School Uniforms An Empirical Analysis and Observational Study of by alextt

VIEWS: 0 PAGES: 61

									School Uniforms: An Empirical Analysis and Observational Study of the Implications in Public Schools.

By: Brian Thomas Weitzel

Supervisors: Olga Bonfiglio, Ph.D. Department of Education Kalamazoo College Kalamazoo, MI

Brent Coates Supervising Teacher Kalamazoo College Kalamazoo, MI

A paper submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts at Kalamazoo College

Winter 2004

It is hard to think of any other man-made object, much less any other garment, that is as physically charged, socially encoded and historically emblematic as the uniform, especially after a century that has seen as much violence and social upheaval as the one just past. Uniforms have long defined tribes, nations, cults and subcultures, divided good guys from bad. They tell us whom to obey, fear, or kill; whom to speak to or ignore; they indicate whom to ask for direction or the check, even whom to ask out. - Roberta Smith, fashion journalist

Acknowledgements
The completion of this SIP could not have been done without the guidance, inspiration, and support of so many people. First and foremost, I would like to thank my loving parents, Dan and Mary Lou Weitzel. Because of their support, generosity and selflessness, I have been able to apply myself to all of my dreams. Secondly, I would like to thank my mentor teacher at PNHS, Mrs. Susan Thole. From the beginning, Mrs. Thole welcomed my knowledge, opinion, and presence in the classroom and later allowed me to foster my own atmosphere and relationships with the students. Futhermore, Mrs. Thole allowed me to explore the art of teaching with little or no boundaries and held me to a high level of professionalism. Also, I would like to thank Mr. John Fitzpatrick for allowing me to adopt his economics classes as my own and his encouraging my professional development. This SIP could also not have been completed without the tremendous support of Dr. Olga Bonfiglio and Mr. Brent Coates. Together, they reinforced and supported my concepts, thesis, observations, and were especially constructively analytical of my pedagogical techniques. Lastly, I would like to thank two groups of people. First, I would like to thank the teachers under whom I have studied for the past 16 years. It is because of their enthusiasm and devotion to education that I wish to bestow this upon others. Lastly, I would like to thank the 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th hour Economic classes I taught while at PNHS. Without your curiosity, inquisitiveness, and acceptance of me as a teacher, my love and passion for this art would not have been implanted.

Abstract
Longstanding has been the debate over the effectiveness of school uniforms. Traditionally reserved for private parochial schools, school uniforms have recently been implemented into public high schools throughout the United States. Dress codes banning the wearing of revealing, suggestive, inappropriate, and/or gang insignia clothing have been replaced by a more strict uniform policy allowing students to choose from an array of solid colored collared shirt, pleated pants, jumpers, sweaters, cardigans, and vests. While many students oppose this adoption of a school uniform policy, critics argue, citing the longitudinal study completed by the Long Beach California Unified School District, that school uniforms foster a more academically focused learning environment, enhance school safety, heighten school pride, and reduce truancy, absences, and violent acts. Following in the wake of the horrific school shooting at Columbine High School, the issue of mandating school uniforms in public schools has come to the forefront of educational debates. Since the massacre, schools, both public and private, have increased security and rewritten their dress codes in order to further restrict dress. Despite these preventative measures and their correlated results, many pose the question if these actions are needed in their local schools. Research conducted by means of qualitative observation, surveys, interviews, and literature reviews examines and analyzes the need for the implementation of school uniforms at PNHS.

Table of Contents
Quote: Roberta Smith Acknowledgements Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii iii iv v vii viii 1 3 4 6 6 8 9

Table of Contents List of Tables . List of Appendices Introduction . Literature Review

Fashion and Where We Get It School Uniforms versus Dress Codes

PNHS Dress Code: Student and Faculty Role of Uniforms . . .

Historical Role of Academic Uniforms

Does a Mandatory Uniforms Policy in Public Schools Infringe on Americans’ First Amendment Rights? . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 12 13 14 17 18 20 25 27 28 29 29 30 33 34 35

School Uniforms and a Mental Perception

We Are What We Wear: The Observational Uniform and its Portrayed Meaning Adolescence and Identity Development: An Eriksonian Perspective Marcia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Long Beach, California (Pros) versus David Brunsma (Cons) Brunsma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

School Culture Methodology

Student Surveys (Appendix A) Consumer Behaviors Income and Demographics . .

Attitudes Towards School Uniforms . Individuality . . . .

Staff and Administrative Surveys (Appendix B) Demographics . . . . .

Attitudes Towards School Uniforms . Inappropriate Clothing . Recommendations . . . . . . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

.

35 38 41 41 41 43 44 46 49 53

School Uniforms: A Conclusive Look at the Advantages and Disadvantages Steps for Adopting a School Uniforms Policy A Self-Critique of this Research Paper Conclusion Appendix A Appendix B Works Cited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tables
Table 1: James Marcia’s Identity Statuses . . . Table 2: Student Demographics . . . . Table 3: Students’ Self-Reported Clothing Choices . . Table 4: Teachers’ Self-Reported Articles of Inappropriateness . . . . . . . . . 17 30 38 39

Appendices
Appendix A: Student Survey . Appendix B: Faculty Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 49

Introduction
During my first semester at Kalamazoo College, I can vividly remember waking up early in order to shower, shave, groom myself around my ears, and press the shirt and pants I would wear for the day. This daily ritual was instilled in me during my twelve years of private schooling, however, at Kalamazoo College, I was now granted more freedoms in my choice of clothing due to the absence of a school uniform policy. I also remember during that first semester being awestruck by the way people presented themselves in class; pajama bottoms, rubber flip flop sandals, hooded sweater shirt, and a backwards baseball cap seemed to be the outfit of choice for most of the veteran college students. After feeling as an outcast due to my appearance, I too conformed and adopted a more relaxed wardrobe consisting of loose fitting blue jeans, long sleeve t-shirts, tennis shoes, and the occasional baseball cap. This wardrobe is replicated by nearly every young adult enrolled in an educational institution, whether it be a public high school, college, or university. Therefore, in essence, young adults have developed their own ‘uniform’ in which they are to be identified. This paper will examine use of school uniforms and their implications on academic achievement, school climate, and other educational aspects. The debate on whether or not school uniforms make a difference has been long standing, however, two events have brought this debate to the forefront of educational issues. First in 1996, following the release of results from Long Beach California Unified School District’s implementation of required school uniforms, President Clinton advocated a mandatory adoption of a school uniform policy. Directly following his public support, the

Department of Education released the “Manual on School Uniforms” in February of 1996. Secondly, the horrid actions of two young men responsible for the April 20, 1999 shootings at Columbine High School have raised discussions about the role of dress codes in educational institutions. The two young men who executed their guerilla-like violence throughout Columbine High School were part of a clique known as the “Trench Coat Mafia.” Critics argue that their ability to wear long black trench coats aided in the killings by easily concealing the weapons (Estrin 1999). After such instances, district policymakers quickly supported the restriction and tightening of school dress codes, however, years after the event, many policy makers and proposals have slowed in their enthusiasm and implementation. Would a stricter dress code forbidding the wearing of jackets in class have prevented such an event? Many students – and parents - would argue that they have every right to wear a coat throughout the school day. However, where is the line drawn between rights and safety? While this paper addresses the use of school uniforms and their implications on academic achievement, school climate, and violence, this paper also seeks to answer the question: Do school uniforms make a difference? If so, in what aspects and why? As this question serves as an overarching theme for the paper, other questions will be addressed, including: Do school uniforms affect student violence? Do school uniforms affect the school’s climate and culture? If so, how? In what way? Are there

characteristics of schools that will make a transition to school uniforms more successful? If school uniforms are implemented in public schools, how will they be paid for? (This question can be revisited now that many schools, after receiving harsh budgetary cuts, are asking students to pay for sports and extracurricular activities. Should students be

accountable for the price of a uniform?) Is the enforcement of a mandatory school uniform in a public school in violation of one’s first amendment right to freedom of expression? Lastly, Do school uniforms have an impact on one’s learning ability? If so, how? This SIP serves as a platform for a normative, qualitative, and quantitative analysis of school uniforms and dress codes. It is important to note that the topic of school uniforms will largely dominate the analysis while the topic of dress codes will be examined through qualitative observations at PNHS.

