smallest details of someone's shoes when they fit the basic criteria of what's asked of the students.

The headteacher is being a snob that is abusing his authority for no good reason. He needs to remember that he is an educator and not a detective for the Fashion Police.

Uniforms in most schools are just a ****ing racket to squeeze money out of parents anyway.

Why do we never see parents who've paid for their kids to go to a good school, moaning in the press about the uniform, when it's almost always a much stricter uniform code than state schools. The whole thing about getting the press in to make a fuss detracts much more from the kids' learning than actually following the rules in the first place.

I'd much rather have a strict uniform code, which reinforces the idea that there is discipline in schools, than have the kids in designer wear ripping the piss out of the kids wearing Primark. I remember secondary school... I remember kids emerging, dripping, from the fish pond because they didn't have the right bag.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Livia

Why do we never see parents who've paid for their kids to go to a good school, moaning in the press about the uniform, when it's almost always a much stricter uniform code than state schools. The whole thing about getting the press in to make a fuss detracts much more from the kids' learning than actually following the rules in the first place.

I'd much rather have a strict uniform code, which reinforces the idea that there is discipline in schools, than have the kids in designer wear ripping the piss out of the kids wearing Primark. I remember secondary school... I remember kids emerging, dripping, from the fish pond because they didn't have the right bag.

Well no, the press attention was a result of the Headtwat's decision to prevent these kids from learning. It was a consequence of HIS decision, not the cause of the disruption itself.

The whole fashion excuse is stupid, bullies will always find a reason to bully others. To try to limit bullying triggers is a pointless endeavor because there will always be a trigger regardless.

The whole idea that uniforms=discipline is also flawed. At my school, if you didn't have the correct uniform, you'd be put into isolation and made to do lines until your parents coughed up the money to buy an overpriced replacement from the school itself and guess what? Our school completely lacked discipline despite the draconian level of strictness over the uniforms. It only reinforced my opinion that uniforms are just a way for schools to force parents to pay for public school.

There's no benefits for students when it to uniforms, they don't prepare you for working life, they don't aid in education (they can actually be a distraction in summer or hot weather), they don't aid in discipline and they don't prevent bullying from occurring. They only benefit a school's profits.

[bots]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Well no, the press attention was a result of the Headtwat's decision to prevent these kids from learning. It was a consequence of HIS decision, not the cause of the disruption itself.

The whole fashion excuse is stupid, bullies will always find a reason to bully others. To try to limit bullying triggers is a pointless endeavor because there will always be a trigger regardless.

The whole idea that uniforms=discipline is also flawed. At my school, if you didn't have the correct uniform, you'd be put into isolation and made to do lines until your parents coughed up the money to buy an overpriced replacement from the school itself and guess what? Our school completely lacked discipline despite the draconian level of strictness over the uniforms. It only reinforced my opinion that uniforms are just a way for schools to force parents to pay for public school.

There's no benefits for students when it to uniforms, they don't prepare you for working life, they don't aid in education (they can actually be a distraction in summer or hot weather), they don't aid in discipline and they don't prevent bullying from occurring. They only benefit a school's profits.

The school published its rules, the vast majority of parent and children complied. The media attention came from the disruptive element that didn't want to comply, and wanted to undermine the schools efforts for improvement.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Well no, the press attention was a result of the Headtwat's decision to prevent these kids from learning. It was a consequence of HIS decision, not the cause of the disruption itself.

The whole fashion excuse is stupid, bullies will always find a reason to bully others. To try to limit bullying triggers is a pointless endeavor because there will always be a trigger regardless.

The whole idea that uniforms=discipline is also flawed. At my school, if you didn't have the correct uniform, you'd be put into isolation and made to do lines until your parents coughed up the money to buy an overpriced replacement from the school itself and guess what? Our school completely lacked discipline despite the draconian level of strictness over the uniforms. It only reinforced my opinion that uniforms are just a way for schools to force parents to pay for public school.

There's no benefits for students when it to uniforms, they don't prepare you for working life, they don't aid in education (they can actually be a distraction in summer or hot weather), they don't aid in discipline and they don't prevent bullying from occurring. They only benefit a school's profits.

Very strong point there Dezzy, my school had strict uniform rules which I thought silly myself, however I actually liked my school uniform so was happy to wear it.

I think you are making the really good points as to this issue, the issue really being that the school insisted on black shoes, not a specific type of black shoe, and these were 'black shoes'.

However your point as to bullies, is an even stronger one, everyone conformed to the rules of the School I was at but there were still bullies getting at people, for whatever suited them to get at them for.
I made many stands for other lads against bullies at the school I finished up at.

They were bullying for usually nothing valid ,just out of plain and sheer nastiness.
Nothing as to fashion as you rightly point out.
They will always find something to bully others for.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Well no, the press attention was a result of the Headtwat's decision to prevent these kids from learning. It was a consequence of HIS decision, not the cause of the disruption itself.

