# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Explore Scholastic for Parents to find curated book lists, learning activities, reading tips, and expert advice for your child's literary development.

# data[].attributes.headline
Weighing the Pros and Cons of Year-Round School for Your Kids 

# data[].attributes.subject
Weighing the Pros and Cons of Year-Round School for Your Kids 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Year-round schooling schedules offer the same 160 to 180 days of schooling as the traditional nine-month school calendar. The difference is that the school vacations are distributed over the year rather than primarily in the summer. The long summer break is believed to have been created to ensure children were home to help parents harvest crops on family farms, a need that is no longer relevant for most American families.

While the year-round schedule is not what most adults remember from their own school experience, it may not be as challenging or undesirable as many assume it to be-in fact, year-round schooling might make life easier for some families. Children are not given less time off of school, rather the usual nine months on, three months off schedule is redistributed. The schedule of instruction is altered to accommodate shorter breaks across the whole calendar year.

Keep reading to learn more about the pros and cons of year-round schooling.

The Debate Over Year-Round Schooling Schedules

Proponents of year-round schooling schedules say that year-round school may be a way to increase academic achievement and be beneficial to many working families, but opponents have also identified potential drawbacks. Here's a closer look at the pros and cons:

Reduces learning loss over summer break

Costs of implementing a new schedule

No need for summer break

Potential for higher operating costs in the summer

Evenly distributed breaks for vacations

Teens could not have summer jobs

Consistent year-round child care need

Siblings may be on different multi-track schedules

Uses a multi-track system to maximize school use

Loss of summer sport and camp opportunities

Makes teaching a full-time profession

Could be challenging to pay teachers for year-round work

Pros of Year-Round School

Some of the pros of year-round schooling include:

Decreased need to re-teach skills after long vacations, allowing teachers to use classroom time more efficiently. In fact, one of the strongest arguments for the year-school calendar is that it combats so-called "summer achievement loss," according to one study.

Extending the school year may help make teaching a more lucrative full-time profession for educators if year-round schools can cut costs through multi-tracking programs.

Families who struggle to find or pay for child care during the summer will benefit, as will children who are in sub-par child care during summer vacation.

Multi-tracking programs, in which groups of students are on different school schedules, may allow for more school consolidation.

Remediation needs can be addressed during the school year as opposed to during summer programs, possibly decreasing the need to include summer school in local budgets.

Shorter summer breaks mean students are less likely to incur summer learning loss, which may increase academic performance for underprivileged children and decrease the number of students being served by intervention programs.

Vacation time can be more evenly distributed throughout the year, making it easier to schedule family vacations and for students to revitalize themselves more frequently.

Cons of Year-Round School

Some of the arguments against year-round schooling include:

Children in year-round schools may not be able to participate in special programs like summer camp or summer sports that currently operate in the summertime.

Initial costs associated with starting or changing a traditional school to a year-round school are high.

Multi-tracking programs mean that parents could possibly have children that are on different schedules.

School budgets and staffing issues may not allow for extended school-year programs and the cost of teaching as a full-time endeavor may not be feasible either locally or federally.

School maintenance costs, including day-to-day upkeep, air-conditioning, and utilities, can increase significantly if schools are open during the warmer summer months.

Teens who need to work to help support themselves or make money for college may have difficulty holding or finding a job if they don't have the entire summer off.

One study conducted all the way back in 2007 by Ohio State University found that students who participate in the year-round school calendar don't actually learn more than those who participate in the traditional school system, and both groups score about the same on tests.

Increasing Popularity of Year-Round School

Frederick M. Hess, director of Education Policy Studies at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, notes that few countries offer more than seven consecutive weeks of vacation for students. This contrasts with the United States' average of 13 weeks. However, some research does show that children who given the opportunity for extensive summer activities and socialization see positive effects on their mental health and physical development.

In a 2008 report titled "Summer Vacation Is No Longer Necessary," Hess suggested that following the agrarian calendar is an anachronistic way of running schools. Although year-round school calendars are not a uniform solution, Hess believes that families should have more options for schools that operate year-round.

That opinion is gaining traction. In fact, a growing number of schools have opted to transition to a year-round calendar model. According to an education policy report prepared for members of Congress in 2014, the number of year-round schools went from 410 (educating 350,000 students) in the 1980s to more than 3,700 (educating 2 million students) across 45 states in 2012.

Such growth in the numbers has school officials looking into research that examines both benefits in learning for students, but also how year-round schools affect the overall cost of education for all parties involved.

Parents uses only high-quality sources, including peer-reviewed studies, to support the facts within our articles. Read our editorial process to learn more about how we fact-check and keep our content accurate, reliable, and trustworthy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A year-round schooling schedule offers the same 180 days as the traditional nine-month school calendar, but school vacations are distributed differently. Here are some potential downsides to this style of schooling.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Year-round school in the United States is neither a new concept nor an unusual one. Traditional school calendars and year-round schedules both provide students with about 180 days in the classroom. But instead of taking off much of the summertime, year-round school programs take a series of shorter breaks throughout the year. Advocates say the shorter breaks make it easier for students to retain knowledge and are less disruptive to the learning process. Detractors say the evidence to support this assertion is unconvincing.

Traditional School Calendars

Most public schools in America operate on the 10-month system, which gives students 180 days in the classroom. The school year typically begins a few weeks before or after Labor Day and concludes around Memorial Day, with time off during Christmas and New Year's and again around Easter. This school schedule has been the default since the earliest days of the nation when the U.S. was still an agrarian society, and children were needed to work in the fields during the summer.

Year-Round Schools

Educators began experimenting with a more balanced school calendar in the early 1900s, but the idea of a year-round model didn't really catch on until the 1970s. Some advocates said it would help students retain knowledge. Others said it could help schools reduce overcrowding by staggering start times throughout the year.

The most common application of year-round education uses the 45-15 plan. Students attend school for 45 days, or about nine weeks, then take off for three weeks, or 15 school days. The normal breaks for holidays and spring remain in place with this calendar. Other ways to organize the calendar include the 60-20 and 90-30 plans.

Single-track year-round education involves an entire school using the same calendar and getting the same holidays off. Multiple-track year-round education puts groups of students in school at different times with different vacations. Multitracking usually occurs when school districts want to save money.

Arguments in Favor

As of 2017, nearly 4,000 public schools in the U.S. follow a year-round schedule-around 10 percent of the nation's students. Some of the most common reasons in favor of year-round schooling are as follows:

Students tend to forget a lot during the summer, and shorter vacations might increase retention rates.

School buildings unused in the summer are wasted resources.

Short breaks provide time for students to receive enrichment education.

Remediation can occur when it is most needed during the school year.

Students get bored during the long break of summer.

It gives families more options for scheduling vacations, rather than restricting travel to summertime.

Other countries around the world use this system.

Schools on year-round schedules can accommodate more students through multitracking.

Arguments Against

Opponents say year-round schooling hasn't proven to be as effective as its advocates claim. Some parents also complain that such schedules make it more difficult to plan family vacations or child care. Some of the most common arguments against year-round schools include:

Studies have not conclusively proven the academic benefits.

Students forget information just as easily with a three-week break as 10. Therefore, teachers on a year-round system end up with four periods of review instead of just one at a new school year.

Summer programs such as youth camps suffer.

Student summer employment becomes virtually impossible.

Many older school buildings do not have air conditioning, making a year-round schedule impractical.

Band and other extracurricular programs can run into problems scheduling practices and competitions, which often take place during the summer months.

With multitracking, parents could have students at the same school on different schedules.

School administrators considering year-round education should identify their goals and investigate whether a new calendar can help achieve them. When implementing any significant change, involving all stakeholders in the decision and the process improves the outcome. If students, teachers, and parents don't support a new schedule, a transition could be difficult.

National Education Association staff. " Research Spotlight on Year-Round Education." NEA.org, 2017.

Niche.com staff. " Schools Without Summer Break: An In-Depth Look at Year-Round Schooling." Niche.com, 12 April 2017.

Weller, Chris. " Year-Round School is Booming but Its Benefits Are Overhyped." BusinessInsider.com, 5 June 2017.

Zubrzycki, Jacklyn. " Year-Round Schooling Explained." Edweek.org, 18 December 2015.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn how a year-round school calendar differs from a traditional one. Discover some the pros and cons of year-round schools in the U.S.

# data[].attributes.headline
Tourists' attitude shift causes Iceland to change its approach to whaling

# data[].attributes.subject
Tourists' attitude shift causes Iceland to change its approach to whaling

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Growing ecotourism industry is creating a whale of a dilemma for Iceland

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Icelanders have been hunting whales for centuries, but now there is a growing demand by tourists to see the animals alive

# data[].attributes.body
Newsela

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Instructional Content Platform

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Newsela is an Instructional Content Platform that supercharges reading engagement and learning in every subject.

# data[].attributes.headline
New law requires meat brands to share information on antibiotic use

# data[].attributes.subject
New law requires meat brands to share information on antibiotic use

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Meat consumers gain access to information about antibiotic use

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
School uniforms-some love them and some hate them. There seems to be a big rift between school uniform supporters and those against school uniforms. So what's the deal? Let's look at some of the reasons those who oppose wearing a school uniform say it isn't a good idea.

Wearing a Uniform Limits Self-Expression

The most common argument against school uniforms is that they limit personal expression. Kids and teens use they way they dress to express themselves and to identify with certain social groups. Many students who are against school uniforms argue that they lose their self-identity when they lose their right to express themselves through fashion.
The courts have even weighed in on this. Based on the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1969 that "it can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate." The First U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in 1970 that "compelled conformity to conventional standards of appearance" does not "seem a justifiable part of the educational process."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
School uniforms-some love them and some hate them. There seems to be a big rift between school uniform supporters and those against school uniforms. So what's the deal? Let's look at some of the reasons those who oppose wearing a school uniform say it isn't a good idea.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela - A lion and a bear are saved, oh my!

# data[].attributes.headline
Study links taxes on meat, milk to benefits for climate, people's health

# data[].attributes.subject
Study links taxes on meat, milk to benefits for climate, people's health

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Chew on this: Study finds meat tax would lead to climate, health benefits

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Study says meat taxes would help on two fronts

# data[].attributes.headline
Relaxed Fri: New Zealand school gives kids gender-neutral uniform options

# data[].attributes.subject
Relaxed Fri: New Zealand school gives kids gender-neutral uniform options

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | New Zealand school’s gender-neutral uniform choices don’t hem students in

# data[].attributes.headline
Giraffes, elands and bongo, oh my: Zoos save endangered African animals

# data[].attributes.subject
Giraffes, elands and bongo, oh my: Zoos save endangered African animals

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | It’s a girl, girl, boy, girl! Baby boom at zoo partnership

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Zoos in New Orleans, Louisiana, and San Diego, California, have partnered to save endangered African animals.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Where's the beef? Not in Beyond Burger's juicy vegetarian product

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Veggie burger defies expectations, delivers juicy, meatlike experience

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Debates continue about whether students should wear uniforms in schools; however, when you read about schools around the world, a high percentage of those surveyed support school uniforms. Many schools agree that uniforms help remove economic barriers, build feelings of community, and reduce instances of bullying.

Our APA Dress Code is founded on similar beliefs that uniforms decrease distractions, simplify the morning routine, increase respect for each student, and prepare students for success by teaching professional dress.

There are many reasons to encourage school uniforms like the ones worn at American Preparatory Academy. Here are some of them.

1. School uniforms promote learning. Our program is rigorous and requires full attention to be successful. We believe our students' focus should be on what they are learning and not on what they are wearing.

2. School uniforms nourish a sense of equality. When students have similar expectations for dress, unhealthy competitive feelings about looks are reduced. Students can stand out because of their character and not their clothes.

3. School uniforms promote a feeling of community. At APA, we believe our school dress should complement our learning culture. We are preparing our students for success in college and beyond. We want our students to have a proper expectation of professionalism. When our students wear uniforms, they feel included. They are part of a team working toward success in the classroom and life.

4. School uniforms make it easier to get ready for school. One of the best reasons for school uniforms? No more indecision about what to wear in the morning!

5. Uniforms help prevent embarrassing problems while promoting self-discipline. We have developed a standard of dress that is reliable for everyone. We want to help our kids avoid issues related to modesty and cleanliness. Dirty and unkept outfits quickly become a non-issue when there is a standard.

6. School uniforms improve safety. Keeping track of students and what they carry into our schools is made easier for staff and other students. Intruders can be identified right away by our school community because they stand out.

7. School uniforms do not eliminate individuality. Our students have fun participating in the occasional spirit wear or free dress day; however, these days are not the focus for our kids. The character of the individual student is our focus. Our kids shine because of who they are, not how they look.

8. School uniforms are more affordable. At the beginning of the school year, our families typically purchase two sets of uniforms for each of their students. Many of our uniform vendors provide durable options that stand up to repeated washing and wear. Parents may need to replace an item or two throughout the year; however, this is often due to children growing up so fast. Overall, our families save money with uniforms by not having to keep up with the latest fashion trends.