Literature Review
In his hopes to create “an atmosphere in our schools that promotes discipline and order and learning,” President William Jefferson Clinton stated, “I believe we should give strong support to school districts that decide to require young students to wear school uniforms.” He cited several incidents where students’ desire for another’s fashionable attire has led to extreme forms of violence (Clinton 1996). This exemplifies one of the many vast implications of a necessity for of school uniforms. Many advocates claim that school uniforms curb violence, limit the potential for gang members to wear representative colors and insignia, deter theft, and instill students with a stronger work ethic and school pride, among other things. Critics, however, argue that school uniforms violate Americans’ First Amendment right to Freedom of Expression and do nothing to curb violence, theft, or promote school safety (Isaacs cited in Paliokas and Rist 1996, McCarthey 1996, Tousignant 1996). Furthermore, critics argue school uniforms have no influence on one’s academic achievement, behavior, or attitude towards school (Brunsma 2001a). While the claims derived from each position are varied and numerous, academic

literature presents a more empirical, historical, and unbiased approach on school uniforms and their impact on academic achievement.

Fashion and Where We Get It Most people believe fashion is a concept belonging to the 20th and 21st century, however, many Roman historians note the stress placed on one’s clothing and appearance. Classical historians, such as Publius Cornelius Tacitus, eloquently describe in detail the different Indian and Chinese-imported linens, silks, and dyes and how each represent different families, social classes, and even governmental occupations. This aesthetic multi-faceted representation, which has transcended sex, centuries, and cultures, has grown to include religious, traditional, occupational, and symbolical representations. Still today, fashion designers contribute in this cyclical process by looking to the designs of clothing from centuries ago and recreate concepts, styles, and lines from those original patterns. Clothing, or the physical means in which fashion is expressed, “create[s] a wordless means of communication that we all understand” (“Fashion” p.1). A bride’s white dress, a doctor’s white jacket, a military uniform, and a skater’s baggy pants and colored mohawk all are symbolically identifiable articles of clothing in which society associates certain traits, occupations, and stereotypes. Therefore, clothing plays a contrasting role in society by both segregating and unifying its wearers. For example, most people upon seeing a teenager dressed in “gothic clothing,” that is, typically baggy pants with oversized pockets, fishnet arm stockings, non-natural colored hair, leather boots, chains and spiked jewelry, tight fitting t-shirt which is covered by a floor-length jacket all of which is predominantly the color black, will label that person as rebellious,

thus segregating them. However, that same teenager will find acceptance with other teens that dress in a similar fashion thus unifying its wearers (“Fashion” p.1). It is important to note that even such non-traditional amalgamation of clothing has subcultural icons held as demigods who influence one’s decision of dress. Cynthia Durcanin of Elle fashion magazine explicates another role of dress and its overarching concept of fashion and symbolic meanings in saying, “Fashion is a means of self-expression that allows people to try on many roles in life…fashion accommodates the chameleon in all of us” (“Fashion” p.3). With fashion and dress adapting to represent the ever-changing self, fashion therefore serves as a vehicle for establishing identity and self-concept. The research and works of the Eriksonian, James Marcia parallels this concept of role-playing and self-identity. Lastly, fashion is largely influenced by the Haute Couture: designers who fabricate the finest fashions for the elite society of bearers. In the 1950s, Elvis Presley set the stage for slicked back hair, sport coats, and dress pants with highly contrasting leather shoes. During her reign as Princess of Wales, Lady Diana Spencer redefined the aura of elegance, womanliness, and brought forth a new-age feminine fashion and sense of empowerment to the conservative housewife and businesswoman. Today, pop icons such as Jennifer Lopez, Eminem, Nelly, Sean “P. Diddy” Combs, among others all influence fashion trends through their own clothing lines. Finally, cultural icons such as Christina Aguilera and Avril Lavigne defy the conformist trends by altering their conservative clothing to represent a sense of individuality and rebellion; thus, no matter one’s personal preferences there is always an aesthetic group in which one can relate, conform to, and find acceptance within.

School Uniforms vs. Dress Codes It is important to make the distinction between the terms school uniforms and dress codes. The terms are often used interchangeably in literature, however, they are drastically and distinctly different. School uniform policies tell students what they must wear while school dress code policies tell students what they are not allowed to wear while abiding by a set of rules regarding aesthetic appearances (Brunsma 2001a, p.31). Most commonly, mandatory school uniforms are observed in private (and sometimes public) elementary and middle schools while dress codes can be found in public high schools. While dress codes also have their implications and place in academic literature reviews, this paper will focus solely on the affects of school uniforms.

PNHS Dress Code: Student and Faculty Although this paper will focus solely on the affects of uniforms in educational institutions, it is important to also examine the current status of dress policy at PNHS. The following passage is taken directly from the “student policy handbook” (2004, p. 21). This passage can be observed in the handbook that is provided to all students the first day of classes and must subsequently be carried with the student at all times.
DRESS AND GROOMING We take pride in the appearance of our students. Student dress reflects the quality of the school, of student conduct, and of student work. We believe that student dress is a factor in the establishment of an educational atmosphere and that clothing should be appropriate for school. Standards of dress that clearly deal with the health and safety of students will be upheld. Forms of student dress are acceptable as long as they are neat, clean, and not considered distracting from the process of education. Within this framework, the following specific guidelines for student dress have been developed: 1. Hats/headwear are not to be worn in the building. 2. Footwear is required in the building 3. Clothing will not be permitted which: a. Advertises or supports drugs, alcohol, tobacco. b. Is profane or vulgar. c. Is revealing, suggestive, or otherwise distracting.

Rules for dress and grooming will be in effect at all school-sponsored functions unless otherwise approved by the administration. Students in violation of the dress code will not be allowed to attend classes or other functions unless otherwise approved. The school reserves the right to establish more definitive dress code regulations. Questions regarding appropriate dress should be referred to a building administrator.

This dress code, typical to many public high schools, is notable for several reasons. First, it provides overarching guidelines under which students are to dress. Secondly, although some of the wording is vague, the code specifically lists prohibited articles. Note; these articles (clothing that “advertises or supports drugs, alcohol, [and] tobacco”) display acts that are illegal to minors. Despite the specific rules displayed in the dress code, there is an underlying and debatable loophole in the code. As noted in subsections b. and c. of item 3, clothing that is profane, vulgar, revealing, suggestive, and/or otherwise distracting covers a wide spectrum of articles. Therefore, who is to determine what is revealing and what is not? Who is to determine what is offensive and profane and what is not? While this argument has many cultural and societal implications, these issues are rarely brought to the limelight due to the delicacy of the subject matter and its susceptibility to criticism. Instead, the indisputable authoritative power is retained within the office of administration. As the clause states, “The school reserves the right to establish more definitive dress code regulations,” thus eliminating the ‘gray area’ that is found within the policy itself (2004, p.21). In other words, while fashion trends are revised on a seemingly weekly basis, it would be too taxing and limiting for the school to list all prohibited articles of clothing. Therefore, the policy is written so that the administration can decide on an individual basis what is and is not acceptable.

