If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
128 students suspended at Ind. school
nimue wrote: Teenagers want to be able to express themselves through their clothing. I have no problem with that. I don't want to squash their individuality. I don't want to control every aspect of their lives. I just want them IN CLASS. Let them have their high school fun; the real world will come along soon enough. School IS the real world. It is the job of 14-18 year olds. And of course they can express their individuality through clothing. THere are score of options that they can wear that meet the dress code. Now, if their 'individuality' requires that they go to school 3/4's naked, or dressed in gang-wear, perhaps their career goals lean towards exotic dancer or drug dealer ... and neither of those requires a high school diploma. Naomi |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
128 students suspended at Ind. school
In article .com,
says... Jen wrote: "nimue" wrote in message ... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060827/..._st/dress_code 128 students suspended at Ind. school Classrooms were a little less crowded at Morton High School on the first day of classes: 128 students were sent home for wearing the wrong clothes. Why not a proper uniform, with a range of things to cover lots of tastes and individuality, but not turning it into a fashion show. Because with a uniform that parents have to go out and buy their kids an entire new wardrobe just for school? (And if the 'range' is broad enough to cover a wide enough range, it's no longer a uniform, but a dress code.) You've always made that assertion about uniforms - that it costs families more, and I never bought it. It's less wear for other clothes, so fewer other clothes are needed, and there are opportunities for bulk buying coordinated by the school or privately, hand-me-downs within famlies, and a used uniform market as well. Didn't we discuss this before, and it eventually came down to how you choose to dress and launder in your particular family? Insisting on much variety in all categories of wardrobe and laundering after each wearing (or was it laundrering very infrequently, necessitating the large wardrobes?), or something like that. Banty -- http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5222154.stm |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
128 students suspended at Ind. school
Banty wrote: In article .com, says... Jen wrote: "nimue" wrote in message ... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060827/..._st/dress_code 128 students suspended at Ind. school Classrooms were a little less crowded at Morton High School on the first day of classes: 128 students were sent home for wearing the wrong clothes. Why not a proper uniform, with a range of things to cover lots of tastes and individuality, but not turning it into a fashion show. Because with a uniform that parents have to go out and buy their kids an entire new wardrobe just for school? (And if the 'range' is broad enough to cover a wide enough range, it's no longer a uniform, but a dress code.) You've always made that assertion about uniforms - that it costs families more, and I never bought it. It's less wear for other clothes, so fewer other clothes are needed, and there are opportunities for bulk buying coordinated by the school or privately, hand-me-downs within famlies, and a used uniform market as well. My kid's clothes STILL rarely wear out before they are outgrown. (And if her school was to suddenly switch to uniforms (or semi--uniforms -- as in, 'blue dress slacks and white shirts'), I WOULD have to go out and buy her at least 5 new outfits for school. (By contrast, I bought her 3 new pairs of slacks and a couple of shirts for school this year. She could still wear most of her clothes from last year.) She sure can't wear her clothes (at least not her shirts -- teens tend to sweat .... ) more than once without laundering, and it's really inefficient of water to have to do 'mini loads' every couple of days -- necessary if she was to try and get by with only a couple of uniforms. Didn't we discuss this before, and it eventually came down to how you choose to dress and launder in your particular family? Insisting on much variety in all categories of wardrobe and laundering after each wearing (or was it laundrering very infrequently, necessitating the large wardrobes?), or something like that. Interestingly, after I have always come out against uniforms in public schools, Shaina wrote a English paper last year (in which she had to support her argument) in FAVOR of school uniforms. She told me she really believed it ... that she thought uniforms would be a great idea. (She got an A on the paper too.) *shrug* I still think a reasonable, and well enforced dress code is quite adequate. Naomi Banty -- http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5222154.stm |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
128 students suspended at Ind. school
In article .com,