9. Parents and teachers support school uniforms. Administrators and teachers are highly in favor of school uniforms at American Preparatory Academy. Our staff manual states that our, "staff must match the level of formality of our students." Most parents say that they love the convenience of school uniforms, and they can tell that students have more confidence when they wear them.

The student dress code at American Preparatory Academy is one that helps create an environment of respect and dignity. Student dress exemplifies students' respect for themselves, their classmates, and learning. When everyone is wearing the same thing, students can focus on essential issues like academics and character.

Our school uniform guide can be viewed here.

Are you considering American Prep for your student? American Prep is an award-winning, tuition-free charter school. We are accepting applications for the new school year.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A good school uniform policy for public, charter, and private schools can increase safety, confidence, and community in schools. This is APA's approach.

# data[].attributes.headline
Company creates a vegetarian burger that will make meat eaters happy

# data[].attributes.subject
Company creates a vegetarian burger that will make meat eaters happy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Bad news about bacon and hot dogs: They can cause cancer, scientists say

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Some schools have a policy stating that students must wear uniforms to class. Normally associated with private schools, uniforms have become more common in public schools, too. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, uniforms are required at about…

# data[].attributes.headline
As Earth's climate changes, scientists try to make farm animals more hardy

# data[].attributes.subject
As Earth's climate changes, scientists try to make farm animals more hardy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Newsela is an Instructional Content Platform that supercharges reading engagement and learning in every subject.

# data[].attributes.headline
Should Students have to wear School Uniforms?

# data[].attributes.subject
Should Students have to wear School Uniforms?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
History of School Uniforms
Traditionally favored by private and parochial institutions, school uniforms are being adopted by US public schools in increasing numbers. According to a 2020 report, the percentage of public schools that required school uniforms jumped from 12% in the 1999-2000 school year to 20% in the 2017-18 school year. School uniforms were most frequently required by elementary schools (23%), followed by middle (18%), and high schools (10%).

The first recorded use of standardized dress in education may have been in England in 1222, when the Archbishop of Canterbury mandated that students wear a robe-like outfit called the " cappa clausa." The origin of the modern school uniform can be traced to 16th Century England, when the impoverished "charity children" attending the Christ's Hospital boarding school wore blue cloaks reminiscent of the cassocks worn by clergy, along with yellow stockings. As of Sep. 2014, students at Christ's Hospital were still wearing the same uniform, and according to the school it is the oldest school uniform still in use. When Christ's Hospital surveyed its students in 2011, 95% voted to keep the traditional uniforms. Read more history...

Pro & Con Arguments

Pro 1

School uniforms deter crime and increase student safety.

In Long Beach, California, after two years of a district-wide K-8 mandatory uniform policy, reports of assault and battery in the district's schools decreased by 34%, assault with a deadly weapon dropped by 50%, fighting incidents went down by 51%, sex offenses were cut by 74%, robbery dropped by 65%, possession of weapons (or weapon "look-alikes") decreased by 52%, possession of drugs went down by 69%, and vandalism was lowered by 18%.

And, school uniforms prevent the display of gang colors and insignia, reducing gang activity and pressure to join on school property. The U.S. Department of Education's Manual on School Uniforms stated that uniform policies can "prevent gang members from wearing gang colors and insignia at school" in order to "encourage a safe environment." Educators in the Long Beach Unified School District have speculated that the sharp reduction in crime following the introduction of school uniforms was a result of gang conflicts being curbed. Osceola County, Florida School Board member Jay Wheeler reports that the county's schools had a 46% drop in gang activity after their first full school year with a mandatory K-12 uniform policy. Wheeler explains that "clothing is integral to gang culture... Imagine a U.S. Armed Forces recruiter out of uniform trying to recruit new soldiers; the success rate goes down. The same applies to gang recruitment." [35] [37] [67]
Read More

Pro 2

School uniforms keep students focused on their education, not their clothes.

Wearing uniforms also enhances school pride, unity, and community spirit, which can boost interest in education. A study of over 1,000 Texas middle school students found that students in uniform "reported significantly more positive perceptions of belonging in their school community than reported by students in the standard dress group." Christopher P. Clouet, former Superintendent of the New London Public Schools in Connecticut, stated that "the wearing of uniforms contributes to school pride." Arnold Goldstein, PhD, head of the Center for Research on Aggression at Syracuse University, points out that uniforms help troubled students feel they have the support of a community: "There is a sense of belonging." Further, "teachers perceived an increase in the level of respect, caring, and trust... throughout the school" and "students are made to feel 'important' and as if they are a part of a team by wearing a uniform," according to a peer-reviewed study.

Plus, school uniforms can improve attendance and discipline. A study by researchers at the University of Houston found that the average absence rate for girls in middle and high school decreased by 7% after the introduction of uniforms, and behavioral problems lessened in severity. School uniforms make getting ready for school easier, which can improve punctuality.
When uniforms are mandatory, parents and students do not spend time choosing appropriate outfits for the school day. According to a national survey, over 90% of US school leaders believe school uniform or formal dress code policies "eliminate wardrobe battles with kids," make it "easier to get kids ready in the morning," and create a "time saving in the morning." Tracey Marinelli, Superintendent of the Lyndhurst School District in New Jersey, credits the district's uniform policy for reducing the number of students running late. Lyndhurst student Mike Morreale agrees, stating that "it's so much easier to dress than having to search for clothes and find out that something doesn't match." A Youngstown State University study of secondary schools in Ohio's eight largest school districts found that school uniform policies improve rates of attendance, graduation, and suspension.
Read More

Pro 3

Students' legal right to free expression remains intact with mandatory school uniforms.

Besides, students can still express their individuality in school uniforms by introducing variations and adding accessories. Junior high school student Amelia Jimenez wrote in her op-ed for the Pennsylvania Patriot-News that "contrary to popular belief, uniforms do not stop students from being themselves. Uniforms do not silence voices. Students can wear a variety of expressive items, such as buttons or jewlery." Students can inject their personal style into their daily look with hairstyles, nail polish, and colorful accessories such as bags, scarfs, and fun socks. 54% of eighth-graders said they could still express their individuality while wearing school uniforms.

Further, students dressed in uniform are better perceived by teachers and peers. A 1994 peer-reviewed study found that students in uniform were perceived by teachers and fellow students as being more academically proficient than students in regular clothes. The study also found that students in uniform were perceived by peers and teachers as having higher academic potential, and perceived by peers as being better behaved. Students need to learn a balance between free expression and working within the confines of expectations.
Read More

Con 1

School uniforms do not stop bullying and can actually increase violent attacks.

Further, a peer-reviewed study found that "school uniforms increased the average number of assaults by about 14 [per year] in the most violent schools." A Texas Southern University study found that school discipline incidents rose by about 12% after the introduction of uniforms. And, according to the Miami-Dade County Public Schools Office of Education Evaluation and Management, fights in middle schools nearly doubled within one year of introducing mandatory uniforms.
Read More

Con 2

School uniforms do not improve attendance, academic preparedness, or exam results.

The problems arise because focusing on uniforms takes attention away from finding genuine solutions to problems in education. Spending time and effort implementing uniform policies detracts from more effective efforts to reduce crime in schools and boost student performance. More substantive improvements to public education could be achieved with smaller class sizes, tightened security, increased parental involvement, improved facilities, and other measures. Tom Houlihan, former Superintendent of Schools in Oxford, North Carolina, stated that school uniforms "are a distraction from focusing on systematic and fundamental transformation to improve our schools."

That uniform policies are a distraction is most evident when we realize that the push for school uniforms is driven by commercial interests rather than educational ones. Americans spend around $1 billion on school uniforms every year. Retailer J.C. Penney Co. says school uniforms are "a huge, important business for us." In one year alone, uniform company Lands' End spent $3 million on marketing efforts directed at public schools and districts. Multiple studies used to promote the effectiveness of uniforms were partly funded by Lands' End, and at least one of those studies is "so wholly flawed as to render itself useless," according to David L. Brunsma. Reuters reported that retailers were "sensing their opportunity... stepping up competition in the uniform aisles and online. Walmart has set up 'uniform shops' or temporary boutiques within some stores."

The commercialization of school uniforms in public schools also undermines the promise of a free education by imposing an extra expense on families. Parents already pay taxes, and they still need to buy regular clothes for their children to wear when they're out of school and for dress-down days. The Children's Commission on Poverty (UK) found that over "95% of parents on low incomes reported difficulties in meeting school-related costs," including uniforms, despite their children attending tuition-free schools. Anderson, Indiana, parents Laura and Scott Bell argued against their children's school uniform policy, saying the $641 for their children's uniforms broke the guarantee of a free public education. In York County, Pennsylvania, a local NBC affiliate reported that some children were missing class because their families couldn't afford to purchase the required uniforms. And, all of that is before the uniform policies themselves are examined. Most operate like dress codes and are classist, racist, and sexist.
Read More

Con 3

School uniforms restrict students' freedom of expression.

Uniforms take away the ability to use clothing as means of expressing support for social causes. Students at Friendly High School in Prince George's County, MD, were not allowed to wear pink shirts to support Breast Cancer Awareness Month and 75 students received suspensions for breaking the school's uniform restrictions. Removing these choices can delay the transition into adulthood. Adults make their own clothing choices and have the freedom to express themselves through their appearance. Denying children and teenagers the opportunity to make those choices may make them ill-prepared for the adult world. Adolescents see clothing choices as a means of identification, and seeking an identity is one of the critical stages of adolescence, according to the late developmental psychologist Erik Erikson.

When students have to wear the same outfits, rather than being allowed to select clothes that suit their body types, they can suffer embarrassment at school. Child and teen development specialist Robyn Silverman says that students, especially girls, tend to compare how each other looks in their uniforms: "As a body image expert, I hear from students all the time that they feel it allows for a lot of comparison... So if you have a body that's a plus-size body, a curvier body, a very tall body, a very short body, those girls often feel that they don't look their best." A study by researchers at Arizona State University found that "students from schools without uniforms reported higher self-perception scores than students from schools with uniform policies." Some students also find uniforms less comfortable than their regular clothes, which may not be conducive to learning.
Read More

Did You Know?

1. The first school district in the United States to require all K-8 students to wear uniforms was Long Beach, CA, in Jan. 1994.

2. Americans spend around $1 billion per year on school uniforms.

3. Students at Eton, one of England's most prestigious schools, were required to wear black top hats and tails on and off campus until 1972.

4. US schools with a minority student population of 50% or more are four times as likely to require uniforms than schools with a minority population of 20-49%, and 24 times more likely than schools with minority populations of 5%-19%.

5. A government agency in Sweden declared that mandatory school uniforms were a human rights violation, stating that students should decide their dress and appearance as "a matter of the individual's freedom and integrity."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
School Uniforms Pros and Cons - 13 Arguments For and Against

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Proponents say uniforms may increase student safety. Opponents say uniforms restrict expression. Explore both sides of the debate.

# data[].attributes.headline
SeaWorld, critics debate if park tanks or sea pens are best for orcas

# data[].attributes.subject
SeaWorld, critics debate if park tanks or sea pens are best for orcas

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | SeaWorld tanks or sea pens? Dispute over which is best for orcas continues

# data[].attributes.headline
For Homeless kids, school uniforms are just one more problem to overcome.

# data[].attributes.subject
For Homeless kids, school uniforms are just one more problem to overcome.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
For homeless kids, school uniforms are just one more problem to overcome - The Washington Post

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | SeaWorld won't breed, replace unusual dolphins

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Many people adopt a ve getarian diet in an effort to boost their health or reduce their risk for disease. Certainly, the benefits of a plant-based diet are well documented. But not all vegetarian diets are nutritious.

The type of foods you choose to include in your meal plan (and those that you choose to avoid) make a big difference in the benefits you gain. A vegetarian diet full of processed foods is less likely to provide health benefits than a diet full of nutritious fruits, vegetables, legumes and grains.

As you think about adopting this food plan, consider all of the pros and cons of a vegetarian diet to make sure it's the right eating plan for you.

There are many different types of vegetarian diets. The most common is the lacto-ovo vegetarian, or someone who avoids meat, poultry, and seafood but consumes dairy and eggs. Ovo-vegetarians eat eggs but avoid dairy, meat, and seafood. Lacto-vegetarians consume dairy but avoid eggs, meat, and seafood. These can all provide a variety of benefits.

Reduced Disease Risk

On a healthy vegetarian diet, you are encouraged to consume whole grains, legumes, fruits, vegetables, nuts, and seeds-foods that are lacking in the diets of many people who follow a more traditional food plan. These plant-based foods provide your body with important vitamins and minerals that boost your health and reduce your risk of many chronic diseases.

