# data[].attributes.body
I mean Nick*

# data[].attributes.body
Read this article...was he right or wrong?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On Tuesday, at the start of the autumn term, a police community support officer, as well as officers passing the secondary school, stepped in after a "disturbance" outside the gates.

Mr Tate has defended the policy, insisting that the school has been under-performing and that enforcing uniform rules was part of a drive to raise expectations and standards.

Public opinion has been split on the issue. Some have praised the move to enforce uniform policy, saying being strict and consistent helps to teach children rules. But some parents have criticised the policy as over-zealous and questioned whether pupils being dressed in the same clothes helps educate them.
Some have also condemned the price of the uniform.
One parent, Latasha Whiting, wrote on Facebook that her 15-year-old daughter was turned away for not wearing an appropriate school skirt.

She believed the crackdown stemmed from a headteacher intent on making an impact in his first few days in the job, adding: "Sorry, wrong kind of impact in my mind."

The school has informed parents that a supplier has all the uniform needed in stock, including blazers priced at £27, skirts at £11.95 and trousers for between £13 and £16.

One woman commented on the school's Facebook page: "Absolutely disgusting, clearly none of those in charge are in touch with reality and what it is like to choose between eating and paying £27 for a blazer."

Mr Tate has previously said he has gained overwhelming support from other parents saying it was "good to set standards".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Headteacher refuses to back down in school uniform row after 80 pupils sent home

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On Tuesday, at the start of the autumn term, a police community support officer, as well as officers passing the secondary school, stepped in after a "disturbance" outside the gates. Mr Tate has defended the policy, insisting that the school has been under-performing and that enforcing uniform rules was part of a drive to raise expectations and standards.

# data[].attributes.body
All the Government facts and figures from 2014-15...go to page 9

# data[].attributes.headline
This one gives you an idea about the type of language you should be using...

# data[].attributes.subject
This one gives you an idea about the type of language you should be using...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
SheKnows helps empower women through articles and discussion related to parenting, women's health, family-friendly recipes & relationship advice.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
School uniforms may still be the exception rather than the rule in U.S. public schools, but a school uniform policy is becoming more common. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, from the 1999 - 2000 to 2013 - 2014 school years, the percentage of public schools reporting they required students to wear uniforms increased from 12 to 20 percent.

In the 2015 - '16 school year, 21 percent of public schools reported they required students to wear uniforms, with more primary schools (25 percent) requiring students to wear uniforms than middle schools (20 percent) and high schools (12 percent).
More: The Question Every Parent Dreads: Can I Take My Cell Phone to School?
On the face of it, the topic of school uniforms doesn't seem to be particularly controversial. But start asking around, and you'll find that most parents - and their kids, naturally - have strong opinions. Who knew that what kids wear to school could be so polarizing?

If you're not sure where you stand on the school uniform debate, here are some of the main pros and cons.

Pros of school uniforms
More: 6 Reasons After-School Activities Are Worth the Effort
However, for every pro of school uniforms, there is a con.

Cons of school uniforms

In a 2007 poll of public school students in Harford County, Maryland, students expressed concern that uniforms detract from a child's individuality. One senior said uniforms would be "teaching conformity and squelching individual thought."

School uniforms enforce outdated gender stereotypes, as argued in 2016 by 9-year-old Irish student Lucille O'Mahony.

Uniforms often emphasize socioeconomic divisions between students who can afford more uniforms and those who can't. In a 2014 Children's Commission on Poverty inquiry carried out in the U.K., where some type of uniform is mandatory for all students from primary school (4 to 5 years) through higher secondary school (15 to 16 years), found that paying for school uniforms is a significant challenge for many parents.

Students may not like wearing uniforms, which may affect their behavior and effort in school. After a school uniform policy was implemented in three Nevada middle schools in 2008 and 2009, 90 percent of students reported that they disliked wearing uniforms.

Former President Bill Clinton is perhaps the most famous and influential advocate of school uniforms. "If it means that the schoolrooms will be more orderly and more disciplined and that our young people will learn to evaluate themselves by what they are on the inside instead of what they're wearing on the outside, then our public schools should be able to require their students to wear uniforms," he said in a March 1996 speech.

But the opinions that really matter are those of parents. SheKnows spoke to four moms with different views.

Toinette Campbell, a mom of two boys in Burbank, California, is decidedly pro: "Uniforms? I love them. The key word being uniform. It gives kids a level playing field and gets them away from one-upmanship on designer labels. It also gets kids used to taking care of their clothes. Getting rid of status symbols prevents children from being teased because they aren't wearing $150 jeans."

Carol O'Neil, a mother of two boys in East Kilbride, Scotland, agrees: "I am totally for school uniforms, as they keep children dressed the same and stop all of the nonsense with kids wearing designer gear. If kids are dressed the same, then they are less likely to be bullied." (In the U.K., uniforms are compulsory in both state and private schools.)
What Is the "Bystander Effect"? Kids Explain How It Harms
But Eduarda Schroeder, a mom of two daughters in Chandler, Arizona, doesn't see it that way. "Uniforms can be a financial burden for poor families," she explains, "because they are an additional expense for parents who pay taxes for a free public education. I am more in favor of a dress code."

Amelia Edelman, a mom of one in Nashville, Tennessee, makes another point in the anti camp: "In addition to being a sometimes prohibitive cost for lower-income parents, uniforms take away one of the healthiest and most creative modes of self-expression that kids - that all of us - have: what we put on our bodies every day. I was lucky to go to a public school where I could wear all the ripped, paint-splattered jeans and pseudo-punk patches I liked, and my clothes were my armor against whatever the day (or the mean girls) threw at me. I felt safe in my own self-expression, and I want the same for my son."