In addition to students, faculty and staff also follow a dress code, however, this dress code is not documented in any resource manual or contract. Instead, the faculty and staff are expected to follow the unwritten code of professionalism. As stated in an informal interview with the principal of PNHS, “Teachers are expected to look professional at all times. No tennis shoes. No sandals. Dress slacks and dress shoes are encouraged. I am personally one for a nice shirt and tie, however, some teachers wear sweaters. We [administration] allow for blue jeans on Friday and I regret budging on that everyday” (Personal Interview 1/16/04).

Role of Uniforms The role of uniforms, that is, distinctive dress worn by specific members of an exclusive group, has taken on many facets. While all uniforms are made to distinguish one from another, they bring forth a visual recognition of the principles held by the wearer. For example, uniforms are used to recognize virtue (judges), expertise (airline pilots, naval officers) trustworthiness (Boy and Girl Scouts, delivery men and women), courage (police officers, firefighters, United States Marines), obedience (marching bands), extreme cleanliness and sanitation (surgeons, public food workers, lab technicians), and success (dark suits, white shirt, tie) (Fussell 2002, p.4). However, while the original intention of uniforms was to visually demonstrate the unity among people, uniforms can also serve as an apparatus of division, segregation, and hierarchical supremacy of a ruling power. During his celebratory parade beginning in the Campus Martius, Roman emperor Caligula wore a gold tunic and red face paint – a uniform reserved only for the gods. Although this was worn by all emperors during their triumph, or celebratory procession through Rome, Caligula refused to remove the

uniform when his triumph was complete in order to demonstrate to the citizens of Rome his true invulnerability, infallibility, and godliness. French King Louis XIV was renown for his extravagant lace, velvet, and exotic furred robes. Symbolic of his status and wealth, Louis XIV wore these garments to demonstrate the extent of his power. Lastly, prior to the Second World War, European rulers of the India, Burma, and Dutch colonies traditionally wore a cork, covered with white cotton hat known as a solar topee. While the functionality of the hat is applicable to all, the rulers manipulated its purpose, claiming the heads of the white, non-native people were special and precious, susceptible, unlike the native’s heads, to damage from the strong, direct sunlight (Fussell 2002, p.191). As George Orwell later pointed out, the hat was used simply as a means to constantly emphasis the differences between the natives and the rulers, thus adding degrees of separation and increasing their ability to install imperialism (Fussell 2002, p.191).

Historical Role of Academic Uniforms Paul Fussell discusses the role and history of dress in academia. After a national conference in 1895, requirements were established for academic ceremonial dress. With emblems, crests, and coats of arms, these requirements, symbolically representative of major and degree of achievement, were widely used by universities. Their alterations, however, soon diminished uniforms’ timeless representative value. Hood length, for example, became an egotistical competition as the informal rule of thumb evolved; the longer the hood hangs down in the back, the grander the wearer (Fussell 2002, p.143). Harvard was first to dilute the integrity of academic dress. Contradictory to the traditional combination, Harvard allowed philosophy doctorates to wear ‘crimson’ gowns

with black sleeve stripes (Fussell 2002, p.143). This initial step towards traditional departure soon made a mockery of graduation attire. Soon, multicolored graduation gowns were being issued to various departments. Once this practice became widely employed, velvet sections with embroidered insignia were also placed as breastplates on the gowns. This practiced began with doctorate candidates but soon transcended into masters, undergraduate, and as Fussell states, “kindergarten kids in little caps and gowns is an abomination of taste displayed” (2002, p.144). Contrary to the Harvard uproar, other Ivy League institutions, specifically Oxford, held tightly to the implications of academic uniform. Oxford called for full sub fusc academic dress - black suit or dress, black dress shoes, white shirt or blouse, and white bow tie - for the slightest occasions, including exams, meetings with professors, tutoring, and even dinner (Fussell 2002, p.144). Oxford utilized the symbolic representation of ceremonial gowns – as do supporters of school uniforms - to remind students that they were to focus on academics at all times. Therefore, in a more modern sense, school uniforms, like gowns, contribute to the “elevating and maintaining the [vain] self-image of the adepts” (Fussell 2002, p.145).

Does a Mandatory Uniform Policy in Public Schools Infringe on Americans’ First Amendment Rights? Many critics argue that a mandatory school uniform in public schools infringes on Americans’ First Amendment right to the Freedom of Expression. Opposing these critics, specifically those of who are for the implementation of school uniforms, claim there are other means by which students can express themselves (Cellucci 1999). These

supporters claim expression of oneself can be done freely without constraints through academic work and ‘fun’ things like different color shoelaces and hair ties for women. Under some conditions, however, these alternatives only segregate students more as they portray hidden meanings only visible to the wearer. Several examples follow: At an all girls parochial school (near Detroit, Michigan) that enforced a traditional ‘Catholic School’ uniform – plaid skirt, white blouse, knee high socks and saddle shoes, the use of hair ribbons was altered to represent a group known as the “Pink Pristine.” Seemingly harmless, the Pink Pristine, a group of young women who wore pink ribbons in their hair on designated days, were ‘initiated’ into the group by performing sexual acts. These same young women could move on the hierarchical latter of the Pink Pristine by committing fornication with another member’s boyfriend. A recent Seventeen magazine article confronted the use of ‘jelly’ bracelets and their rouge role as sexual performance indicators. Used in a game called “Snap,” males try to break the bracelet from the females’ wrist. If the male succeeds, the female is to perform that act at his discretion. To add variety to the game, different colors represent different sexual acts. For example, yellow is equivalent to a hug; purple is equivalent to a kiss; red is equivalent to a lap dance; blue is equivalent to oral sex; and black is equivalent to sexual intercourse (NBC 7/39). Other colors, specific to a school’s discretion, include group sex, anal penetration, among other acts. Sadly, middle school students most often play this game, thus leading to the banning of ‘jelly’ colored bracelets in several Florida middle schools (Mikkelson 2003, p.1).

-

While it cannot be determined if in either case the presence or lack of a school uniform is responsible for the actions taken, it is important to note several things. First, some students will go to distant means in order to find status. In the first scenario, the visual pink ribbon was a badge worn with pride by the members. Secondly, bringing forth social implications, it appears that students often function under great societal and peer pressures. Of the students interviewed who wore the ‘jelly’ bracelets, many said they were reluctant to wear them, however, continued due to peer pressures. Others, however, denied the meaning of the bracelets and wore them due to their aesthetic value and trend qualities.