For example, in a large cohort study evaluating both vegetarian and vegan diets, researchers found that both groups experienced a reduced risk of cardiovascular diseases, cardiometabolic risk factors, and some cancers.﻿﻿﻿﻿

There is also some evidence that a vegetarian diet may help you to avoid conditions such as gallstones and kidney stones. A 2019 study published in the journal Nutrients followed over 4800 participants and concluded that by lowering cholesterol levels, a vegetarian diet successfully reduced the incidence of gallstone disease.﻿﻿

And a 2014 study investigating the effects of various diets on kidney stone formation determined that a balanced lacto-ovo-vegetarian diet can be protective against the condition as long as there is adequate calcium intake.﻿﻿﻿﻿

May Boost Longevity

There have been a number of studies investigating the link between vegetarian or vegan diets and longevity. Some studies have found that those who follow healthy plant-based diets live longer than those who eat meat.

However, results from studies like these can be tricky to interpret. The 2014 cohort study included 73,000 people but they were all Seventh-day Adventists who typically consume no alcohol and do not smoke.﻿﻿ These factors may have played a role in their longevity patterns.

Other studies have investigated the link between plant-based diets and longevity, with many finding a positive association. But it can be hard to tell if it is the diet itself or related factors that boost longevity.

For example, those who choose a vegetarian or vegan diet often practice mindful eating, exercise regularly, and manage stress with meditation or yoga. These habits may also play a role in providing the benefit.

Increased Food Variety

The standard American diet is called an omnivore diet because no foods are excluded. But often, people who consume an omnivore diet get into the habit of eating the same foods day after day. The result is that they eat a relatively limited number of foods or types of food.

For example, a traditional American dinner generally includes meat (such as a steak or pork chop), a starchy side dish (such as a potato or rice), and maybe a vegetable. Dairy products are often used as ingredients, side dishes, or toppings.

On a vegetarian diet, however, many traditional foods are not compliant. Therefore, when you begin this diet, you may have to get creative and experiment with foods that are not familiar. For example, in the absence of meat, lentils, beans, or peas might become the foundation of your meal. Then to fill out your plate, you can rely on a variety of vegetables.

Of course, just choosing to go vegetarian does not guarantee this benefit. A vegetarian can also get into a food rut and eat the same (unhealthy) foods every day. But switching to a vegetarian diet may provide the motivation to experiment with new healthier food options.

Improved Weight Control

Plant-based eating is often associated with losing weight. Studies have shown that those following a vegetarian diet typically consume fewer calories than an omnivore diet. Researchers have also found that the most restrictive variation-the vegan diet-is also likely to have the lowest caloric intake.﻿﻿﻿

If you are trying to reach or maintain a healthy weight, the lower daily calorie intake associated with vegetarian or vegan eating may help you achieve your goal.

Offers Complete Nutrition

Getting the recommended intake of both macro and micronutrients is easier on a vegetarian diet than it is on the more restrictive vegan diet. And while there are still some concerns about nutritional deficiencies on a vegetarian diet, there are substantial resources available to help you met your nutritional needs.

For example, the USDA and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services included a Healthy Vegetarian Eating Pattern as part of their 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans.﻿﻿ The guide provided recommendations for the intake of various food groups such as green leafy vegetables, starchy vegetables, legumes and beans, soy products, and others.

Recommended amounts are provided for daily caloric intakes ranging from 1000 to 3,200 calories per day. By following this guide, you are likely to get the daily vitamins, minerals, and macronutrients needed for a healthy body. However, like any diet, you may fall short of nutrients if you don't take steps to eat a balanced diet.

Reduced Food Costs

Choosing a vegetarian diet may help you to reduce your food costs. But your total food costs will ultimately depend on the foods you choose to include in your meal plan.

Meat and seafood are typically expensive and for many are a major component of their total grocery bill. Convenience foods and fast foods that are not compliant on a vegetarian diet can also be pricey. When you remove these foods from your diet, you eliminate the substantial food costs that are associated with them.

Bulk grains and legumes are usually budget-friendly. And if you buy produce in season, you can cut costs as well. Off course, vegetarian-convenience foods and meat alternatives can be expensive, but they are likely to cost less overall than a diet rich in animal-based products.

Friendly Environmental Impact

There is increased concern in the environmental community about the impact of livestock and livestock farming practices on the earth. So, some people choose to eliminate meat and eat a vegetarian diet because they feel it is better for the planet.

The farming of plants to produce fruits, vegetables, nuts, seeds, and grains requires fewer land and water resources than the production of meat, poultry, and dairy. And cows produce more greenhouses gasses than plants, which leads some to believe that eliminating meat and dairy from the diet helps to reduce the risk of global warming.

Several research studies have even suggested that the vegan variation of a vegetarian diet is better for the planet than other diets, including the popular Mediterranean diet.﻿﻿﻿

Ethical Treatment of Animals

Because no animals are killed to produce vegetarian foods, many choose this diet because of concerns about animal cruelty. However, those who choose to consume eggs and dairy may still have to confront issues regarding the treatment of chickens and cows.

Animal rights activists prefer that consumers choose a vegan diet to promote the ethical treatment of animals. But the less-restrictive vegetarian option still reduces the overall impact on the animal population.

Even though a vegetarian diet offers some substantial benefits, there may be drawbacks as well.

Possible Nutritional Deficiencies

A well-rounded vegetarian diet can provide adequate nutrition. However, there are certain key nutrients that are generally found in animal foods that may be lacking in a vegetarian diet if the diet doesn't include a variety of healthy foods.

Zinc: Studies have shown even though zinc intake tends to be lower in vegetarians, their bodies adapt to lower levels through increased absorption and retention of the mineral.﻿﻿﻿﻿ Researchers also note that a well-planned diet can provide adequate zinc through plant-sources such as whole grains, tofu, tempeh, legumes, nuts and seeds, fortified breakfast cereals and dairy products.

Vitamin B-12: Vitamin B-12, or cobalamin, is found in beef, liver, fish, shellfish, chicken and other meat-sources-foods not consumed on a vegetarian diet. But eggs contain vitamin B12, as well as some fortified breakfast cereals and dairy products. Researchers have found, however, that supplementation may be needed for people who follow a vegetarian or vegan diet.﻿﻿﻿﻿

Vitamin D: Some researchers and health experts have raised concerns about vitamin D levels in vegans and vegetarians. The vitamin is found naturally in fish, fish liver oils, and egg yolks. But most of our vitamin D comes from exposure to sunlight. Two excellent vegetarian sources of vitamin D include maitake mushrooms and Portobello mushrooms. Fortified nut milk and fortified grain products may help increase your vitamin D intake during the winter months.

Calcium: Vegetarians who do not consume dairy may need to plan meals carefully to get enough calcium. But green leafy vegetables, white beans, pulses, sesame seeds, and some dried fruits are rich in the nutrient. Many nut milks and brands of orange juice are also fortified with calcium.

Omega-3s: Lastly, a vegetarian diet can be deficient in omega-3 fatty acids. But soy, pumpkin, flax, or chia seeds and walnuts are good sources of omega-3.

Fewer Food Choices

If you are used to consuming a traditional diet that includes meat, seafood, and other animal products, you may find the vegetarian diet to be limiting at first. Certainly, it takes time to adjust to the eating style if you are used to building meals around bacon at breakfast, deli meats at lunch, and beef or chicken at dinner.

But there are a wide variety of resources to help you learn to find or create satisfying meals without meat. Most vegetarians find that there are plenty of options not only in grocery stores and at restaurants, but even when dining with friends and family in private homes. Plant-based dishes are often encouraged by health experts for meat-eaters, so it is not uncommon to see hearty dishes that are vegetarian-friendly.

Reduced Satiety

Studies have found that vegetarian diets tend to be lower in calories, fat, and protein than omnivore diets.﻿﻿﻿ Foods that are higher in fat and protein help you to feel full and satisfied after eating.

Some carbohydrate-rich foods such as fruit or refined grains are digested more quickly and may leave you feeling hungry soon after a meal or snack. As a result, when you switch to a vegetarian diet, you may feel less satisfied and hungry more often.

But careful food choices can help boost satiety. Hearty beans and whole grains are high in fiber and help you to feel full. Snacks that include nuts or seeds also provide protein and fat to increase feelings of satisfaction after eating.

Less Convenient

Even though plant-based foods are getting easier to find, those who follow a strict vegetarian diet will still need to read ingredient lists, especially if they choose to consume processed foods. Foods that you might assume to be free from animal by-products may contain gelatin, whey, casein, or other foods that are non-compliant.

Dining out can also be a challenge, especially when you are first adapting to a strict vegetarian diet. While some restaurants provide meat-free meals, the meal may be made with dairy or other animal products. Vegetable soup, for example, might be made with chicken or beef broth, or even vegetable broth that used an animal bone for flavoring.

Eventually, you are likely to find restaurants with plenty of plant-based compliant meal choices. When dining at someone's home, bring a vegetarian recipe that you can enjoy and share with others.

Not Always Healthy

While consuming a vegetarian diet can provide health benefits and help you maintain a healthier weight, it is not a guarantee. There is an increasing number of heavily processed vegetarian foods. Many times, these foods contain more fat, sodium, added sugar, and calories than their traditional counterparts.

In fact, one study that investigated vegan diets found that those who followed a diet that included whole grains, fruits, vegetables, nuts, legumes, oils, tea, and coffee had a substantially lower risk for heart disease. But those who chose a less healthy version of the diet, including sweetened beverages, refined grains, potatoes, fries, and sweets had a higher risk.﻿﻿﻿

Exposure to Chemicals

There has been some concern in the health community about the increased risk of exposure to herbicides and pesticides among those who consume a plant-based diet.

In fact, some studies have shown that because fruit, vegetables, and grains are often farmed using these chemicals, vegetarians may be more exposed to pesticide residues than the general population due to specific dietary habits.﻿﻿﻿ However, even though exposure to pesticides may be higher, other researchers have found that it is still likely to fall within safe guidelines.﻿﻿

Additionally, it is not clear if the limited exposure has more potential for harm than exposure to hormones or antibiotics sometimes found in animal foods or if the potential exposure reduces the benefits gained by consuming a plant-based diet.

A simple solution to this concern is to buy organic foods. However, these products are often expensive and may not be available in all areas. If organic products are not an option for you, health experts advise that you wash fruits and vegetables carefully to limit exposure.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Many people adopt a ve getarian diet in an effort to boost their health or reduce their risk for disease. Certainly, the benefits of a plant-based diet are well documented. But not all vegetarian diets are nutritious.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
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 Adi Sirkes, 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 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."

ON-LINE SCHOOL UNIFORMS RESOURCES

The Effects of Student Uniforms on Attendance, Behavior Problems, Substance Use, and Academic Achievement
In this study, published in The Journal of Educational Research (February 13, 1998), the researchers concluded that requiring students to wear uniforms has no direct effect on substance abuse, behavioral problems, or school attendance. They found, in fact, that the students they studied who were required to wear uniforms actually scored lower on standardized achievement tests than did a comparable group not required to wear them.

OTHER RESOURCES USED TO COMPILE THIS STORY

"School Uniforms Increasingly in Fashion," USA Today (October 15, 1998). This article describes the pros and cons of uniform policies, including anecdotes from many school systems throughout the U.S. that have adopted one.

"In State, New School Cheer: One Style Fits All," Boston Globe (March 12, 1999). The article describes the pros and cons of the school uniform initiative adopted in Massachusetts.

"Skeptics Downplay Uniform," The Wichita Eagle (November 22, 1998). This article describes the results of researchers David L. Brunsma and Kerry A. Rockquemore's study on the effects of school uniforms on academic achievement. The complete study can be accessed at http://www.members.tripod.com/rockqu/uniform.htm.

"District's Dress Code Challenged," The Dallas Morning News (October, 12, 1998). This article describes some problems faced by the San Antonio school district when parents opposed to requiring the wearing of school uniforms took the district to court.

"Parents Vow to Fight Mandatory Uniforms," Miami Herald July 20, 1999). Parents unhappy about Polk County's (Florida) dress code planned a boycott and established a Web site to publicize their stance.

"Should Public Schools Require Students to Wear Uniforms? Pros and Cons," Hartford Courant (July 11, 1998). This article describes the pros and cons of initiating a school uniform policy.

Article by Glori Chaika
Education WorldÂ®
Copyright Â© 2008 Education World

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
School Uniforms: Panacea or Band-Aid? | Education World

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
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?

# data[].attributes.headline
Rhinos will soon be extinct if poachers don't stop killing them

# data[].attributes.subject
Rhinos will soon be extinct if poachers don't stop killing them

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela - Rhinos will soon be extinct if poachers don’t stop killing them

# data[].attributes.headline
The Beginner’s Guide to Becoming a Vegetarian

# data[].attributes.subject
The Beginner’s Guide to Becoming a Vegetarian

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Is a vegetarian diet healthy? We explain the pros and cons to becoming vegetarian, plus provide information about food substitutes and other things you need to know to follow this diet, including how to start, how to manage eating on the go, and the different types of vegetarian diets.