says... Banty wrote: In article .com, says... Jen wrote: "nimue" wrote in message ... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060827/..._st/dress_code 128 students suspended at Ind. school Classrooms were a little less crowded at Morton High School on the first day of classes: 128 students were sent home for wearing the wrong clothes. Why not a proper uniform, with a range of things to cover lots of tastes and individuality, but not turning it into a fashion show. Because with a uniform that parents have to go out and buy their kids an entire new wardrobe just for school? (And if the 'range' is broad enough to cover a wide enough range, it's no longer a uniform, but a dress code.) You've always made that assertion about uniforms - that it costs families more, and I never bought it. It's less wear for other clothes, so fewer other clothes are needed, and there are opportunities for bulk buying coordinated by the school or privately, hand-me-downs within famlies, and a used uniform market as well. My kid's clothes STILL rarely wear out before they are outgrown. (And if her school was to suddenly switch to uniforms (or semi--uniforms -- as in, 'blue dress slacks and white shirts'), I WOULD have to go out and buy her at least 5 new outfits for school. (By contrast, I bought her 3 new pairs of slacks and a couple of shirts for school this year. She could still wear most of her clothes from last year.) She sure can't wear her clothes (at least not her shirts -- teens tend to sweat ... ) more than once without laundering, and it's really inefficient of water to have to do 'mini loads' every couple of days -- necessary if she was to try and get by with only a couple of uniforms. Naw - it's that you STILL outfit way too much. Look - ANY policy wouldnt' work perfectly well for alllll families. This family has siblings to hand down to, that one does not; this teen isn't squicked by used clothing; that teen is; this set of parents is releived not to buy the latest fashion demands fortheir kids; that set of parents don't care. I think just about any policy can be *made* to be burdensome if you really try. So, if you INSIST that skirts and vests (rather than just shirts and socks) HAAAAVE to be washed after every wearing, and INSIST that your child immediately changes when she gets home to clothes that are of comparable quality and variety to what she would wear to school everyday, and INSIST that everything gets washed after even an evening's wear, and REFUSE to do smaller washes to save water because you live in the desert climes of - Indiana, and REFUSE to look into second hand clothing, then I guess you've pretty much engineered a problem for yourself if there were a school uniform policy in your district. Didn't we discuss this before, and it eventually came down to how you choose to dress and launder in your particular family? Insisting on much variety in all categories of wardrobe and laundering after each wearing (or was it laundrering very infrequently, necessitating the large wardrobes?), or something like that. Interestingly, after I have always come out against uniforms in public schools, Shaina wrote a English paper last year (in which she had to support her argument) in FAVOR of school uniforms. She told me she really believed it ... that she thought uniforms would be a great idea. (She got an A on the paper too.) One doesn't have to believe in the premise to make a good argument - ask any high school debater *shrug* I still think a reasonable, and well enforced dress code is quite adequate. Oh, I agree with that. But I have yet to hear a good argument that uniforms are actually harmful or unreasonable, even if I'm likewise convinced they're not necessary. Banty -- http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5222154.stm |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
128 students suspended at Ind. school
wrote:
Banty wrote: In article .com, says... Jen wrote: "nimue" wrote in message ... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060827/..._st/dress_code 128 students suspended at Ind. school Classrooms were a little less crowded at Morton High School on the first day of classes: 128 students were sent home for wearing the wrong clothes. Why not a proper uniform, with a range of things to cover lots of tastes and individuality, but not turning it into a fashion show. Because with a uniform that parents have to go out and buy their kids an entire new wardrobe just for school? (And if the 'range' is broad enough to cover a wide enough range, it's no longer a uniform, but a dress code.) You've always made that assertion about uniforms - that it costs families more, and I never bought it. It's less wear for other clothes, so fewer other clothes are needed, and there are opportunities for bulk buying coordinated by the school or privately, hand-me-downs within famlies, and a used uniform market as well. My kid's clothes STILL rarely wear out before they are outgrown. (And if her school was to suddenly switch to uniforms (or semi--uniforms -- as in, 'blue dress slacks and white shirts'), I WOULD have to go out and buy her at least 5 new outfits for school. (By contrast, I bought her 3 new pairs of slacks and a couple of shirts for school this year. She could still wear