School Uniforms and a Mental Perception Many argue that school uniforms radiate a Catholic school perception (Paliokas and Rist 1996, p.1). They struggle to see past the plaid jumpers and white blouses for women and dress pants and solid color shirts for men. These critics further argue that this type of uniform subconsciously emits the values inherent to Catholicism. Dorothy Behling, in her 1994 paper entitled “School Uniforms and Person Perception,” sought to investigate “whether or not style of clothing (controlling for gender and school type) influenced how high school students and teachers perceived the wearer’s academic abilities, behavior, and potential” (Brunsma 2001b, p.3). Behling showed photographs of a college-aged male and female each wearing one of the four styles of clothing: a ‘dressy’ uniform; a ‘casual’ uniform; a casual nonuniform, typical style of clothing; and a jeans, sweatshirt, and jean jacket combination to represent the less than casual to a non-random sample of 270 sophomores and 20 high school teachers from a single-sex, religious private school and coeducational public high school in a middle-class, medium-sized city in Ohio (Brunsma 2001b, p.3). The respondents were to rate the students in the photograph based on their perceptions’ of the model’s behavior, grade point average, and academic potential. Behling’s results are summarized as follows: The jean and jacket combination carried the most negative connotations. Males who dressed in more casual clothing were seen as more likely to suffer from behavioral problems than females dressed in the same clothing. Contrary to the preceding statement, uniforms made male students look more “angelic” than female students dressed in uniforms. Both male and female students dressed in uniforms were rated higher in both current and potential academic ability by teachers and students when compared to male and female students dressed in the jean/jacket combination (Brunsma 2001b, p.3).

Behling describes the collaborative results of this mental perception, that is, students who wear uniforms are perceived to have higher academic abilities and lower behavioral problems than those who do not wear uniforms, as a “Halo Effect.” Other researchers who have cross-studied the “Halo Effect” support Behling in that the “benefits of uniforms are more perceptual than real” (Hinchion-Mancini 1997, p.63) and that “uniforms seem to be a way of circumventing, rather than solving the problem of teacher prejudice” (Kohn cited in Posner 1996, p.2). This belief that the perceptual benefits of uniforms outweigh the actual benefits is largely documented in the work of David Brunsma and can be found in sections below.

We Are What We Wear: The Observational Uniform and its Portrayed Meaning Paul Fussell, clothing historian, observed that when enough people wear the same thing over time (citing the dark suits and white shirts of businessmen and businesswomen) their costume conveys valuable personal qualities in its wearer, specifically in the form of a uniform (2002, p.4). Today’s adolescents have a vast array of clothing from which they can express themselves, however, many choose a combination of jeans, t-shirts, tennis shoes, hooded sweatshirts, and a plethora of neck, wrist, finger, and ear accessories. The commonality of adolescents wearing this combination of articles has led to a mainstream assignment of adolescents to their respective uniforms, specifically jeans. Alison Lurie, author of The Language of Clothes, observes jeans’ popularity, stating, “Ninety percent of middle-class and college students of both sexes are now identical below the waist” (cited in Fussell 2002, p.49). Umberto Eco, in his essay,

“Lumbar Thought” agrees with Lurie in that with the discovery and popularity of jeans, the human body was divided into two “independent zones;” the upper zone being free moving, and the lower zone, identical among sexes and ages, is constricted by a “lowerbody corset,” or jeans (cited in Fussell 2002, p.51). With icons such as James Dean and Marlin Brando wearing jeans in popular films focusing around social rebellion, jeans took on an anti-parent, anti-responsibility, and most importantly, a sexual role (Fussell 2002, p.50). Tight fitting jeans became popular among both sexes as they delineated the sexual organs of the wearer. Despite the derivations of styles, tight fitting jeans, specifically in the form of ‘hip huggers,’ or jeans worn below the hipbone, only inches above sexual organs, remain popular today. In a perception study conducted by the author, 94.7 percent of students at PNHS wear jeans on a typical day. While the role of jeans intentionally portrayed by the students remains unknown, jeans serving as a means for self-expression and identity development remains inarguable.

Adolescence and Identity Development: An Eriksonian Perspective Identity development plays an important role in the lives of adolescents. Deriving itself from Freudian theories, Erik Erikson expanded Freud’s original five developmental stages of life into eight. Erikson’s fifth stage, identity versus identity confusion, plays an integral role as the platform from which adolescents will develop their sense of self. The development of the self, specifically in terms of identity, is characterized by the experimentation with roles and personality (Santrock 1999, p.323). Eriksonian theory argues that the “personality experimentation is a deliberate effort on the part of the adolescents to find out where they fit in the world…It is important for…adolescents [to

have] the time and opportunities to explore different roles and personalities. In turn, most adolescents eventually discard undesirable roles” (Santrock 1999, p.323). While the development of personality occurs internally through the experiences and influences from peripheral sources, adolescents often provide external indicators, designating with which role they are experimenting. The most common form of this indication is their dress. Dress is used as the most frequently utilized apparatus to represent identity development for several reasons, which can be explained both physically and psychologically. First, dress “is a means of self-expression that allows people to try on many roles in life…[it] accommodates the chameleon in all of us” while providing “a mirror of sorts on society” (Durcanin cited in “Fashion,” p.3). In other words, clothing serves as a means in which adolescents can function within the structures of society. This active participation with society is critical in the Eriksonian concept of psychosocial reciprocity, that is, “the mutual relationship of adolescents with their social world and community. Identity development is not just an intraphysic self-representation but involves relationships with people, community, and society” (Santrock 1999, p.324). Further immersing into the psychological aspect of dress, social theorists have discovered that dress plays an imperative role in peer acceptance and identity development. Although dress grants individuals the ability to express themselves in ways unique to their own characteristics and personality, dress can also encourage opportunities and instances of discrimination, treatments of inequality, and biasness within educational institutions. These acts of discrimination are present both within peer groups and among adults, teachers, administrators, and professionals (note that Brunsma

[2001b] found a negative correlation between uniform’s and a principles perception of school climate and safety). Such acts have been explored in studies conducted by Ladd (1999) and Rubin (et al. 1998, both cited in Westen 2002). Together, Ladd and Rubin support the theory that people are more likely to accept and have positive preconceptions about those who “appear” like themselves and reject those whom with they do not aesthetically associate. Implications of these findings are vast and applicable. It is found that children begin to develop reputations and judge others by the time they enter preschool (Denham & Holt 1993 cited in Westen 2002, p.489). Those students who develop negative reputations are labeled as rejected or neglected children. These children have been found to typically be more aggressive, unhappy, and have lower levels of self-esteem. All of these factors can lead to difficulties in the classroom and in learning and consequently lead to increased problems later in life, including a higher rate of school drop out, delinquency in adolescence, and stifled progress through future Eriksonian developmental stages. One might argue that, according to the Eriksonian model of development during the identity versus identity confusion stage, freedom in dress is important to aid in identity development; however, freedom of dress can occur outside of educational parameters. Taking into account the findings of Ladd, Rubin, and other social

psychologists, the implementation of school uniforms, specifically at a younger age, may eliminate the negative implications associated with dress. In other words, school uniforms may serve to place children on an initially level playing field so that they may associate with one another on a level that does not merely emphasize appearance. While this argument is found in anecdotal literature, it maybe argued, against Brunsma’s

findings, that school uniforms should only be implemented among young children who suffer from emotional distresses or are at-risk.