# data[].attributes.headline
The consequences if the world decided to go meat-free

# data[].attributes.subject
The consequences if the world decided to go meat-free

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Everybody currently engaged in the livestock industry would need to be retrained for a new career - this could be in agriculture, reforestation or producing bioenergy. Failing to provide career alternatives could lead to mass unemployment and social upheaval, particularly in traditionally rural communities.
So, have you been tempted to convert to vegetarianism? Why? Let us know on Twitter or Facebook where you can join the conversation with 800,000 Future fans. And if you like this, you may also like... Chocolate vs vegetables: the true environment costs The past, present and future of food
Taking livestock like sheep away could actually have a negative impact on biodiversity, as their grazing has helped to shape the land for centuries - so some farmers could be paid to keep animals for environmental purposes.

No more Christmas turkey - losing meat means that we would also lose traditions. Many communities around the world offer gifts of livestock at weddings and celebrations. For Ben Phalan at the University of Cambridge, this is "why efforts to reduce meat consumption have often faltered".

No meat would lower the chances of coronary heart disease, diabetes, stroke and some cancers - and so save the world 2-3% global gross domestic product in medical bills.

But we would need to replace meat with nutritional substitutes, in particular for the world's estimated two billion-plus undernourished people. Animal products contain more nutrients per calorie than staples like grains and rice.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The consequences if the world decided to go meat-free

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Everybody currently engaged in the livestock industry would need to be retrained for a new career - this could be in agriculture, reforestation or producing bioenergy. Failing to provide career alternatives could lead to mass unemployment and social upheaval, particularly in traditionally rural communities. So, have you been tempted to convert to vegetarianism?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
School uniform has long been a hot topic of debate among students, parents and teachers alike.

Pegasus Primary School in Birmingham has been forced to backtrack on plans to make pupils wear a branded sweatshirt or cardigan, following an angry reaction from some parents.

Vince Green, chief executive of the Summit Learning Trust, which runs the school, told BBC Radio 4 's "Today" programme that the logo was important because it provided "that sense of belonging, that sense of family - just as it does if you play for a sporting team".

According to research conducted by The Children's Society in May, parents in the UK spend on average £422 a year on secondary school uniforms, and £287 for primary school pupils. One in eight families have had to cut back on food to afford uniforms from specific suppliers. "For too many families, uniforms cost way too much money," Mark Russell, chief executive of the charity, told "Today".

One reason the question of school uniforms is "so explosive", said Will Hazell for the inews site, "is because it touches on children's home lives and parental supervision". The Week takes a look at some of the pros and cons.

1. Pro: promotes equality and inclusion

Uniforms should be a "social leveller", Green told the "Today" programme. Wearing the same clothes "fosters a sense of inclusion and equity in school students", said Education Times, and can help with "laying the foundation of an equal society".

Supporters say a uniform can help build "a sense of identity and cohesion", said Hazell. Mark Lehain, founder and first headmaster of Bedford Free School, told the news site that he was "taken aback by the enthusiasm" for uniforms among parents. A 2007 study from Oxford Brookes University found that uniforms often "directly contributed to a feeling of school pride".

2. Con: imposes extra financial burden

A Hull councillor has called for a uniform subsidy to help struggling families, saying parents were "having to choose between school clothes and essentials, like food and rent", said BBC News. "Demand for help has doubled compared to last year," Labour's Jessica Raspin told the broadcaster.

While some supermarkets offer cheaper options such as plain trousers or white shirts, "many schools demand logos on clothing that is sold at only one supplier", said The Times.

Despite Department for Education guidance that schools keep branded items to a minimum, The Children's Society poll showed that the average pupil was expected to have three, while 29% of secondary school pupils were required to have four or five.

About 22% of UK parents told the charity that their child had been given a detention for breaching uniform policies, due to being unable to afford the correct uniform, according to Schools Week.

3. Pro: promotes discipline and focus

Uniforms became more common in the US in the late 1980s "with the promise that they would curb gang violence and crime", said The Washington Post. Uniforms, teachers say, "have become a no-nonsense way to stave off distractions" and focus on learning.

It is a variation on the "broken windows" theory of law and order, said Hazell for the inews site: "if schools clamp down on sloppy dress and incorrect clothing, it makes clear to pupils that the teachers are in charge".

However, a study by the Education Endowment Foundation, which was set up by the government to evaluate initiatives, found there was "no robust evidence" that a uniform alone would "improve academic performance, behaviour or attendance".

4. Con: curbs freedom of expression

The growing support for school uniforms in the US is "one of the great surrenderings of liberty in modern history", said Mark Oppenheimer for The New Yorker. Uniforms are "yet one more way that the surveillance of the un-powerful - the poor, people of colour, and that great unheard group of the young - has become increasingly acceptable".

At university, "I can wear whatever I feel fit and it has by no means interrupted my learning", student blogger Emily Moor wrote for HuffPost. It is "unrealistic" to expect students to "grow to make their own decisions when they are not even allowed to choose their own trousers".

Uniforms can even be "a kind of instrument of control", deputy headteacher Alistair McConville told the inews site, which cuts against society's need for individuality.

5. Pro: could save time and money overall

Conversely, uniforms might help families who are struggling financially, according to Dame Rachel De Souza, chief executive of the Inspiration Trust, which runs 13 schools in England. "There is no peer pressure on students to have the latest trainers," she told the inews site.

Parents say "they're changing how they shop for the school year", according to The Washington Post. "There are fewer late-summer buying sprees for everyday clothes."

A uniform could also make the morning routine run more smoothly for hassled parents.

6. Con: continued gender issues

A 2018 survey from Plan International UK found that a third of British girls said they were sexually harassed while in their school uniforms. Of course, there is no real evidence that they would have been safer out of school uniform.

But Labour MP Emma Hardy, also a former teacher, has raised concerns about how schools seemingly police female students' uniform to a greater extent than they do with boys, particularly with regards to modesty rules.

In Wales, guidance now encourages schools to introduce gender neutral uniforms, said Hazell.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Do rules around clothing promote discipline and inclusion or are they a pricey constraint on individuality?

# data[].attributes.headline
Is a vegetarian diet really better for the environment? Science takes aim at the conventional wisdom.

# data[].attributes.subject
Is a vegetarian diet really better for the environment? Science takes aim at the conventional wisdom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Is that salad really good for the environment? (Photo by Renee Comet for the Washington Post)

The idea that being vegetarian is better for the environment has, over the last forty years, become a piece of conventional wisdom.

Its popular rise began in 1971 with the publication of the surprise best-seller Diet for a Small Planet and then spread far and wide: earlier this year it made its way into a key government report for recommendations for the American diet.

As that report from the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee put it: "Consistent evidence indicates that, in general, a dietary pattern that is higher in plant-based foods, such as vegetables, fruits, whole grains, legumes, nuts, and seeds, and lower in animal-based foods ...is associated with lesser environmental impact than is the current average U.S. diet."

This notion isn't, however, something that scientists have agreed on, and some new research undermines the longstanding idea.

A paper from Carnegie Mellon University researchers published this week finds that the diets recommended by the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which include more fruits and vegetables and less meat, exacts a environmental toll than the typical American diet. Shifting to the diets recommended by Dietary Guidelines for American would increase energy use by 38 percent, water use by ten percent and greenhouse gas emissions by six percent, according to the paper.

"We were very surprised by our results," said Paul Fischbeck, professor of engineering and public policy at Carnegie Mellon University. "It's not what we set out to do - in fact, we expected the exact opposite."

The findings on the government-recommended diet, which the researchers described as "perhaps counterintuitive," stem from the fact that the "healthy" diet includes larger amounts of fruits, vegetables, dairy products and fish, which have relatively large environmental impacts when compared to some foods in our current diet such as foods with added sugars.

"You can't just assume that a vegetarian diet will reduce your carbon footprint, which is what people think," Fischbeck said.

[Here's what Congress is doing about concerns regarding the accuracy of the Dietary Guidelines]

The Carnegie Mellon paper was funded by the Colcom Foundation and the Steinbrenner Institute for Environmental Education and Research at Carnegie Mellon University.

While the research builds on previous work that likewise undermines the conventional wisdom, the debate over the environmental virtues of vegetarianism are unlikely to subside any time soon.

For one thing, the vegetarians have a point: scientists on both sides have concurred that eating beef - though not other meats - has daunting environmental impacts.

Because of the amount of grain and land used to produce a pound of beef, as well as the volume of methane the animals produce, the nation's intake of beef has significant environmental ramifications, particularly in terms of greenhouse gas emissions. Indeed, the environmental impacts from beef production dwarf those of other animal foods such as dairy products, pork and poultry.

"The key conclusion - that beef production demands about one order of magnitude more resources than alternative livestock categories - is robust," according to a paper last year in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Perhaps not surprisingly then, six other studies, all cited by the federal committee providing expert advice to Dietary Guidelines for Americans, indicated that diets including less meat are for the environment. To take but one example, Cornell University researchers reported in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition in 2003 that "meat-based food system requires more energy, land, and water resources than the lactoovovegetarian diet."

On the other hand, other papers echo the findings from Carnegie Mellon, suggesting that diets with less meat are no guarantee of environmental benefits. For example, a 2013 paper published by French researchers in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition found that some diets "containing large amounts of plant-based foods" had the highest levels of greenhouse gas emissions.

"Our results therefore seem to contradict the widely accepted view that diets that are good for health are also good for the planet," they reported.

So how do the scientists reach such different conclusions?

The reasons, it turns out, are illuminating.

To oversimplify somewhat, research of this type consists of adding up the amounts of greenhouse gas emissions and other environmental costs estimated to come from the production, transportation and marketing of individual foods included in a diet. For example, in the Carnegie Mellon research, the scientists collected estimates of the water use, energy use, and the greenhouse gas emissions for scores of individual foods, and then added up the environmental impacts incurred by various diets.

One of the reasons that the studies vary is that the scientists made different assumptions about the foods involved in each diet studied - and this turns out to be critical. The environmental impacts of individual foods vary tremendously (see chart below), and consequently, the results of these papers shift dramatically depending on the particular vegetarian or meat-eating menu.

Some of the environmental impacts of individual foods are quite strikingly opposite what you might guess: On a per calorie basis, producing lettuce creates nearly as much greenhouse gas emissions as does beef, according to the CMU research; in fact, lettuce generates roughly three times what pork does. Fresh fish, too, is associated with surprisingly high levels of greenhouse gas emissions.

As a result of the varying impacts among foods, small changes in the diet to be analyzed can have large impacts on the results: for example, cutting out pork and eating more lettuce, for example, might be good for you but it will take a higher toll from the environment.

Another important reason for the conflicting findings is that some of the research only considers the environmental costs of what people actually eat. But a significant percentage of any given food is wasted, and in order to get a complete tally, the environmental costs of producing the wasted food also ought to be included. Including food waste tends to raise the environmental costs of fruits and vegetables because more of them tend to be wasted: According to Fischbeck and colleague Michelle Tom, while about 40 percent or more of fruit goes to waste, only about 33 percent of meat does.

The data on the environmental effects of the food supply, moreover, can be extremely complicated to measure, vary from place to place, and are a subject of significant scientific uncertainty. But for all the debate over the issue, and the complexity of data, a couple of nuggets seem clear.

First, while it might be nice to think that what's good for you is also good for the planet, it's not necessarily the case. To take just one example that may please some people: Ingredients associated with junk foods, such as added sugars and saturated fats, have lower environmental impacts, according to the CMU estimates.

Second, the choices you make for dinner do have environmental consequences. They're just not as simple as you might think.

Today's Headlines

The most important news stories of the day, curated by Post editors and delivered every morning.

By signing up you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Is a vegetarian diet really better for the environment? Science takes aim at the conventional wisdom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The idea that being vegetarian is better for the environment has, over the last forty years, become a piece of conventional wisdom. Its popular rise began in 1971 with the publication of the surprise best-seller Diet for a Small Planet and then spread far and wide: earlier this year it made its way into a key government report for recommendations for the American diet.

# data[].attributes.headline
30 Key Pros & Cons Of The Vegetarian Diet

# data[].attributes.subject
30 Key Pros & Cons Of The Vegetarian Diet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"I'm not strictly vegetarian, but meat doesn't play a big part in my diet."
Katie Holmes, Actress

Even though a vegetarian diet has many advantages, it also implies some downsides. In this article, the pros and cons of a vegetarian diet are examined in detail.

1. Health benefits

2. Weight loss

3. Potential higher life expectancy

4. Can slow down global warming

5. Can save the lives of animals

6. Reduction of the need for factory farming

7. More efficient food use

8. Reduction in global hunger

9. Conservation of water

10. Preservation of our forests

11. Mitigation of habitat destruction

12. Reduction in antibiotics use

13. Reduction of the overfishing problem

14. Less soil pollution

15. Less groundwater pollution

16. Ethical concerns regarding meat consumption

Vegetarianism has become quite popular over the past decade. People become more conscious about our environmental problems and the awareness regarding our nutrition and diets increased significantly.

One major advantage of vegetarian diets is that it can be quite healthy. For instance, many people, especially in our Western world, consume far too much meat, which leads to all kinds of health issues in the long run. Thus, those health issues can be avoided by switching from a meat-based diet to a vegetarian lifestyle.