According to the 2013 National Survey of School Leaders, the majority of teachers believe that school uniforms promote a positive learning environment and improved behavior in students. But it's clear that among parents, as well as the kids themselves, the jury's still out.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Pros & Cons of School Uniforms: Moms Weigh In

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
School uniforms may still be the exception rather than the rule in U.S. public schools, but a school uniform policy is becoming more common. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, from the 1999 - 2000 to 2013 - 2014 school years, the percentage of public schools reporting they required students to wear uniforms increased from 12 to 20 percent.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Britain's school uniforms are on the march, and they're heading in the wrong direction because we seem to have forgotten what the point of a uniform is.

A school uniform should perform a few basic functions: it should be affordable, comfortable, and practical. It should help save parents and children time in the morning. It should also - and this is where we get into tricky, subjective territory - make children look, at the very least, not bad. And it strikes me that most schools are failing to make the grade in meeting these basic criteria.

Cost

The price of uniforms has been a hot topic on parents' forums in recent days. Having just invested £150 in polyester and pleather myself, I can sympathise.

Gillian Guy, chief executive of Citizens Advice, says: "Mums and Dads are telling us that school costs are more expensive this year than last. Buying from specific shops leaves parents with a lack of cheaper alternatives when it comes to clothing for term time. Low wages and squeezed family budgets have meant some are reliant on borrowing from friends and family." Indeed the latest figures from Citizens Advicesuggested that a quarter of parents had to borrow money to cover the cost of a new uniform.

In an effort to reduce the financial burden on families, the Schoolwear Association, whose members manufacture or distribute three-quarters of Britain's school uniforms, has started a- 1,200 signatures and counting - calling for a salary sacrifice scheme similar to childcare vouchers, which would allow parents to buy uniforms with untaxed money. This seems like an interesting idea. And there is already help availablefrom local education authorities if families cannot afford to buy their child's uniform.

Still, reading all of these cost-cutting measures makes me wonder why we're buying them at all. I love the idea of a uniform - fosters community spirit, efficient in the morning - but those worn by the majority of children don't actually look good.

A fashion No

The hipster trend - while entertaining - seems dangerous. Fashion is fickle. Official guidance from the Department for Education repeatedly admonishes schools to consult with children when choosing uniforms. Might that not end up with a prescription of miniskirts, skinny jeans, and fancy trainers?

Many schools, especially primaries, currently ask children to wear a sweatshirt or polo shirt with the school logo and grey trousers. Increasingly, and especially in new academies, there is a trend for reviving a more formal uniform, including school blazers and ties. According to Matthew Easter, chairman of the Schoolwear Association: "School uniforms are now clearly linked to academic performance and good behaviour, and we see more and more schools and academies upgrading to smarter and better quality uniform as a result."

I like this idea - that a school uniform, besides creating a sense of community, teaches students the importance of dressing appropriately for formal situations.

But the quality of the vast majority of state school uniforms I see just doesn't seem to carry that idea out: the uniforms from any given supplier are cut for one body type, and are therefore too narrow or too wide for most students. Schools buoyant with school spirit select garish colours that are universally unflattering. Training for professional dressing this is not.

So if we aren't succeeding with formal uniforms, and cool kit seems hazardous, should we just move to casual, but uniform, gear? Last year a primary school in Harrogate was criticised for ordering parents to dress children in Vicky Pollard-style jogging bottoms rather than smart trousers, skirts or pinafores. Parents protested that the sloppy uniform would "lower standards" and Chris McGovern, chairman of the Campaign for Real Education, said the idea promoted "the Vicky Pollard perspective on education", referring to the tracksuit-clad teenage delinquent in Little Britain. Rossett Acre Primary School defended the decision, insisting that it made sense for children aged four or five to wear clothes that were "sensible and practical".

This makes sense to me: if we can't to smart in a financially efficient and aesthetically pleasing way, shouldn't our children at least be comfortable? Are we still meant to be following the Chinese in all matters educational? Well guess what, their children wear tracksuits.

Do uniforms really kill individuality?

Some rail against school uniforms, saying that a major part of a student's education is the development of personality (agreed), and that this is manifested through choice of clothing (hmm. Really? Surely the development of personality and selfhood should go far beyond identification with a Goth or Abercrombie look. And surely the time to learn that looks aren't everything is as soon as possible.)

Does lack of uniform cultivate individuality?

What's the answer?

By now, even the most Francophile among us have figured out that Parisian children do, at times, throw food, some Mmes are fat, and their 35-hour work week hasn't quite worked out as planned. However, in matters of fashion, perhaps it is still safe to defer to our Gallic friends. When I complained about British school uniforms, my French friend shrugged and recalled how, in France, before the student riots in 1968, children just wore their own clothes to school and put a smock over them for the school day, to protect them. This custom is now seen as an authoritarian anachronism in France, and its revival is tabled only occasionally by far-Right candidates. But still... Comfortable. Practical. One-size-fits-all. Perhaps we should give up on the notion of pre-professional dressing and follow the 'ancien French'. It may not be such a bad idea.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why do the British get school uniforms so wrong?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Britain's school uniforms are on the march, and they're heading in the wrong direction because we seem to have forgotten what the point of a uniform is. A school uniform should perform a few basic functions: it should be affordable, comfortable, and practical. It should help save parents and children time in the morning.