Marcia James Marcia, an Eriksonian researcher, further examined the concept of identity among adolescents and devised a classification system that monitors one’s progress through the four identity statuses: identity diffusion, identity foreclosure, identity moratorium, and identity achievement. Each of these statuses has a different combination of two characteristics: Crisis which is “a period …[where] the adolescent is choosing among meaningful alternatives” and commitment which is a demonstrated personal investment towards a conscious decision made by the adolescent (Santrock 1999, p.325). A table of each status can be found in the chart below:

Crisis Commitment

Identity Identity Identity Diffusion Foreclosure Moratorium Absent Absent Present Absent Present Absent Table 1: James Marcia’s Identity Statuses

Identity Achievement Present Present

Marcia argues that many young adolescents are identity diffused, that is, they have yet to experience either a crisis or a commitment (Santrock 1999, p.324). In other words, they are in the initial phases of developing a sense of self through the exploratory conditions of playing roles, ‘trying on’ personalities, and experimenting with dress as a means to identify with a clique or group identified by society. Therefore, dress, the outward means by which people readily express and identify themselves, plays an integral role in identity development. As students are generally reluctant to adopt a school uniform policy, claiming as one PNHS student did, “I think

[school uniforms] take away the students’ only way of being unique and individualistic in a standardized setting such as school…We don’t need them because they suppress individuality.” Developmentalists who support an environment where adolescents can explore their identity status are also reluctant to adopt a uniform policy. In other words, the absence of a school uniform policy allows students to experiment with identity roles and express themselves through their individualized, yet conformist clique or group-type dress. While critics (Cellucci 1999) argue that students can still investigate differing identity roles through academic experimentation, the use of dress is utilized more often due to its availability, universal representation, understanding, and straightforwardness.

Long Beach, California (Pros) versus David Brunsma (Cons) Beginning in 1994, the Long Beach Unified School District (CA) launched the nation’s largest mandatory school uniform policy ultimately effecting over 58,500 students. The enormity of the project brought forth national attention, research

applications, and a renaissance to the school uniform debate. The results from this project would later serve as President Clinton’s platform from which he would support the implementation of uniforms in public schools. The results are largely considered a success. District officials reported that within the year following the implementation of school uniforms within the Long Beach Unified School District, overall school crime decreased 36 percent, fights decreased 51 percent, sex offenses decreased 74 percent, weapons offenses decreased 50 percent, assault and battery offenses decreased 34 percent, and vandalism decreased 18 percent (“Manual” 1996). Other related factors also assisted in the success of the program. Despite the ability for students to ‘opt-out,’ that is, students would not have to wear the uniform

provided parental consent, less than one percent of students elected to ‘opt-out’ (“Manual” 1996). Also contributing to the extensive success of the program, financial assistance was given to those students and families who could not afford to purchase uniforms. In total, over $160,000 was raised through philanthropic donations to help assist low-income families. Many schools also initiated a ‘hand-me-down’ program where graduating students could donate old uniforms. In spite of the statistical evidence and well-developed programs to aide in the policy’s success, there are many critiques of the Long Beach policy implementation. First, the uniforms were enforced in all elementary and middle schools. No high schools or schools of secondary education were included in the program. This argument is seen by many to largely void the results of the policy implementation. Many critics derive that uniform policies are more effective with students of younger age due to several reasons. First, students in elementary and middle schools are more likely to adopt a school uniform policy. Secondly, these students are heavily under the influence of their parents; thus, they have limited choices and autonomy. Third, from a developmentalist standpoint, students of elementary and middle school ages have yet to begin identity development (in Eriksonian terms) and are very limited to their understanding of and interactive role in society. Clothes have yet to fully develop their aesthetic meaning and symbolic representation of the self to these students, thereby contributing to the students’ willingness to participate in such a program. Lastly, other internal administrative changes also occurred during the implementation of school uniforms. These internal changes include the installation of in-school security cameras, the addition of hall monitors and security guards, the augmentation of after school

programs, and the stricter enforcement of disciplinary programs. Therefore, the methodology of the study conducted by the Long Beach Unified School District is skewed due to the absence of a sole independent variable, school uniforms. Instead, many variables contributed to the results. As Dick Van Der Laan, a representative of the Long Beach Unified School District explains, “We can’t attribute the improvement exclusively to school uniforms” (“Manual” 1996, p.3).

Brunsma David Brunsma, professor of Sociology at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, is a leading researcher in the field of school uniforms. Brunsma has conducted several longitudinal and cross-sectional studies on school uniforms whose applications span across elementary, middle school, and high school spectrums. Brunsma’s methodological techniques are sound, incorporating nationally representative random samples, utilizing multivariate analysis with regression models and Hierarchical Linear Modeling, all while avoiding diluted perception and anecdotal studies and reviews. Regardless of the particular study, Brunsma’s findings largely differ from the Long Beach Unified School District’s results in nearly every facet. Reviews of each individual study’s findings are as follows:

The Effects of School Uniforms on Attendance, Behavior Problems, Substance Use, and Academic Achievement (Brunsma and Rockquemore 1998). • School uniforms may indirectly affect a school’s environment and student outcomes by providing a visible and public symbol of commitment to school improvement and reform. Students who wear uniforms do not have a statistically significant higher or lower academic preparedness, pro-school attitude, or peer group structures with pro-school attitudes.

•

•

School uniforms are not significantly correlated with any of the school commitment variables (absenteeism, behavior, or substance use); therefore, uniforms are independent of any changes in such variables. Student uniforms have a negative effect on student academic achievement in specific areas (reading and mathematics), specifically in a Catholic school setting where uniformed students score three points less on an achievement test than non-uniformed Catholic students. It is also important to note that uniformed Catholic students are absent more often than non-uniformed Catholic students. In conclusion, all four hypothesis (Student uniforms will decrease substance use; Student uniform will decrease behavioral problems; Student uniforms will increase attendance; Student uniforms will increase academic achievement) are not statistically supported by the collected data.

•

•

Mount Carmel Elementary Education and School Uniform Policies: A Quantitative Assessment of Available Data, Report #1 (Brunsma, 2001). • Research findings and the collection of evidence concerning the impact of uniform policies on educational processes has yet to provide sufficient evidence to support the effectiveness of school uniform policies on the following subjects: academic achievement, attendance rates, behavioral and disciplinary problems, school climate, and substance use. The student-to-teacher ratio, specifically ranging from 15:1 to 20:1, has a larger influence on academic achievement than school uniforms in many of the tested elementary schools. No empirical evidence was found that correlates an increase in class attendance to school uniforms. However, in the case of this specific district, a drop in attendance is partially correlated with an increase in the percentage of low-income students attending the school and a decrease in the number of classrooms with twenty students or less. Limited data led to a possible inaccurate assessment of academic achievement (reading, writing, mathematics), however, the findings do not statistically support a correlation between academic achievement and school uniforms. No empirical evidence was presented demonstrating an isolative effect of reducing substance use due to school uniforms. No statistically significant empirical evidence was present demonstrating a decrease in violence due to school uniforms.

•

•

•

• •

•

The invention of a ‘Support Room,’ utilized for several reasons, including student misbehavior, disobedience, make-up tests, in-school suspension, detentions, and most commonly, students not adhering to the dress code, led Brunsma to believe the following: the Support Room indicates teachers issue more violations after the implementation of the school uniform; teachers adopted the role of ‘fashion police,’ thus leading to more work for teachers and less classroom time spent teaching; and the possibility of the creation of more problems deriving themselves from the uniform policy itself. Lastly, it is crucial to note that data provided by the school district was largely misrepresented, incomplete, and inaccurate when compared with outside sources and self-collected data. Statistical tools were used to minimize invalid data and account for missing data; however, providing all requested forms of data would result in the most accurate assessment of the findings.