Since plant-based diets often also imply the consumption of fewer calories, people tend to lose weight by switching from a meat-based to a vegetarian diet.

Especially in our Western world where overweight and obesity are big problems, weight loss might be quite beneficial in order to increase our overall health levels and to lower the enormous public costs that are associated with diseases like obesity.

However, note that not all vegetarians are slim and fit. It also depends on their lifestyle, exercising and other factors, not only on changes in nutrition.

Vegetarianism is also often associated with a higher average life expectancy. However, it is questionable if this is really true. Even though people living on a vegetarian diet tend to live longer, there might be additional factors apart from their diet that vastly affect life expectancy.

For instance, people who engage in vegetarian diets may also be better educated and more aware of their health. Thus, those people are also more likely to work out on a regular basis and to take additional measures to stay healthy.

Therefore, the higher life expectancy might be correlated, but might not actually be solely caused by a vegetarian diet.

In our Western world, we consume excessive levels of meat on a daily basis. These high levels of meat consumption also contribute to climate change. Through the production of meat, large amounts of greenhouse gases are emitted into the air.

Through the switch from a meat-based to a vegetarian diet, the level of greenhouse gas emissions could be significantly lowered and global warming and its related adverse environmental effects could be slowed down to a certain extent.

Some people also claim that meat consumption should be abandoned since there are plenty of diet alternatives and we as humans might not have to use the meat from animals anymore to survive.

Thus, many people also think that saving the lives of animals should be prioritized over our enjoyment regarding meat consumption.

In order to meet the excessive demand for meat on a global scale, factory farming has become an effective and cheap tool to produce large amounts of meat in a quite short period of time.

However, there are many problems with factory farming. Animals are usually treated quite poorly and may suffer from plenty of health issues since they are often barely able to move.

Meat consumption can also be regarded as quite an inefficient food use. For instance, for the production of one calory of meat, multiple calories of plant material have to be used.

This implies that we could feed many more people by switching from a meat-centered to a vegetarian diet instead. Thus, vegetarianism can also be considered to be more efficient in terms of calory use compared to a meat-based diet.

Since an increase in vegetarianism would allow us to feed more people, this would also imply that the number of people who currently suffer from global hunger and starvation could be significantly decreased.

Thus, everyone of us could make his or her contribution to ensure the livelihood of people around the world through the reduction of meat consumption or even better by an entire switch to a plant-based diet.

Since the production of meat also implies the use of huge amounts of water, switching to a vegetarian diet would also conserve plenty of water.

There might be even fights for water, especially in poor regions of our planet. Thus, vegetarianism might also conserve water and might ensure the livelihood of many people around the globe who would otherwise suffer from a serious shortage of drinking water.

In order to supply our global population with plenty of meat, large areas of land have to be used. However, our world population is growing and so is the demand for meat. In order to be able to supply enough meat in the future, chances are that large forest areas have to be cut or burned down in order to get more space for farming.

Hence, our excessive meat consumption may also contribute to deforestation and the implied environmental issues. By switching to a vegetarian diet, this problem could be mitigated to a certain extent.

Deforestation also implies the destruction of habitats of a huge variety of animals and plants. Thus, in order to avoid deforestation and to preserve the natural living space of our species, we should refrain from excessive meat production and consume more plant-based products instead.

In the industrial meat production industry, large amounts of antibiotics are used in order to keep animals healthy. However, the excessive use of antibiotics is quite problematic since it could lead to antibiotic resistance for us humans.

Since humanity relies on antibiotics for the treatment of several diseases, those antibiotics might no longer work anymore in the future and many people might die due to that.

Not only factory farming can be seen as quite problematic, also overfishing has become a quite big problem over the past decades. Many fish species have become endangered in the past and may even become extinct if we do not preserve them properly.

In order to preserve our fish stocks, we all can make a positive contribution through the reduction in fish consumption. This is also implied by a vegetarian diet since all kinds of animals are excluded.

Thus, by switching to vegetarianism, you can also contribute to reduce the overfishing problem.

Our excessive meat production also implies significant soil pollution. In order to supply enough feed, excessive amounts of fertilizers are used. However, overuse of fertilizers also implies the contamination of the soil with harmful substances. In the long run, this soil may become less fertile and it may no longer be suitable for agricultural purposes anymore.

Thus, in order to avoid factory farming and the related soil pollution, switching to a vegetarian diet may be a suitable measure since less meat would have to be produced.

Since water will become a quite scarce and valuable resource in the future, it is crucial that we protect our groundwater reserves.

By reducing our meat consumption and switching to a vegetarian diet, we could also mitigate the problem of groundwater pollution to a certain extent.

Many people also feel the need to refrain from meat consumption due to the poor treatment of animals in factory farming and also since they do not want to be responsible for the death of animals.

Therefore, many vegetarians are also convinced that it is not justifiable from an ethical perspective to consume meat since there are many different diet alternatives.

1. Needs a strong will

2. May be more expensive

3. Vegetarian diet may lead to nutrient deficiencies

4. Might be hard to implement in your daily life

5. You may have to give up your favorite foods

6. You may lose muscle mass

7. May be problematic in jobs that require hard physical work

8. May hurt the growth of kids

9. May hurt your health if not done properly

10. Vegetarianism may be considered unnatural

11. Use of GMOs in soy farming

12. Also implies greenhouse gas emissions

13. Global hunger might rather be a distribution problem

14. Fear to lose freedom of choice

Thus, also from an ethical standpoint, switching to vegetarianism may be the way to go in the future.

Vegetarianism has many important advantages. However, there are also some downsides related to it. For instance, it will be quite hard for many people to switch from a meat-centered diet to a vegetarian one. Some people really love eating meat and can not imagine to stop eating meat at all.

Thus, it will need a quite strong will to stay persistent and to refrain from meat consumption. This is especially true since you will see tasty steaks, burgers and all kinds of delicious meat all the time and it will be quite tempting to quit vegetarianism in the long run.

Since in many countries, meat is quite cheap due to factory farming, a vegetarian diet might even be more expensive compared to a meat-based diet.

Consequently, depending on the amounts of veggies and fruits you need to feel saturated, a vegetarian diet may cost you more money and you might have to cut your expenses for other things due to that.

Another issue of a vegetarian diet is that it can lead to serious nutrient and vitamin deficiencies in the long run. For instance, many vegetarians suffer from a lack of vitamin B12. Thus, in order to supply your body with these vital vitamins and other components, vegetarians may need to rely on food supplements.

However, food supplements can also be harmful to human health if they are not applied in a correct manner. Therefore, vegetarians might also suffer from some kind of health issues related to a lack of nutrients and vitamins.

It might also not be easy to implement a vegetarian lifestyle. Even though many vegetarian restaurants opened over the past years in many big cities, there are still some areas on our planet where this kind of lifestyle is not popular yet and especially in those regions, you might have a quite hard time and it might take plenty of effort to practice a vegetarian diet.

Thus, living a vegetarian lifestyle may also require more effort compared to relying on a meat-based diet.

Let's be honest. Especially for men, most of their favorite foods are made out of meat. Men like to barbecue and to eat tasty steaks, burgers, sausages and all other kinds of meat.

Thus, especially for men and also women who love to eat good meat, it would be quite hard to give up all those delicious dishes. I know many people who would never be willing to give up the pleasure of eating those foods.

Therefore, it might be quite hard to convince part of our society to switch to a vegetarian diet since it would simply be too much pain for many people.

Since meat contains plenty of protein, switching from a meat to a vegetarian diet might also imply a loss in muscle mass. Even though there are some products that are made in order to meet this problem, vegetarians will tend to have more difficulties to sustain their muscles.

Thus, especially if you are quite active in the bodybuilding industry, you might have a quite hard time to avoid meat since it will be a major component of your diet in order to grow your muscles.

Switching to a vegetarian diet may also be quite hard for people who have to work in physically exhausting jobs. For instance, working in construction involves plenty of physical work and construction workers need large amounts of energy from their food in order to be able to stay fit.

However, a purely vegetarian diet might not be sufficient to provide this kind of energy. There is a reason why people in physically demanding jobs often even eat meat for breakfast.

Thus, if you work in one of those physically demanding professions, chances are that you might have difficulties getting enough energy from a vegetarian diet.

Through different media channels, we also frequently hear from parents who wanted to feed their kids solely on a vegetarian or even on a vegan diet. Many of those kids will suffer from growth problems and may also suffer from serious consequential damage in the long run.

Therefore, especially for children, a vegetarian diet might rather harm than do any good and parents should really be careful regarding vegetarian or even vegan diets for their children.

Since vegetarians have it harder to get sufficient nutrients, they may also be more likely to suffer from health issues caused by a lack of vitamins and minerals.

Thus, before switching to a vegetarian diet, it is crucial that you inform yourself about the consequences and how you can get enough nutrients to stay healthy even without eating any meat.

If you do not inform yourself, chances are that you will suffer from serious health issues in the long run due to your vegetarian diet.

Since our ancestors ate vegetables but also relied on meat as a major food source, it may seem kind of unnatural to many people to give up eating meat since our ancestors have consumed meat for millions of years and our genetics developed according to that.

Hence, in order to keep our body healthy, many people claim that meat should be an essential part of every diet since our body adapted to meat consumption for a quite long period of time.

Vegetarians often rely on soil products as a substitute for meat. However, soy is often produced through the use of genetically modified plants.

There are many critics out there which claim that genetic engineering can be quite harmful to humanity and that it might also affect our health in an adverse manner.

Thus, since vegetarians rely on many products that are made out of genetically modified plants, they may be at greater risk to suffer from potential adverse health consequences.

Even though the production of vegetables and fruits implies less greenhouse gas emissions, vegetarian diets are not entirely green. Also for the production of crops, large machines have to be used which emit significant amounts of greenhouse gases into our atmosphere.

Even though we could feed more people by switching from a meat-based to a vegetarian diet, this does not automatically mean that we actually will feed more people on a global scale.

Global hunger is not only a phenomenon of a lack of food, it is rather caused by distribution problems. For instance, we would currently be able to feed our entire world population.

However, millions of people die each year from starvation. Thus, in order to fight poverty and starvation, it is crucial to fight the structural political problems and switching to a vegetarian diet would not solve those issues.

Positive health effects

May need a strong motivation

Less factory farming needed

Vegetarian diets may be expensive

Efficient food use

Hard to implement in daily life

Mitigation of global hunger

Not respected in some regions yet

Slow down global warming

Use of genetic engineering

Water conservation

May be considered to be unnatural

Possible higher life expectancy

May hurt your kids

Reduction of overfishing

Nutrient deficiencies

Less soil pollution

Less energy

Reduction of groundwater pollution

Problematic in some jobs

Many people are also quite critical when it comes to restrictions on their diet. Some people fear that they will be confined regarding their diet in the future. Thus, especially if you live in those regions, you might have a quite hard time and might be even bullied if you practice a vegetarian diet.

The vegetarian diet has become extremely popular over the past decade. Hundreds of millions of people around the world rely on it. Although vegetarianism has many important advantages, it might not be the right way to go for some people since it also implies serious issues.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegetarianism https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/vegetarian-diet-plan https://www.vegsoc.org/ About the author
You have to decide for yourself whether you want to switch from a meat-based to a vegetarian diet or not, depending on your individual preferences and by evaluating all the pros and cons carefully in order to be able to make a profound decision.

My name is Andreas and my mission is to educate people of all ages about our environmental problems and how everyone can make a contribution to mitigate these issues.

As I went to university and got my Master's degree in Economics, I did plenty of research in the field of Development Economics.

After finishing university, I traveled around the world. From this time on, I wanted to make a contribution to ensure a livable future for the next generations in every part of our beautiful planet.

Wanna make a contribution to save our environment? Share it!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
30 Key Pros & Cons Of The Vegetarian Diet - E&C

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
" I'm not strictly vegetarian, but meat doesn't play a big part in my diet." Katie Holmes, Actress Even though a vegetarian diet has many advantages, it also implies some downsides. In this article, the pros and cons of a vegetarian diet are examined in detail.

# data[].attributes.headline
School Uniforms – Can They Really Improve Safety? – Pros and Cons

# data[].attributes.subject
School Uniforms – Can They Really Improve Safety? – Pros and Cons

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The National Center for Education Statistics states that as of 2016, 21% of elementary schools and 20% of middle schools in the United States have a uniform policy in place. Only 12% of American high schools had a uniform policy in place. The number of schools based in cities that required their students to wear a uniform was higher than that of schools from the rural and suburban areas.

Let's consider the pros and cons of school uniforms.

Benefits of school uniforms

More people have joined the support for the introduction of the uniform policy in public schools. Proponents for mandatory school uniforms cite increased safety of students as the major reason why more public schools should implement the policy. It's much easier to spot intruders in the school compound when everyone else is in a uniform. This is key to dealing with them before they can put anyone at risk or cause damage to the school property.