The whole fashion excuse is stupid, bullies will always find a reason to bully others. To try to limit bullying triggers is a pointless endeavor because there will always be a trigger regardless.

The whole idea that uniforms=discipline is also flawed. At my school, if you didn't have the correct uniform, you'd be put into isolation and made to do lines until your parents coughed up the money to buy an overpriced replacement from the school itself and guess what? Our school completely lacked discipline despite the draconian level of strictness over the uniforms. It only reinforced my opinion that uniforms are just a way for schools to force parents to pay for public school.

There's no benefits for students when it to uniforms, they don't prepare you for working life, they don't aid in education (they can actually be a distraction in summer or hot weather), they don't aid in discipline and they don't prevent bullying from occurring. They only benefit a school's profits.

I'm not in agreement with calling this man the "headtwat". He hasn'tmade this decision alone, there would have been a whole host of people in on it, including the Board of Governors, many of whom will be parents.

Uniforms are not a distraction. If there is a uniform, there will be a summer version. And also, the school doesn't make a profit on uniforms unless they have a shop in the school or take a cut of profits from the suppliers. And the cost of them are considerably less than the designer stuff that was the chosen uniform by the kids my nieces' old school.

We're going to have to disagree on the rest of it Dezzy. But I can tell you that, as a person who was bullied mercilessly at school, my experience has shown me that what you're wearing is the A.No.1 trigger. It's the first thing the bullies see.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

The school published its rules, the vast majority of parent and children complied. The media attention came from the disruptive element that didn't want to comply, and wanted to undermine the schools efforts for improvement.

And that doesn't change the fact that the original disruption came from the fact that the headtwat decided to go on a power trip that contradicted the very nature of his job. The shoes in the pictures were all black shoes that were perfectly acceptable, the parents have a right to be mad that a headteacher is impeding their children's education just to be a pedantic prick. People like him shouldn't be in charge of schools, actions like this only goes to show that education is secondary to his ego.

Originally Posted by _Tom_

I disagree. If there was no school uniform at all and everyone came in with their own clothes everyday, bullies would have so much more ammunition. Sure, bullies will always find reasons to bully someone - but someone coming in wearing cheaper brands, or coming into class with the same outfit more than once a week for example would make them a much bigger target than their peers.

Must we conform in the naive hopes of preventing bullying although we know that it doesn't work anyway? Everyone could go to school looking exactly the same and bullying would still be a factor. To limit individuality out of fear of bullying is a true tragedy and is ultimately cowardly.

Originally Posted by Livia

I'm not in agreement with calling this man the "headtwat". He hasn'tmade this decision alone, there would have been a whole host of people in on it, including the Board of Governors, many of whom will be parents.

Uniforms are not a distraction. If there is a uniform, there will be a summer version. And also, the school doesn't make a profit on uniforms unless they have a shop in the school or take a cut of profits from the suppliers. And the cost of them are considerably less than the designer stuff that was the chosen uniform by the kids my nieces' old school.

We're going to have to disagree on the rest of it Dezzy. But I can tell you that, as a person who was bullied mercilessly at school, my experience has shown me that what you're wearing is the A.No.1 trigger. It's the first thing the bullies see.

He is a man who places his own power trips over the needs of his students, I shall call him a headtwat as much as I please because it's an appropriate name for a mediocre person like him who shouldn't be in a position of authority. A school is a place of education, anyone that prioritises conformity over education i has lost sight of the purpose of a school in the first place.

I've never known a secondary school to offer a summer alternative, I don't think it's common practice outside of summer dresses for primary school girls. Schools can and do make a profit from uniforms, ours certainly did, especially when they changed from jumpers to blazers to squeeze more money out of the parents. If a school has an individual design for their uniform then chances are they profit from it, otherwise what is the point of having a specific uniform designed for the school if not to take generic and cheaper options out of the equation and force parents to either buy from the school or from a shop affiliated with them?

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Livia

Why do we never see parents who've paid for their kids to go to a good school, moaning in the press about the uniform, when it's almost always a much stricter uniform code than state schools. The whole thing about getting the press in to make a fuss detracts much more from the kids' learning than actually following the rules in the first place.

I'd much rather have a strict uniform code, which reinforces the idea that there is discipline in schools, than have the kids in designer wear ripping the piss out of the kids wearing Primark. I remember secondary school... I remember kids emerging, dripping, from the fish pond because they didn't have the right bag.

Personally if I could afford to send my kids to private school..I would easily be able to afford the overpriced school crap. As it stands, I cannot afford to pay 100+ per outfit (3 full sets sets would be near 300 quid, plus PE bag, school bag and such that they recommend is coming up to 400 per child)..so have to make do with tescos stuff in the same colours. The school could piss and moan about it if they wanted to be dickheads, and I would be in the same situation as the parents in this story :S And being judged for 'not following rules'. Though I wouldn't go moaning to the press