School uniforms are uncomfortable to wear and impractical for learning. This is an argument raised in the debate against school uniforms by students having to wear them because the uniform may be made out of uncomfortable material. Students will also claim that they're better off wearing their own clothes.
++6598341
School uniforms, for whatever reason, are often made of uncomfortable materials that students often despise. Therefore, it is reasonable to argue that if school children were allowed to pick their own clothes, then they would learn better because they feel more comfortable. The problem seems to be an inherent one—school uniforms need to be uncomfortable to keep costs down and achieve the desired look. Therefore, making a comfortable school uniform simply would not be possible.
When considering school uniform pros and cons, it is vital that the purpose of school uniforms is discussed. If uniforms don't meet the purpose they were intended for, then they should be abolished.
5. Dress Codes Are a Practical Alternative
A practical alternative to school uniforms is instilling dress codes. This means that the school can continue to enforce dress standards without forcing all students to wear the exact same thing. This way, the school uniforms debate can be side-stepped completely.
While it is reasonable to want students to meet some minimum standards of dress, having a compulsory uniform is not necessary to achieve this. By having an enforceable dress code, it's possible to have the best of both worlds. All of the arguments against school uniforms simply fall a
+-way when you replace it with a dress code instead.
Strongly, strongly against.
They don't stop kids using wealth to define social status. The poor kids are the ones wearing steel toe caps, using a ripped bag, and wearing a uniform two sizes too big; the rich kids have Nike trainers in their PE kit, get picked up by their mum in a Porsche, and talk about their recent trip to Cairo after half /term. Kids aren't stupid, it's easy to tell who has money and who doesn't.
They don't teach any lessons about what work is like in the real world. Throwing on the same outfit for eleven years doesn't teach anything, it actually denies kids the ability to learn how to pick out appropriate outfits for a professional setting.
They don't save money. Kids still need to have a wardrobe of other clothes for weekends and holidays. For those that qualify for government assistance, they simply become something that needs to be maintained for an unreasonable amount of time, not to mention another expense for the tax system; for those that don't, they become another thing to buy, and the rules at some schools make them rather expensive for struggling families.
What they actually do is deny children any chance to express individuality or free thinking. They are yet another way to restrict and control young people, and ensure they do not behave outside the mandated terms. You get a bunch of kids, dress them the same, feed them the same, teach them the same, and soon you have a bunch of people who act, talk, and think the same.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