Two years after the uniform policy was implemented in Long Beach, cases of assault on students dropped by 34% while reports of attacks using deadly weapons reduced by 50%. Offenders could no longer hide weapons in baggy clothes to school under the guise of being students. Cases of sexual assaults also dropped tremendously.

Every school has a set of uniforms that is unique to them and has its badge or logo emblazoned on the chest. This can be used to identify students as belonging to a given school.

In the event that a child gets lost on their way to or from school, whoever finds them can easily be able to reunite them with their loved ones by taking them back to their school, from where their family can be traced. Students who sneak out during school functions or run away from school can also be easily identified by the local authorities.

Students come from different socio-economic backgrounds. Naturally, some are more privileged than others. Clothes, being fashion items and a status symbol, could make children from poor backgrounds vulnerable to bullying from privileged ones. Bullying, especially if based on a student's social standing, can badly impact their self-esteem and they are likely to feel like they don't belong.

On the other hand, students who come from higher-income families and thus can afford higher quality clothing may also become targets for robbery and theft from other students.

Enacting the uniform policy would level the playing field for all students and minimize chances of bullying based on socio-economic status. Students who can't afford the latest fashion trends would not have to struggle to fit in.

Wearing the same colors to school instills a sense of belonging and pride among the students. If the students are from a school with a rich history, they will be proud to wear the badge and will want to represent the school positively.

This high sense of school spirit and pride will inspire morality among the student body. It also boosts the morale of the students and promotes unity among them. They will want to represent the badge.

Uniforms save students from the stress of rummaging through their wardrobe every morning for something to wear to school. This will, in turn, improve punctuality. They already know what they need to wear for the day and have no other choice.

This means they don't need to spend as much time preparing for school. They can also have a good night's sleep without having to worry whether what they will wear to school will be accepted by their peers. Evenings can be spent completing assignments or on a constructive recreational activity.

Fashion trends are constantly changing. It would be expensive for parents to purchase the latest fashion trends for their kids to wear to school. Uniform designs, on the other hand, remain the same for a long time, often years. A uniform policy will save the parents from having to keep up with the latest fashion trends. There won't be any need to upgrade the kid's wardrobe on a regular basis.

School uniforms are also usually made from strong fabrics that can be worn for long before needing a replacement. A set or two of the school uniform is enough to see the students through a semester. This will save the parents some money, and thus they will be able to reallocate those funds toward learning materials and supplies.

School gangs usually wear certain types of clothing or colors as a way of identifying themselves. These gangs are always at the center of drug peddling and unrest in the school.

School uniforms will prevent gangs from gaining the identity and attention they crave. Students who join such gangs just for popularity from being identified with them are also likely to quit as uniforms make them feel the same as the rest of the student body.

The uniform fosters a spirit of oneness among the students and they are unlikely to attack other students who they feel is one of their own.

Schools that have not implemented the uniform policy usually have specific dress codes in place. Developing these dress codes is not an easy task. The schools have to tread with caution to ensure that the codes do not violate the rights of different religious and cultural backgrounds.

Besides that, it is difficult to decide on the type of acceptable items, such as the appropriate lengths of skirts or shorts. Even with strict dress codes, students will always find ways around them. Uniforms provide more general standards that are acceptable and are much easier to implement.

One of the arguments that have been advanced by those who are against the uniform policy is that it restricts students from expressing their individuality through their dressing. While this may hold some truth to it, it works to help the students express themselves in other ways.

The students will have to use other avenues besides fashion to express themselves. As a result, they could actually open up opportunities for themselves that they wouldn't consider otherwise. Uniforms can help students discover their talents in areas such as art, science and technology, or sports and other extra-curricular activities.

When all the students are in the same uniform, they will be able to focus on their studies instead of wondering if they fit in. No student will be concerned with how their clothes look. Uniforms eliminate the need for competition, especially among female students. There is very little distraction for the students when everyone is in the same type of clothes. As a result, there may be a notable improvement in the performance of the students when it comes to academics. The boost in self-esteem when all the students feel the same also boosts performance.

Concerns about making students wear school uniform

The above benefits make valid points for the implementation of the uniform policy in public schools. However, opponents have raised concerns about the implementation of the policy.

Some of these concerns are:

One of the biggest concerns is that uniforms could promote rivalries among schools within the same locality. Students from schools that are deemed to be more privileged could be targets of attacks once they are outside the school premises. The uniforms will make them easy to identify.

The government aims to provide free education in all public schools. This effort could be thwarted by the introduction of a uniform policy unless the government offers to also shoulder the costs of the uniforms.

This will limit the efforts of students from poor backgrounds to have access to education if their families can't afford to buy the uniforms. The parents may struggle to be able to afford a set or two of school uniforms, especially if they have more than one child in school. The dropout rates are likely to increase as a result of this.

One of the areas where children can hone their decision-making skills is in having a say in what they want to wear. Choosing an outfit for school, with the guidance of their parents, can help them know what to wear, when to wear it and how to wear it.

School uniforms take away this opportunity from students as they have to abide by clothing that has already been selected for them. Students are also likely to develop self-doubt and resent their own opinions if they can't be trusted with a simple thing such as dressing appropriately for school.

School uniforms are intended to eliminate socio-economic boundaries and make all the students feel that they are one. However, uniforms could be counterproductive to this same purpose they are supposed to achieve.

Students from privileged families will be able to afford more than one uniform while those from poor backgrounds are likely to stick to a single set for a long time. These will develop wear and tear within a short period of time due to being frequently worn to school. This promotes bullying and segregation based on one's social class.

If students are allowed to wear regular clothes to school, students from poor backgrounds can simply shop for affordable outfits. Nobody will be able to judge based on their clothes if they are in good condition.

Whether or not to enforce the uniform policy is a decision that directly affects students. Unfortunately, their contribution to the school uniforms debate has often been ignored. Opponents of the policy argue that students are opposed to the policy and don't want to be made to wear uniforms to school.

A study by the University of Nevada which sought the opinion of 7th and 8th graders revealed that 90% of them were against the idea of wearing uniforms. Washington High School is often used as a case study for this argument. The school introduced the uniform policy in 2006 and enrollment has since declined by almost 43%.

Students, especially girls, are more likely to compare how they look to others when made to wear the same type of outfit. Since uniforms don't take into consideration the different body types the students may have, they are more likely to be subjected to ridicule and embarrassment if they don't look good in the uniforms.

Students who are in their teenage years are usually expected to start preparing for life as an adult. They are expected to start preparing for the transition into adulthood by making good choices on matters concerning them. However, this transition could be delayed if the students aren't allowed to have a say in simple matters like what they can wear to school.

Uniforms deny the students an opportunity to learn how to make decisions for themselves. Teenagers often use clothes as a form of identity. Denying them an opportunity to develop their identity affects their development.

One of the downsides of encouraging oneness among the student body is that individuality is restricted. Thus, students may be more likely to conform to a mob mentality. Students are more likely to bow to peer pressure in order not to betray the spirit of togetherness.

This can lead to a rise in cases of indiscipline and widespread unrest among the students. Uniforms plant the idea that it is okay to conform to the standards of everyone else in your sphere even if it is harmful, instead of being different.

Most people who oppose the introduction of uniforms in public schools feel that policymakers in the education sector are using the uniform issue to run away from solving the real problems facing the sector. They argue that serious problems such as poor performance in public schools, disciplinary problems, and school violence cannot be simply solved by making students wear uniforms in schools.

Instead, they suggest the sector has more serious problems to focus on than what students are wearing to school. They argue that the push for the introduction of school uniforms is driven more by commercial interests rather than genuine concern for students' welfare.

When it comes to school uniforms, there are some definite benefits to security. However, consideration must be given to all the pros and cons mentioned in the article. There are also unique circumstances in every school that may influence policies. Each school district will need to weigh these when making the decision whether to mandate school uniforms at their school.

A great place to start is the BeSafe Facility Safety Assessment Guide. Download it here and start using it today.

BeSafe Technologies Inc. is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.
BeSafe Technologies offers safety and security technology and services to help keep schools safe.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
School Uniforms - Can They Really Improve Safety? - Pros and Cons

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The National Center for Education Statistics states that as of 2016, 21% of elementary schools and 20% of middle schools in the United States have a uniform policy in place. Only 12% of American high schools had a uniform policy in place.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Over the past few years, there has been a lot of talk about the captivity of animals and whether it is a good or a bad thing. With the instant reach of social media, people can be quick to jump on the bandwagon of "All zoos are bad" and "free all of the animals". However, many people do not take the time to educate themselves on the issues, the reasons for captive animals, and the good that the best of these institutions can do. Yes, there are many poorly run zoos/aquariums/sanctuaries, but there are also those who fight hard against extinction, reintroduce species on the brink of extinction, and work with governments and communities to protect species and house animals during rehabilitation and recovery. Such institutions can have a critical role in helping preserve our planet, saving some species, recovering habitats, and educating our youth about the ecosystem and its importance in our plight for survival. So, how do we recognize which is which?

About Our Guest Author: Samantha Sullivan

Biology with a wildlife conservation focus at the Miami University in partnership with San Diego Zoo Global. Sam's interest is to work within communities to inspire coexistence with wildlife through education and awareness. Sam is currently studying for a master in She is passionate about conservation which we witnessed firsthand when we met her in 2015 in the context of a conservation volunteering project in Costa Rica.

Here Sam shares with us a few comments about zoos in our modern world, and how to recognize the good from the bad institutions. Remember that when it comes to animals in captivity, the picture is rarely all black or white. The key is to understand the shades of gray, identify the definite bad ones, and help the well-intended ones to do the right thing. In the end, we are all responsible and accountable for what happens in those institutions, because we are the ones visiting and therefore endorsing them. As concerned humans, we have the power to help zoo institutions get to better standards for the benefit of their non-human guests.

There are many ways to educate ourselves and make better-informed choices. A little research goes a long way and might help to answer some questions and provide clarity to our concerns around these institutions. Every zoo and aquarium are different from each other and just because one is smaller, older, or ends up attracting media attention, it does not mean that they do not have the best interest of the species in mind. The knowledge in the animal world is constantly changing. Therefore good zoos and aquariums are constantly changing. They make upgrades to better suit the artificial environment to the natural habitats of their guests; they change diets to better match their wild diet or to provide essential nutrients; they add new programs; under careful monitoring, they bring new animals in for the public to learn about. These changes may affect the appearance or marketing tactics of a zoo and this does not mean it is a bad place or only out to turn a profit. Again how do you know? There are a few little things that we can do to better grasp if one institution is worth our visit and attention. And here are some helpful tips to get us started.

What is the Zoo Accreditation?

An important way to learn about the legitimacy of a zoo or aquarium here in the United States is to ensure it is accredited by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA). This accreditation process includes reviews and inspections to assess candidates and member institutions against mandated standards. You can get a complete list of AZA-accredited institutions at . If they are not accredited, it may be best to stay away. [If you are in another country you can check the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums , which is the worldwide and unifying organization for the world zoo and aquarium community.]

Is the Zoo a Nonprofit?

I am constantly hearing from people who claim that zoos just exist to make a profit. Let's stop right there. Take a look and see what their status is. If it is a nonprofit, there must be (and please do check those) programs in place to benefit the animals, the community, and education. True non-profits are not there to make a profit and get rich. Many zoological institutions and aquariums are non-profit organizations. Not sure how to find this out? Just look for the institution online. If you are interested in learning more about their programs, which should be described on their website. There is a good chance that there are educational brochures and/or volunteers on site that can talk to you more about the different zoo programs that support the community, education, species reintroduction, and more.

What is the Zoo's Mission?

This can get you started, but it is not as simple as whether or not they draw in a profit or not. Now look deeper. What is their mission statement? What do they stand for? Any zoo will (and should) state its mission, vision, and current projects on its website. Read them, and educate yourself. What do you think? Do they seem genuine? Do your values align with theirs? You may be surprised at just how many legitimate zoos out there are doing hard work to help save our planet and the amazing species we share it with. Additionally, check out the educational programs that the institution offers. Are there fun and educational ways -yet respectful towards the animals- to get your children involved in nature and excited about animal welfare and conservation? Are there programs for adults to bring awareness to serious conservation issues?

Are there Indicators of Good Welfare Practices?

Another topic to consider is the state of the enclosures where the animals live. Of course, it is hard to have a sense just by looking at their website, so this is more pertinent when you are on the premises. Then, what do the enclosures look like? Do they seem to mimic natural habitats (light, sound, substrates) with opportunities to hide away from the public eye? What about enrichment such as treats, activities, and other items to engage the animal? What about the size of the enclosure: does it seem fitting for the animal (if you don't know then research the topic beforehand)? Keep in mind many enclosures are actually much larger than what you can see; often a public enclosure is smaller so that the visitors can have the opportunity to see the animal (yet again they need to provide withdrawal areas), but the behind-the-scenes area may be larger. Having a conversation with a zookeeper or volunteer may answer some of your questions about the enclosures and the well-being of the animals, for instance, ask them about the private enclosure's size and quality, as well as ask how it compares to the natural habitat of the animal.