•

The Effects of School Uniforms and Student Dress Codes: Final Report Series for the Mount Carmel School Uniform Case, Report # 3 through #7 (Brunsma 2001). • • In total, data from 48,866 students representing 2296 schools was collected. The study used, in part, the National Center for Education Statistics’ (NCES) 1988 study on the impact of school uniforms on Kindergarteners. This current study is a continuation of the NCES study and traces the students through eighth and tenth grade. Brunsma hypothesizes an absence of relationship between school uniforms and positive or increasing self-esteem. Instead, Brunsma argues, though there is no statistical evidence, that uniforms may actually stifle the factors that aid in a positive self-image through a ‘leveling of individual differences;’ thus, an overall message that individualism and self-expression is secondary. The findings statistically support a lack of relationship between positive selfesteem and school uniforms. In fact, attending a Catholic school seems to diminish one’s self-concept/image/esteem. However, some variables are statistically supported in their fostering a positive self-image, they are: high academic achievement, parental support, positive educational climate, and a positive network of peers. These findings apply to both groups studied (eighth and tenth graders). Females, despite their level of behavioral problems, have lower self-concepts than men. Although it is argued in anecdotal literature that school uniforms influence the factors (academic preparedness and pro-school attitudes) that do effect attendance rates, behaviors, and substance use, there is statistically significant

•

• •

evidence that denies the effect of school uniforms on the aggregate measures of academic preparedness, pro-school attitudes or peer pro-school attitudes. • No correlation is found between students who switch from non-uniformed to uniformed schools and changes in their academic achievement, self-concept, self-control, or perceptions of the safety of their schools.

Kindergarten and Elementary • • School uniforms have no effect on a kindergarteners’ level of self-control and internalization or externalization of problem behavior. Contrary to all anecdotal literature, school uniforms have a statistically significant negative effect on the principals’ perceptions of safety in their schools. However, school uniforms do not effect either the students’ or principal’s perceptions of the educational climate of the school. Therefore, school uniforms play a neutral role in the perception of a school’s academic atmosphere. Also, there is no statistically significant effect of school uniforms on principals’ perceptions of the safety of elementary schools. Instead, parental involvement is found to influence a principals’ perception of safety on the elementary school level. Lastly, school uniforms have no statistically significant effect on elementary school principals’ perceptions of the educational climate. School uniforms do not affect kindergarteners’ reading readiness scores, mathematical aptitude, or the level of general knowledge. Other factors, however, do effect kindergarteners’ ability to learn. These factors include: students who have a positive approach to learning, students from a higher socio-economic background, and students who attend private schools.

•

Middle School • It is not statistically supported that school uniforms alter eighth graders perception of a school’s climate. Factors that do alter this perception include: the aggregate levels of achievement among the student body, attending Catholic or private schools, and having a strong parental involvement. On an eighth grade level, school uniforms do not affect student composite achievement levels in any subject matter. School uniforms have no impact on the attendance rate of middle schools; however, they also create an aggregate perception among eighth graders that absenteeism is a problem.

• •

•

School uniforms have no impact on the aggregate middle school perception of student drug use. Rather, these perceptions are strongly influenced by the educational climate. School uniforms have no effect on the aggregate levels of student behaviors in middle schools; however, Catholic schools, high socio-economic schools, and schools whose students perceive a positive educational climate are less likely to have problematic student behavior. School uniforms negatively impact the perception of safety among students and principals of middle schools.

•

•

High School • Continuing research from the Brunsma and Rockquemore study (1998), there is statistically significant evidence that school uniforms have a negative effect on reading achievement in tenth grade; however, school uniforms have no effect on mathematics, history, or science. Uniform policies also do not affect the factors of academic achievement (academic preparedness, pro-school attitudes, and peer pro-school attitudes) on a tenth grade level. School uniforms have a statistically significant negative effect on the aggregate level of academic achievement (reading, mathematics, science, history) on the tenth grade level. However, it is important to note that additional factors that influence the aggregate composite include: socioeconomic classes, urban vs. suburban school districts, availability of college preparatory/Advanced Placement/International Baccalaureate classes and racial demographics. School uniforms have no statistically significant effect on attendance, behavior, or substance use on the tenth grade level. Rather, factors that do affect attendance levels include: socio-economic status, enrollment in college preparatory/Advanced Placement/International Baccalaureate classes, and proschool attitudes.

•

•

Therefore, although the Long Beach Unified School District offered empirical evidence of a decrease in violence, absenteeism, truancy, and behavioral problems after the implementation of a school uniform policy, Brunsma negates these findings, pointing to a more methodologically sound longitudinal study conducted on a much larger scale. Brunsma’s findings demonstrate a near neutrality of uniforms except in the case of

academic achievement, where uniforms are actually detrimental to a student’s reading capabilities among tenth graders. Furthermore, school uniforms do not influence factors that do have an affect on academic achievement, including academic preparedness, proschool attitudes, and peer pro-school attitudes. It is important to note that these findings are based on multivariate regressions with proper control variables (student gender, minority status, school setting and location, and student socio-economic background among others) in place. Therefore, these correlation studies strictly and independently analyze the relationship between academic achievement in various fields and school uniforms. Lastly, correlation does not imply causation, however, Brunsma supports his findings with the standard 95% significance. Taking into account the large number of participants studied and the methodological practices, Brunsma’s findings are logistically fortified and can therefore be statistically supported as accurate. To summarize Brunsma’s findings, school uniforms, contrary to anecdotal literature, do not enhance one’s ability to learn, focus, or raise one’s aggregate level of academic understandings or abilities. In fact, school uniforms do not enhance any aspect of education, perceptive or quantitatively supported. Rather, the possibility of positive effects resulting school uniforms are tertiary to influential factors such as socio-economic class, racial demographics, pro-school attitudes, and a positive educational climate.

School Culture
The high school institution (PNHS) at which the observations will be collected is located in a city focused primarily on the service industry. With the constant influx of jobs and developing businesses taking place, the city has a record of both economic expansion and contraction. Despite the recent variance in jobs, the progressive increase

of industries in the city, specifically the development of pharmaceutical companies demanding a highly educated work force, has influenced many people to migrate in order to find work. Due to the diversity of local residents, there is a stark division in socioeconomic classes. This consortium of socioeconomic classes is represented at PNHS. Although city records show the collaboration of differing socioeconomic classes within the public school environment, the division between social classes can readily be seen by the aesthetics of the students and specifically, the way students dress. Designer Louis Vuitton, Burberry, Fendi, Coach, and Gucci handbags with price tags reaching upwards to $400 are carried by a representative population of the female student body. The extravagance does not stop there. Tiffany’s jewelry, designer stiletto heeled shoes, and clothing designed more for a runway than a classroom also accompanies some of the females. The men are also not exempt from this fashion exorbitance. Coordinated sweat suits by Sean John, silver chains paved in diamonds, the newest basketball shoes (also reaching upwards to $150), ‘worn’ khaki pants with calculated frayed cuffs and precision cut seams to give a more relaxed look, and ‘muscle’ fit izod shirts coordinated with the sea shell necklace are also sported by some of the male students in, but not limited too, the higher socioeconomic classes. Ensembles purchased from such adolescent-favored stores like Abercrombie and Fitch can reach upwards to $200, not including the complimenting designer Doc Marten shoes whose retail price begins around $80. Despite the fashion elite of the school, many students are seen in traditional teenage ‘street’ clothes: jeans or pajama bottoms, tennis shoes, t-shirts, and the occasional hooded sweatshirt. This ensemble, often worn by the same Burberry handbag

carrying fashion elitists, is by far the most common choice of clothing. The majority of students at PNHS dress in such combinations on a daily basis. Aside from the aesthetic appearances of the students, the climate and culture of PNHS is one of friendliness, pride, cliques, and academic array. Typical of any public high school, it has its problems. The popular athletic students ban together forming cliques. Other cliques are also found among those students who wear the latest fashions, live similar lifestyles, and listen to similar genres of music. Theft of purses, cellular phones, and cash occurred during observation. Suspected drug use among students was also a concern, however, it is important to note that this was a rare occasion and does not represent the popular masses of the student body. Despite these characteristics universal to nearly every public high school, PNHS believes in their H.U.S.K.I.E.S. mascot, or Honor, Unity, Self-Expression, Kindness, Initiative, Excellence, and Spirit. These qualities can be seen in the attitudes and actions of the students, faculty, and staff. Overall, the school culture is one of unity and most of all, ‘Huskie’ pride.