most of her clothes from last year.) I don't think there's a significant financial hardship that would be entailed by buying two more pairs of slacks and a couple more shirts than you normally buy if the school had uniforms all along. My kids did wear out their clothes, and I couldn't hand things down even when they didn't because dd#1 was thinner (slim v.s. regular) than dd#2, plus there were several years where they wore the same size. By the time dd#3 (5 years younger) came along, the clothes that I saved from dd#1 and dd#2 were out of fashion. So it would have saved me money if the kids had a uniform. She sure can't wear her clothes (at least not her shirts -- teens tend to sweat ... ) more than once without laundering, and it's really inefficient of water to have to do 'mini loads' every couple of days -- necessary if she was to try and get by with only a couple of uniforms. This doesn't compute, even if I don't quite understand why she can't wear antiperspirant. If you have 3 pairs of uniform slacks from last year and you buy two more for this year, and you get several shirts for this year (counting on her wearing some of last years), there's no reason why you would have to do 'mini' loads. DD#1 and dd#2's children wear uniforms to school, and I don't notice them doing any mini loads. DD#1's daughter wore white blouse, pleated plaid skirt, knee socks and dark blue sweater. (It was a catholic school.) DD#2's children wear a collared shirt and khaki shorts (they are in Miami in a private school), or in the case of her dd a skirt. Didn't we discuss this before, and it eventually came down to how you choose to dress and launder in your particular family? Insisting on much variety in all categories of wardrobe and laundering after each wearing (or was it laundrering very infrequently, necessitating the large wardrobes?), or something like that. Interestingly, after I have always come out against uniforms in public schools, Shaina wrote a English paper last year (in which she had to support her argument) in FAVOR of school uniforms. She told me she really believed it ... that she thought uniforms would be a great idea. (She got an A on the paper too.) *shrug* I still think a reasonable, and well enforced dress code is quite adequate. Naomi |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
128 students suspended at Ind. school
"Banty" wrote in message ... In article .com, says... nimue wrote: Teenagers want to be able to express themselves through their clothing. I have no problem with that. I don't want to squash their individuality. I don't want to control every aspect of their lives. I just want them IN CLASS. Let them have their high school fun; the real world will come along soon enough. School IS the real world. It is the job of 14-18 year olds. And of course they can express their individuality through clothing. THere are score of options that they can wear that meet the dress code. Now, if their 'individuality' requires that they go to school 3/4's naked, or dressed in gang-wear, perhaps their career goals lean towards exotic dancer or drug dealer ... and neither of those requires a high school diploma. Few teens actually dress to express their individuality. Quite the opposite. They dress for peer group identification. That is their identity. Not that that's necessarily all bad, but it's not this vaunted project in self-actualization that an enlightened institution needs to respect, either. It can darn well happen during non-school hours, or in more subtle ways within a dress code. Depends on the dress code. But even if they code requires black shoes, they can choose the brand and style, to suit their needs. Same things with ties and shirts. And not all dress codes are strick. Apparently, the dress code that the OP referenced just required that certain areas of the body be covered and nothing offensive be on the clothing. And, that teens keep their cell phones off (that's not part of the dress, however - but there were problems with this, as well). Jeff Banty -- http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5222154.stm |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
128 students suspended at Ind. school
Jeff wrote: "Banty" wrote in message Depends on the dress code. But even if they code requires black shoes, they can choose the brand and style, to suit their needs. Same things with ties and shirts. And not all dress codes are strick. Apparently, the dress code that the OP referenced just required that certain areas of the body be covered and nothing offensive be on the clothing. And, that teens keep their cell phones off (that's not part of the dress, however - but there were problems with this, as well). Right. The dress code sounds very similar to the one at our local schools. Which includes: no offensive/drug related slogans on shirts; skirts and shorts have to be longer than the tips of the fingers held at the sides; girls can wear sleeveless shirts if the straps are (IIRC) at least two fingers wide and the shirt is cut high enough under the arms to cover the bra; boys have to have sleeves. (Not sure why the discrepancy.). No bare midriffs or backs (shirts have to be long enough to tuck in), and pants have to be high enough to cover the underwear. Nothing transparent or very low cut. No hats or bandanas or heavy coats. (Religious headcoverings are exempt.) No pajamas. And nothing likely to damage school property. (Cleats on shoes or hard metal trimmings on clothing.) The code concludes with something like "If in doubt, don't wear it." Still plenty of room there for 'individual expression.' Oh, and cell phones have to be off during school hours. Jeff Banty -- http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5222154.stm |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