By no means do these tips constitute an exhaustive list of the questions that we should ask ourselves before going to a zoo? But again they offer a good and minimal start. As concerned and responsible humans, we need to be able to identify reliably legitimate good zoos, praise those for what they do well, and call upon the bad instances so that we can push altogether for better standards. That comes with knowledge, and knowledge starts with us doing our homework...

Samantha's Wild Q&A about zoos is a great introduction to the EwA Zoo Evaluation tool. The EwA Zoo Evaluation tool is a short and easy guide for visitors to help discern animal welfare conditions in captive environments. That is, it enables zoogoers to deepen their understanding of (and therefore their ability to gauge and help) institutions exhibiting captive wildlife. By understanding what we are looking at, we can push and support better captive conditions. That's the least we can do for the millions of animals that we are forced into captivity.

And if you are planning to visit a facility with captive animals, please take the time to check our short Etiquette for the Zoogoer.

by Samantha Sullivan

The photos used in this article are the property of the author.

✒️️ What you think is important to us. Feel free to engage us and leave a courteous message below. Thanks!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Not ALL Zoos Are Bad... But How Do You Know?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Over the past few years, there has been a lot of talk about the captivity of animals and whether it is a good or a bad thing. With the instant reach of social media, people can be quick to jump on the bandwagon of "All zoos are bad" and "free all of the animals".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I would like to begin by defining “zoo.” It is a park-like area in which live animals are kept in cages or large enclosures for public exhibit. Hold on, large enclosures? More like tiny cages. As zoo funds are cut, cages become smaller wi

# data[].attributes.headline
What's the Problem with Pets in the Classroom

# data[].attributes.subject
What's the Problem with Pets in the Classroom

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Many teachers consider bringing animals into their classrooms as a way to teach students about responsibility, pet care, animal science, and more. We know that many teachers who keep classroom "pets" do so with good intentions and a love for animals. But a classroom simply isn't a suitable home for an animal, and there are many factors that kind teachers need to consider before bringing one into theirs.

While children can undoubtedly benefit from knowing and learning to care for animals, those lessons must be taught in situations where all variables are controlled-a virtually impossible feat in a bustling classroom full of curious youngsters. There are many ways to teach students responsibility and appreciation for animals that don't involve putting vulnerable lives at risk.

As educators, it's our responsibility to teach students that each and every life is valuable. Here are facts that every teacher considering a classroom "pet" needs to know:

A Classroom Is an Unhappy 'Home' for Animals

When sensitive animals are confined to small cages or tanks in classrooms, their needs are rarely met and their natural instincts can't be accommodated. For example, mice and other small mammals are nocturnal, yet they're kept in brightly lit classrooms and regularly removed from their cages throughout the day, completely disrupting their natural sleep rhythms. Rabbits and rodents are prey animals, so they instinctively try not to show that they're sick or in pain-and they become terrified very easily, are fearful of being picked up by unfamiliar hands, and are even prone to suffering from heart attacks in stressful situations. Imagine how distressing it must be for animals to be handled by large numbers of children who may not know the correct way to hold them. It's virtually impossible for an animal in a classroom to be protected at every single moment when children outnumber adults.

While having classroom "pets" might be tempting and seem like fun, let's face it: You know that your busy classroom (and your many young learners' excited, inexperienced hands) are not the best thing for animals-and it's wrong to discount their needs and well-being.

Classroom 'Pets' Are Often Left Alone and Left Behind

Class "pets" are highly vulnerable to illness and neglect, as they're regularly left unmonitored at night and on the weekends. And when animals are left alone-even overnight-things can quickly take a turn for the worse. There have been countless cases of animals who died of heatstroke in classrooms during warm weekends or perished in the cold when the heat was turned off as everyone else went home. Small animals are at risk of heatstroke in temperatures as low as 82 degrees.

During school breaks, it's a scramble to find students who can take animals home with them-which presents another problem entirely. More often than not, if students do volunteer, their homes aren't screened, and they and their families are unprepared for the comprehensive care that small animals require (which can-and often does-lead to tragic consequences). A teacher in Beaverton, Oregon, for example, reported that a "classroom" gerbil who was sent home with a student endured a broken back and died after being played with recklessly. In another case, a rabbit was killed by a dog after being sent home with a student. A household full of kids, other animals, and unpredictable circumstances can be a dangerous place for a defenseless animal whose life depends on proper care.

If no students or teachers can take animals home during school breaks, they usually end up in severely crowded shelters-contributing directly to the homeless-animal crisis. Because of this-as well as the risks involved in keeping animals in the classroom-some shelters have even implemented rules against adopting animals for classroom use.

And what happens to "classroom" animals in an emergency? While these situations are (thankfully) uncommon, they do occur. Most schools, though, don't have emergency preparedness plans in place for the animals in their classrooms in the case of a fire, flood, or other disaster-meaning that, in all likelihood, the animals will be left behind to suffer. Is it realistic to think that the animals in your classroom will be rescued if your school faces an emergency?

It's a Health Risk for Kids

Having classroom "pets" poses a huge risk not only for the animals-it can endanger the students, too. Millions of kids suffer from allergies and asthma, which can both be triggered or exacerbated by the presence of certain animals and some types of animal bedding.

Bacteria, such as salmonella, can be spread by the handling of reptiles and amphibians and their enclosures, and small mammals, such as hamsters, rabbits, chinchillas, guinea pigs, gerbils, rats, and mice, can carry transmittable diseases, too.

Animals such as guinea pigs, sugar gliders, spiders, and snakes can also easily nip or bite students if they feel threatened, frustrated, or even hungry. Small animals are often handled roughly by eager students (many of whom have absolutely no experience doing so) and can become scared and uncomfortable, which could cause them to lash out in self-defense.

Animals in the Classroom Are at Risk of Abuse

Sadly, unintentional neglect isn't the only threat that classroom "pets" face. Even in the best of situations, animals in classrooms are at risk. Nearly every week, PETA learns about animals who have been hurt or killed by young people (and we assume that countless other incidents go unreported). PETA has also received many reports of neglect and awful cruelty to animals who are kept in schools. The following incidents are a few of them:

Arlington, Texas: A group of high school students strangled a classroom "pet" ferret to death during class, allegedly to elicit a response from their teacher.

Beaverton, Oregon: A gerbil who was sent home with a student endured a broken back and died after being played with recklessly. A rabbit was killed by a dog after being sent home with another student.

Cape Coral, Florida: A rabbit who was allegedly kept with three others in a wire cage at a school died after being chased during a weekend.

Helena, Arkansas: A snake was stolen from his classroom enclosure and cooked to death in a school microwave.

Hoboken, New Jersey: An African dwarf frog died after apparently being overfed by a kindergarten student.

Lawrence, Kansas: A rabbit at the Hilltop Child Development Center died after his tail was apparently pulled off.

Melbourne, Victoria, Australia: A rabbit was found decapitated and the body strewn about the campus, and a guinea pig died from shock at Smith Street Early Learning Centre.

Monterey, California: A goldfish being kept as a "pet" in a middle school classroom was killed after bleach was poured into his water.

Orlando, Florida: Several snails died after students purposefully shook the jars in which they were being kept. The animals were being used as part of a cruel bottle biology experiment in a science classroom.

Santa Rosa, California: A hamster was tortured and killed at Northwest Prep Charter School during a break-in by five juveniles between the ages of 11 and 14.

Staten Island, New York: A hamster was stolen from Eden II School during a burglary and was never recovered.

Tampa, Florida: Nine gerbils died after they were deprived of food and water for more than two weeks, finches died of exposure, and a ball python froze to death in the head of the science department's classroom at Freedom High School.

Yorktown, Virginia: A gerbil in a Grafton High School classroom was allegedly killed by a student who became upset. The student was charged with cruelty to animals.

Having Animals in the Classroom Supports Cruel Breeders and the Hidden Horrors of the Pet Trade

Many small animals used as class "pets" come from awful breeding facilities, where they're kept in horrific conditions, deprived of proper veterinary care, and left vulnerable to abuse. Breeders also directly contribute to the severe animal-overpopulation crisis and destroy the chances that animals in shelters have of finding good homes.

There Are Better Ways to Teach

Kids can learn responsibility and develop respect for animals in countless ways that don't put a single animal at risk. Teach responsibility through community service projects and by caring for plants and/or a school garden. Teach children about the life cycle and animal behavior by observing local wildlife, watching high-quality documentaries, or using computer programs. Children should never be misled into thinking that animals are classroom tools-there's never an excuse to put an animal's well-being at risk. Every lesson that can be taught with live animals can also be taught in kind and thoughtful ways that don't jeopardize anyone's life.

Respecting Animals Means Leaving Them Out of the Classroom-so What Can You Do?

Say no to classroom "pets" and yes to humane teaching methods. Pledge NEVER to keep animals in your classroom, and share information with your students and staff about why you choose to do so. Choose enriching classroom activities that show students to respect, care for, and empathize with animals without keeping them in unnatural situations or putting them at risk. Be creative-animals are living beings, not teaching tools, and there are much better ways to instill important lessons in children.

Speak up for animals at risk in your school. If your school is keeping animals-either as "pets" or as teaching "tools"-voice your disagreement! If you're comfortable doing so, communicate with the staff members involved, explaining the cruelty inherent in the pet trade and in keeping animals in the classroom, along with the many risks that are involved and the message that it sends to students.

Change your school's policy. You can even write a letter to your principal and school board members, asking them to implement a policy regarding keeping animals in the school. Be sure to include all the pertinent information, and contact usif you need any assistance!

Remember, it's never too late to do what's right. If you already have an animal in your classroom, please make the compassionate decision either to take the animal home or to find a sanctuary where he or she can live peacefully and with appropriate care. Explain to your students why you're making this decision and use it as an honest, teachable moment.

Living beings should never be put in danger in order to be used as an example or part of a lesson. Just because we can do something doesn't mean that we should do it-and when it comes to keeping animals in the classroom, the risks to the animals' well-being will always outweigh any potential benefits to the students (which can easily be achieved through kinder means). It's our responsibility to make sure that we treat animals with respect, dignity, and their best interests in mind-and teach our students to do the same.

Every teacher can lead with compassion. Join TeachKind for free to receive lesson plans, classroom ideas, tips on humane education, and more!

All fields in bold are mandatory.

FormBuilder Form - 3364

By submitting this form, you're acknowledging that you have read and agree to our privacy policy and agree to receive e-mails from us.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What's the Problem With Classroom 'Pets'? | PETA

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Thinking about getting a classroom "pet"? Think again. Find out why the classroom is NOT a good place for animals.

# data[].attributes.headline
Humane Society Study Results Pets in the Classroom

# data[].attributes.subject
Humane Society Study Results Pets in the Classroom

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The debate over whether students should wear school uniforms has been going on for more than a decade. Some people argue that uniforms have a positive impact on the school environment by promoting inclusivity, confidence, and a sense of belonging. Others fear that school uniforms prevent kids from expressing themselves through their clothing choices.

The research on school uniforms is often mixed. While some schools have found uniforms to be beneficial, other research has found that they have little effect. Some studies have even reached the conclusion that requiring school uniforms can be harmful for students.

Let's take a closer look at some of the potential benefits, as well as the challenges, of requiring students to wear uniforms.

Student Safety

Some people think that school uniforms can help make schools safer for kids. When Long Beach, CA, required all students in grades K-8 to wear uniforms, reports of assault and battery decreased by 34%.

Additionally, assault with a deadly weapon decreased by 50%, fighting incidents declined 51%, and sex offenses dropped by 74%. Possession of weapons dropped by 52%, possession of drugs went down 69%, and vandalism was lowered by 18%.

The Sparks Middle School in Nevada reported a decrease in gang activity after instituting a uniform policy. They also reported a drop in fights, graffiti, property damage, and battery. Overall, there was a 63% drop in police reports.

Other proponents of school uniforms report that it prevents students from concealing weapons under clothing. And some also believe intruders would be recognized faster, making the students and staff safer in the event someone from the community tries to enter the school.

Not all studies have found that uniforms reduce discipline issues, however. In fact, a peer-reviewed study found that school uniforms increased the average number of assaults by about 14 per year in the most violent schools. The Miami-Dade County Public Schools Office of Education Evaluation and Management found that fights in middle schools nearly doubled within one year of making uniforms mandatory.

Focus on Education

For many students, clothing can be a major source of stress. Not having certain brand name clothing or not wearing fashionable items could lead to feelings of insecurity.

Some people feel students are better able to concentrate on school when they all wear the same clothing. Researchers in Australia noted that students who wear uniforms had improved discipline and academic performance.﻿﻿

Not all studies have found that uniforms improve grades, however. In fact, at least one study found that school uniforms had a negative effect on achievement.﻿﻿﻿﻿

Attendance Rates

Kids may show up to school more often when they're wearing uniforms. A study by researchers at the University of Houston found that the average attendance rate for girls in middle and high school increased by 0.3 to 0.4 percent after school uniforms became mandatory.﻿﻿﻿﻿ A study by Youngstown State University also found that attendance rates increased and suspensions decreased once students began wearing uniforms.﻿﻿﻿﻿

Students may also be more likely to show up to school on time when they have to wear uniforms. If they don't have to spend time choosing what to wear every morning, students are able to get out the door more quickly. This means fewer late arrivals.