Methodology
While there have been several, more recent studies on the topic of school uniforms, the conclusions have been divided. One of the reasons for this division in findings is due to the research methods and structure of the study. While all studies have employed sound research tactics, most studies have varied in their demographics and socioeconomic factors. In other words, school uniforms may not be a panacea for all schools. Dependant upon demographics and socioeconomic factors, the results of the previously held studies have varied. This SIP seeks to look at the implications of school

uniforms in a specific school, factoring in its climate, culture, demographics, and socioeconomic diversity. The methodological practices of the study are multi-faceted. A statement and analysis of PNHS’s current dress code policy has been addressed in order to set the foundation of the paper. Next, collected data will be presented in several ways. The surveying of students, faculty and staff using numerical representation in addition to the interviewing of staff members has been conducted. Both the interviews and surveying focus on the topics of school climate, culture, opinion of dress code, opinion of school uniforms, support for the implementation of school uniforms, amongst other relevant topics. Qualitative data largely contributes to the SIP. Data collection regarding the students’ dress spanned a total of 14 weeks and was documented on a daily basis. This qualitative data contributes to the description of the school culture and climate and allows insight into the school culture; thus allowing the researcher address the following question: Are school uniforms needed at PNHS?

Student Surveys (Appendix A) Students at PNHS were given a thirty-question survey dealing with consumer behavior, thoughts on fashion and its role in society, and their personal opinion of school uniforms. The representative body was not a random sample. Rather, four economics classes, comprised mainly of juniors, and two psychology classes also comprised mainly of juniors, took the survey. The classes chosen were due to accessibility and willingness of participants. Sophomores and seniors were also included in the survey; however, the

collaboration of these students does not offset the majority. In total, 114 surveys were collected. A more detailed and quantitative analysis of the findings is located in chart A, however, a summary of findings follows:

Consumer Behaviors Within the last 30 days, the students shopped an average of 3.075 times, spending $67.50 on 3.02 articles of clothing during their last shopping experience. When asked if they had participated in ‘Back to School’ shopping for clothing, 69% of the students had purchased clothing prior to returning to a new school year. On average, these students spent $250.17 on 9.98 articles of clothing. This expenditure is below the statistical average of $450.76 spent on clothing prior to returning to a new school year (Horovitz 2003, p.1A). In total, $5.4 billion dollars was spent in August of 2003 on clothing alone (U.S. Census Bureau 2003). A possible contributing factor is the grade of the students polled. Since an influential majority of students polled are upperclassmen, it is possible that less money was spent on ‘Back to School’ clothing due to their already existing wardrobe purchased in preceding years.

Income and Demographics In regards to demographics, 54 participants, or 47.37% were male while 60 participants, or 52.63% of the participants were female. The most common age of the participant was 16 years. Members of the sophomore class comprised of 19.29% of the participants, or 22 surveys. The junior class comprised of 63.15% of the participants, or

72 surveys. Lastly, seniors represented the remaining 17.56% of the participants, or 20 surveys.

Male Female Freshman 0 0 Sophomores 10 12 Juniors 38 34 Seniors 6 14 Total 54 60 Table 2: Student Demographics Of the students polled, 51.35% of students have jobs; working an average of 11.27 hours per week, making $6.81 dollars an hour, or $75 dollars per week. Collectively, 66.98% of students receive a form of outside income, mainly from parents or guardians. This source of income, including the outlier of $75, averages $19.93 a week. 25.76% of the students’ budget is dedicated to their clothing expenditures. It is important to note the two preceding statistics are slightly skewed. Several students claimed an outside source of income from a parent a guardian, however, failed to give an exact amount, citing “Whatever I need,” or “Whenever I need money.” Secondly, many students claimed that they dedicate 0% of their budget to clothing because their clothing expenditures are covered by a parent. Finally, 12.5% of the surveys reported having a credit card, with an average outstanding balance of $40.

Attitudes Towards School Uniforms Using a five-point scale to assess their level of agreement (one being strongly disagree, five being strongly agree), five statements directly polling on students’ attitudes towards school uniforms and school climate were incorporated into the survey. The statements are as follows:

-

The setting of the school is one of a social setting. The setting of the school is one of an academic setting. Students dress inappropriately at school School uniforms would be a distraction. School uniforms would enhance school security, pride, academics, and climate. In regards to students’ perception of the school setting, the average student rating

of 3.94 correlates to a strong belief that the school is one of a social setting. Secondly, the students’ perception of the school’s academic setting rated 3.66. Thus, when comparing both atmospheres, students rate the school to be more social than academic. When polled on their peers’ dress, students rate the level of inappropriate dress occurring in school at 2.39, thus demonstrating a relative acceptance of peer aesthetics. A further examination of what students typically wear to school occurs in following subsections. Students’ collective rating of 3.44 regarding the distractions brought forth by school uniforms in collaboration with the students’ rating of 2.04 regarding school uniforms enhancing school security, pride, academics, and climate delineates an overall attitude towards school uniforms; that is, one of rejection. Although there were some students who took a more neutral or even supported the mandating of school uniforms, the majority of students voiced strongly against school uniforms, stating, “It’s the worst idea for school ever.” “They [school uniforms] suck.” “I hate them. They should die.” “I would switch schools.” “I don’t like them because it would make me feel even more oppressed by the school than I already do.” “Clothing is the one thing I consider to be a given right.” While it is unknown if these students have developed their opinions having had previous experience with school uniforms, it is apparent that one student’s opinion derives from such an experience; “I would NEVER wear another school uniform again.”

Despite the negative testimony, some students took a more neutral, unbiased stance towards school uniforms, stating, “I am not vehemently opposed to uniforms, but I would rather choose my own clothes.” Others gave little input, but clearly demonstrated their neutrality; “I have no strong opinion either way.” “I am indifferent either way.” Still, other students demonstrated a more balanced position, stating, “I used to attend a school that required uniforms. It seems much more comfortable not to wear them. On the other hand, what you wear at school affects how other people think of you. Peer pressure is heavy at schools without uniforms. But not having to wear a uniform encourages individuality.” Furthermore, one student offers useful insight of a teenager. As demonstrated with the Pink Pristine and their manipulation of school uniforms to form a rouge league, this students claims, “I think that school uniforms would be a good attempt at taking out the stress of fashion at school, but kids will still find ways to enhance their uniforms with makeup, shoes, jewelry, and hair styles, defeating the purpose of everyone wearing the same thing.” Although the majority of students are against the implementation of school uniforms at PNHS, some students are advocates for school uniforms. While only two the students cited an increase in unity and school pride (“I think they should be worn! They’ll show a sense of unity and dignity for school and others!” “I think they will be great, less stress, more pride, we will look real formal”), all students commented on the lessening of stress placed on fashion. “They would be beneficial…take away a great deal of stress.” “I think it would take some of the stress off what a student wears or what someone else is wearing and make students focus more on work.” “I think school

uniforms would…put less stress on dress/fashion with all students.” “It would be great to not have to decide what to wear in the morning, but no individuality.” As voiced by these individuals, the fashion and aesthetics is stressed in school. When polled about the stress of fashion in school, students responded with a 3.29 rating, complimentary to this is their rating stress of fashion in society at 3.86. These ratings, in collaboration with the 3.94 rating of the school’s setting being one of a social environment, demonstrate the prominent/prevalent role of aesthetics and fashion in school. Should school uniforms be implemented, the stress of fashion in school, hypothetically, would be either eliminated (due to homogeneity of dress) or drastically reduced (aesthetics may still be expressed through alternate means such as shoes, jackets, or personal appearance). Therefore, the correlation and connotation between a school fostering a social setting with an underlying emphasis on dress no longer serves as a threat to the academic integrity of the school.