128 students suspended at Ind. school
"Banty" wrote in message ... In article , nimue says... Tori M wrote: I found it to be distracting to be in classes with kids wearing CoEd Naked shirts (until the school figured them out lol) This was also the "start" of the baggy jeans to your ankles pants.. kids yanking them up all the time. I dont want to see anyones undies. I dont see what the big deal is of wearing Jeans that fit and then going home and changing and expressing themselves on their own time. Some people might be suprised at how nice it is to walk without your pants falling off all the time. I think it is absolutely ridiculous to suspend kids who violate the dress code. Hello? The kids need to go to class to learn. We should not punish kids by taking away their opportunity and responsibility to learn. That is utterly counter-productive. Give the kids detention if you must, just don't take them out of class for violating a dress code. They need to know that going to class and getting an education takes priority over nearly everything. OK - so you object to the punishment and not the rule? I agree that suspension is a pretty unimaginative way to deal with it. to me: unimaginative = clear-cut. If you don't were the right dress, you don't come to school. So, how about in-house detention, and in black slacks and white shirts as required wear. IF the parents can't support that (and run out and get the clothes), then their true value on education would be apparent. It would make the point, and the clothes would add the embarassment factor that would make the point to the kids in question. Would you go along with that? Banty The kids were essentially sent home on the first day of school because they either were not wearing appropriate attire or were using cell phones. The student dress code is available on the internet and presumable, students and parents were able to get a copy of it if they didn't have it from the previous year. Clothing stores in the area sell the apporpiate clothing that is consistant with the dress code (no logos except school logos) in the appropriate color. I am sure not only did the high school students get the message that only appropriate clothing is to be worn, but the kids at the other two high schools in the district and the lower grades got the message, too. If the policy is uniformly enforced, then it becomes a non-issue. The kids have plenty of ways to express themselves with wearing jewlry and othe ways. Hats and other colors are often allowed in schools to decrease the visibility of gang symbols. IMHO, the school did a good job. http://hammond.k12.in.us/StudentParentGuide.pdf Jeff -- http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5222154.stm |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
128 students suspended at Ind. school
wrote in message oups.com... Jen wrote: "nimue" wrote in message ... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060827/..._st/dress_code 128 students suspended at Ind. school Classrooms were a little less crowded at Morton High School on the first day of classes: 128 students were sent home for wearing the wrong clothes. Why not a proper uniform, with a range of things to cover lots of tastes and individuality, but not turning it into a fashion show. Because with a uniform that parents have to go out and buy their kids an entire new wardrobe just for school? (And if the 'range' is broad enough to cover a wide enough range, it's no longer a uniform, but a dress code.) As far as I know ALL highschools have uniforms here, and most primary schools are now starting, my daughter is in primary, and I like the idea of a uniform. As I mentioned, there is some variety, But the basic colours are navy blue and white, and the only thing that is more expensive is the jumpers or jackets that need the logo on them. All the kids look like they're from the same school - it's definitely a uniform, and not just a dress code. Jen |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
A School Paddling Correlation Study | [email protected] | Foster Parents | 2 | November 9th 05 01:48 PM |
Trying to understand - some personal issues based on experience | Stuart Magpie | Spanking | 4 | August 4th 04 11:15 AM |
How Children REALLY React To Control | Chris | Solutions | 437 | July 11th 04 02:38 AM |
IQ-160s Vote (with their *feet*) | [email protected] | Solutions | 119 | June 3rd 04 06:29 AM |
Virtual school seeks Iowa funding | [email protected] | General | 4 | June 29th 03 12:55 AM |