Discipline Issues

Proponents of uniforms report that it can improve behavior in students. One school that found this to be true is the John Adams Middle School in Albuquerque, NM. When they mandated school uniforms, discipline referrals dropped from 1,565 in the first semester of the previous year to 405.﻿﻿﻿

An Australian study also concluded that students wearing uniforms were more disciplined and they listened significantly better. Classes were also more likely to start on time.﻿﻿﻿﻿

Not all studies have found this, however. Some research has found that disciplinary issues and bullying didn't decrease after instituting a mandatory uniform policy.

Dress Code Enforcement

Many school officials spend a lot of time policing dress codes. Enforcing policies can require a lot of resources as teachers may send kids to the office, and administrators have to determine whether clothing is too baggy, inappropriate, or revealing.

Kids who violate dress codes may spend a lot of time in the office awaiting consequences, or they may receive suspensions for repeated violations. School uniforms can keep kids in the classroom more and prevent staff from wasting time trying to enforce policies.

Cost for Families

Parents may spend less money on school clothes when kids wear uniforms. There is less pressure to buy expensive name-brand clothing, and school uniforms might be more affordable.

Opponents of school uniforms, however, say that requiring parents to buy specific articles of clothing goes against the idea that students should be given free education. When public schools force parents to buy uniforms, this could be placing a hardship on some families.

Impact on Self-Esteem

Proponents of uniforms report that they have a positive impact on student self-esteem.﻿﻿ Wearing the same clothing as everyone else means that students don't have to worry about whether their clothing choices will be acceptable to their peers.

But opponents argue that uniforms may have a negative impact on some students' body image. Research conducted at Arizona State University found that students without uniform policies actually reported higher self-perception scores than students with uniform policies.﻿﻿﻿

When all students wear the same clothing, they may be more likely to compare themselves to their peers as clothing fits differently on everyone's body.

The Problem With Uniform Research

Although there are many studies that examine the potential benefits and drawbacks of uniforms, many of them revealed correlation, rather than causation. Just because grades went up or behavioral problems went down, there's no way of knowing that the reason for the change was due to uniform policy. There are many other factors that may have influenced these issues.

A Word From Verywell

Before any school adopts a uniform policy, it may be wise to review the literature. While there certainly may be a lot of benefits to making uniforms mandatory, there are also some potential drawbacks and challenges you might face. Parents, teachers, and administrators may want to weigh the pros and cons before instituting any type of clothing policy for students.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Pros and Cons of School Uniforms for Students

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The debate over whether students should wear school uniforms has been going on for more than a decade. Here are some of the potential benefits and challenges of uniforms.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
You can make many arguments about the various pros and cons of school uniforms and whether they are necessary. While they have traditionally been used in many private and religious schools, they have become even more popular in recent years. In fact, a 2020 report showed that the percentage of public schools that require uniforms went from 12% in 1999 to 20% in 2017.

Debates about whether or not school uniforms make a difference in students' learning experiences persist, though, with many proposed pros and cons.

Pros
There are many benefits of school uniforms that parents, teachers, and students often agree on. Schools that use uniforms argue that they:

Encourage discipline and set clearly defined rules.

Promote comradery and foster a sense of community.

Make it easier for students to get ready in the morning - they're convenient.

Make laundry less of a hassle for parents.

Cons
Some argue that the cons of school uniforms outweigh the pros. They argue that:

Most kids don't like school uniforms.

Uniforms limit closet space.

Kids who wear uniforms are more likely to be bullied.

Uniforms don't allow children to be creative - they only teach them to comply.

Uniforms can affect a kid's self-image.

Uniforms are usually a standard set of clothes chosen by schools. Most of the time, you can purchase them from special uniform stores or directly from the school.

Depending on the school's choice of attire, uniforms will usually have the school's crest or emblem on button-up or polo shirts, as well as blazers and sweatshirts.

These days, students can often choose from a range of options, such as:

Polo shirts or blouses, usually in plain colors like white and/or the colors of the school

White button-up shirts

Shorts, usually khaki

Pants, also usually khaki

Blazers, worn for more formal occasions (such as Mass at Catholic schools)

Sweatshirts or some other form of sweater with the school's name or logo

Dress codes, on the other hand, are different from school uniforms. They are not standardized, which usually means that students can wear most varieties of a specific type of clothing. Schools that use dress codes might have students wear pants of the same or similar color, but they don't necessarily have to be the same brand or style. Many schools throughout the country have started using dress codes in recent years as a way to hopefully promote equality among students and improve academic success.

School uniforms are neither good nor bad - they have both upsides and downsides. At the end of the day, the decision about incorporating school uniforms (or a dress code) comes down to the specific school and its unique needs. Sometimes, having a school uniform helps a school meet certain needs and expectations of the parents whose students will attend it.

School uniforms are a standard form of dress set by an academic institution. Though they often include some options, such as pants or shorts for boys and skirts, pants, or shorts for girls, they are generally all the same color.

One of the first records of school uniforms was made in 1222, when the Archbishop of Canterbury made a rule that students had to wear a robe-like outfit called a "cappa clausa." These robes were used as a way to standardize the dress among school boys, making it easier for school teachers to keep track of boarding school students. In later centuries, this practice became associated with the upper class, and boys at prestigious schools would wear very formal coats with button-up shirts and top hats. These cumbersome standards (and cumbersome clothes) eventually became more relaxed, though.

As mentioned earlier, schools that have uniforms may use them as a way to standardize the dress code amongst their students. Many private schools or those that are religious will use uniforms to create a sense of order and uniformity. Children and teens can sometimes look unkempt or choose to wear clothes that may be considered provocative or offensive, especially in religious schools.

Additionally, schools that favor uniforms feel that they help create a safer educational environment, letting students focus more on learning, as opposed to what they're going to wear to school the next day.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Are the Pros and Cons of School Uniforms?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn why uniforms are used in school as well, as the possible benefits and disadvantages of using them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Is It Time to Reconsider the Year-Round School Schedule?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This scheduling option can help schools with large enrollments manage space constraints and provide built-in breaks for remediation.

# data[].attributes.headline
More Schools Should Offer Year Round Schooling

# data[].attributes.subject
More Schools Should Offer Year Round Schooling

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A group of kids in a tug-of-war game enjoy the time outside together.
getty

Few events spark as much nostalgia as summer for parents.

Heat waves notwithstanding, camps, vacations, jobs, and time in the neighborhood pool spark fond memories, which ripple into pop songs devoted to the joys of summer.

Yet for many parents from all walks of life, the summer break from school can be simultaneously painful.

That pain is why I argue in my new book, " From Reopen to Reinvent," that it's well past time that many more schools began offering year-round schooling. Such a move would not only aid parents, but it would also reduce stress on students and burnout among teachers.

The parental pain stems from many angles.

For some, it's the agony and pressure of planning and constant coordination.

Parents often begin planning for summer the preceding November. Camp sign-ups start as early as December, and the spots at the popular camps fill up fast.

Trying to predict in which activities children will have an interest six months from now offers its own stress, as does the sense that parents will be letting their children down if they don't sign them up for the "right" activities, from robotics to coding, design engineering or something else.

Many feel they have to cram their children's interests into the summer break instead of spreading them throughout the year, which pits academics, athletics, arts and other areas of passion against each other rather than modeling a balanced lifestyle.

Each week of summer is also different for many families, which makes it hard to create a rhythm. Coordinating who is caring for and chaperoning the children each week is challenging.

Spreadsheets abound as parents seek to juggle everyone's schedules and make sure there are no unaccounted-for hours.

"Every Sunday during the summer, I have mild panic," said one parent on my podcast titled Class Disrupted, "because I need to not only figure that information out for myself and print out maps of where the drop-off site is on this complicated campus, but now I've got to convey that information to three other people."

There is also the cost of summer programs for parents.

And while academics debate whether there really is a "summer slide"-the idea that children lose their academic gains over the summer months-what's clear is that for some families, the summer is a time of vast enrichment that other families, particularly those from low-income backgrounds or those that lack the social capital to know which opportunities to explore, don't have access to. In some cases, children even take advanced academic classes so they can get an edge over their peers when they go back to school.

But the pain of summer doesn't have to accompany its joys.

Many mistakenly believe that the current school calendar with its long summer break-known in education circles as the "agrarian calendar"-began to allow children to be home to help during the farming season when agriculture played a bigger role in the economy.

In actuality, children in rural farming communities who were enrolled in school in the 19 th century typically spent five or six months in school-two to three months in the summer and two to three months in the winter. They were home during the spring and fall for planting and harvesting.

The children enrolled in urban areas in the 19th century went to school year-round with short breaks. In 1842, Detroit schools were open roughly 260 days. New York's were open 245 days.

School wasn't mandatory then, so many students didn't show-particularly in the hottest months in urban areas, given the lack of air conditioning. Many in the community were concerned that summer bred "epidemics, and [was] most fruitful of diseases generally," and said students would be better off at home or in the countryside.

To beat the summer heat, wealthy families pulled their children out of school and journeyed to the countryside or beach where the weather was cooler. As mandatory public school expanded, legislators and labor unions pushed for less school time and a more regulated summer break.

Decades later, we now just treat this as the way school is done.

But there are public schools around the country that have been moving to year-round school, or what's often known as a balanced calendar. According to the Congressional Research Service, in 1985 there were "410 year-round public schools, serving about 350,000 students. . . . During the 2011-2012 school year, there were 3,700 public schools" operating year-round school serving over 2 million students.

These schools still offer breaks for students.

In one model, for example, students attend school for roughly 12 weeks followed by three weeks of vacation year-round.

In another popular model, students enroll for roughly nine weeks and have two weeks off in between-with the exception of summer, when they have roughly a month of vacation.

From Charleston, West Virginia to Holt, Michigan, many schools that offer year-round schooling report improved parent satisfaction and teacher happiness.

The reason for the "happier teachers" may be that the schedules provide more frequent breaks that help them rejuvenate. That helps teachers avoid complete exhaustion at the end of the school year.

There are of course concerns with moving to such a school calendar.

Some worry that students will lose the opportunity to enjoy enrichment experiences or hold jobs during the summer.

Rethinking schooling to create more spaces for enrichment activities at a more regular cadence or making projects a core part of schooling such that enrichment opportunities are embedded in the school experience could address the former concern.

As for working, it's true that by holding a job students can gain key skills for the workforce, awareness of the various career pathways that exist, and beneficial connections.

But fewer teenagers have been working than at any time in our nation's history over the past decade. Roughly 20 percent of teenagers worked prior to the pandemic, compared to 40 percent in 1990, for example.

Although there are signs of a change, there are also a variety of reasons behind these statistics, including many families believe that their children are better served by loading up on impressive-sounding extracurricular activities in the pursuit of college than by holding a job.

The bottom line is that far too few adolescents are taking advantage of summer to work-and schools could do a better job of integrating real-work experiences from the surrounding community into school for all students.

Another set of concerns revolve around the nostalgia for the summer break.

There are also entire industries that have sprung up around summer vacation, from camps to classes and resorts. In New England, where I live, there are towns that exist for the summertime because their economy is so dependent on the vacation and tourist activity that takes place during those months of the year.

As a result, there are vested interests in keeping summer break the way it is.

There are answers to these challenges. Among them are the reality that families would still have vacation time during the summer when they could escape for the coast and summer music festivals. Relatively few families, after all, can afford to take off the entire summer in a tourist location.

But more broadly, concerns around losing something aren't unique to summer break. The status quo often has a big constituency behind it ready to push back on any significant change.

To create change, it's critical to find ways to address the inevitable anxiety that people will experience around proposed changes. Switches occur only when the pain of a current situation plus the allure of the new overcomes existing habits and anxieties. This typically means no instant changes, but gradual work with communities to find ways forward.

Some schools have discovered that allowing several teachers to co-teach a larger group of students allows them to keep the school building open year-round and allows students and teachers to schedule breaks when it suits them. If a teacher is absent in this arrangement, there's no break in continuity for the students. The flexibility offers far more support for parents and reduces pressure on students so long as they make steady academic progress. And for those families for whom the traditional school calendar works, they can continue to follow it.

As society slides back into taking for granted that schools are open, it's time to revisit one of our core assumptions: that school closes during the summer.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
More Schools Should Offer Year-Round Schooling Option

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Few events spark as much nostalgia as summer for parents. Heat waves notwithstanding, camps, vacations, jobs, and time in the neighborhood pool spark fond memories, which ripple into pop songs devoted to the joys of summer. Yet for many parents from all walks of life, the summer break from school can be simultaneously painful.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This article describes the pros and cons of year-round schooling.