Individuality The concept of individuality is built upon the platform of identity achievement. James Marcia would argue that an individual can utilize dress as a mean for identity development, specifically in statuses of identity foreclosure and identity moratorium. Hence, one must first encompass a sense of identity before they can adapt it to their own individual tastes, thus producing the concept of individuality. Again, dress is often used to express and separate one’s self from the standardized conformity which is embedded in societal structures, specifically, public school. As Santrock states, “Individuality consists of two dimensions: self-assertion, the ability to have and communicate a point of

view; and separateness, the use of communication patterns to express how one is different from another” (1999, p.327). As previously delineated, school uniforms arguably violate a students’ First Amendment right to Freedom of Expression. To many students, this Freedom of Expression is synonymous to the expression of their individuality. Students and critics alike argue school uniforms suppress the ability to express one’s individuality in a school setting. Specifically, students argue, “School uniforms limit people to express their individuality. If the uniforms are put in effort to limit ‘social classes/cliques’ of middle and high school, then it will not carryout the wants that were intended. These ‘popular’ people will still exist.” “I think they take away the students’ only way of being unique and individualistic in a standardized setting such as school…We don’t need them because they suppress individuality.”

Staff and Administrative Surveys (Appendix B) A variation of the student survey was administered to the faculty and staff. This 34-question survey focused less on consumer behavior and sought to delineate the overarching attitude towards school climate, student dress, and school uniforms. This survey serves as a platform for the comparative analysis between the data gathered among the students and the data gathered among the faculty and staff. The representative body was a random, voluntary sample. All 135 faculty and staff members were given the survey, however, only forty surveys were returned for analysis. Therefore, the response rate of the faculty and staff survey was drastically lower than the response rate for the students, 29.6% versus 98.4% respectively.

A more detailed and quantitative analysis of the findings is located in chart B, however, a summary of findings follows:

Demographics Of the forty surveys collected, ten participants, or 25% were male while thirty participants, or 75% were female. The average age of the participants was 39.38 years, however, this number is slightly inaccurate due to two respondents replying “50+” for their age. Collaboratively, the respondents have taught an average of 11.62 years. Again, this statistic is slightly inaccurate due to two respondents replying “30+.” Seven of the forty respondents, or 17.5%, have had experience as students with school uniforms while only five respondents, or 12.5% have taught in school were school uniforms are mandatory. These two statistics may have an impact on the following questions dealing with opinions and views of school uniforms.

Attitudes Towards School Uniforms Using a five-point scale to assess their level of agreement (one being strongly disagree, five being strongly agree), seventeen statements and questions directly polling on faculty’s attitudes towards school uniforms and school climate were incorporated into the survey. The statements and questions are as follows: -

-

-

The setting of the school is one of a social setting. The setting of the school is one of an academic setting. Some female students dress inappropriately at school. Some male students dress inappropriately at school. School uniforms would be a distraction for the students. School uniforms would allow for students to focus more on academics and less on their peers’ aesthetics. School uniforms enhance school security, pride, academics, and climate. There is a need for school uniforms at PNHS. You support the implementation of a mandatory school uniform policy at PNHS.

-

-

-

-

You support the implementation of a mandatory school uniform policy with an opt out clause at PNHS. A teacher’s appearance should be professional (shirt and ties for males; blouse, skirt, or suit for females) when teaching. The wearing of jeans by teachers on Fridays fosters a more relaxed atmosphere for students. The wearing of jeans by teachers on Fridays fosters a less academically focused environment. The wearing of jean by teachers on Fridays has negative affects on their ability to teach. The wearing of jeans by teachers on Fridays has negative affects on the students ability to learn. To what degree is dress/fashion stressed in the school environment by other students? To what degree is dress/fashion stressed in society? In regards to the faculty’s perception of the school setting, the average faculty

rating of 3.7 correlates to a strong belief the school is one of a social setting. Secondly, the faculty’s perception of the school’s academic setting rated 4.11, a significant difference than the student’s rating of 3.66. When polled on the inappropriate dress on the behalf of some female students, the faculty rated 4.55, demonstrating a slight decrease in rating from 3.925 for male students. Because the term ‘inappropriate’ is solely based on opinion and not a standardized format, an analysis of articles of clothing considered inappropriate was also conducted. This analysis is in the following sections. When polled if uniforms would be a distraction to students, faculty responded with a below average, 2.12 rating; thus demonstrating a weak belief in the statement. A rating of 3.58 was given to the statement that uniforms allow for students to focus more on academics and less on their peers’ aesthetics; thus uniforms would not serve as a distraction to the students but allow students to focus more on academics. Also correlating to this observation is the 3.27 rating of faculty’s belief that uniforms enhance school pride, academics, and climate.

In regards to there being a need for school uniforms at PNHS, the faculty collaboratively rated this statement at 2.71. Therefore, even though the faculty agrees that the implementation of school uniforms would not serve as a distraction to the students and enhance their ability to focus on academics, they do not feel there is a need for school uniforms at PNHS. Furthermore, a rating of 2.8 was given to the statement supporting the implementation of a mandatory school uniforms policy, while a rating of 1.77 was given to the same statement with an opt out clause; therefore strengthening the argument that although the faculty at PNHS sees the value of school uniforms, there is no need/little support for the uniforms themselves. In regards to the dress of the teacher, a rating of 3.2 was in support of the teacher’s appearance to be professional when teaching. However, “Friday, Jean Day” for teachers has no significant impact on both the ability of the teacher to teach and the ability for the students to learn, rated 1.59 and 1.725 respectively. Also, the wearing of jeans by teachers on Fridays does not foster a less academic environment according to the nearly neutral rating of 2.275 given by the faculty. Lastly, with a rating of 3.7, the wearing of jeans by teachers is thought to provide a more relaxed environment for the students. When comparing the faculty’s views of the levels of stress placed on fashion in both the school environment and society to the students’ views, the faculty found more of a stress placed on fashion in school (3.85) than the students did (3.29). The faculty also found more a stress placed on fashion from society (4.275) than students did (3.86).

Inappropriate Clothing The difference of opinion between students’ belief of inappropriate clothing being worn to school and the faculty’s belief is drastic. Students rated the level of inappropriate dress among fellow students at 2.39; however, the faculty average of inappropriate dress taking into account males and females at 4.23. To further examine the concept of inappropriate dress, students were asked to circle articles of clothing they wear to school on a typical day. A modified list of clothing (done specifically to deter any sort of sexist bias towards the students) was drafted and given to the faculty in order for them to determine what was inappropriate. The two lists can be found in Appendix A and Appendix B respectively. A listing of articles of clothing and the percentage of students who reported to typically wear the articles on a given day is located in the table below.

Articles of Clothing

% of Students Who Wear Clothing to School Everyday Collared Shirt 34.2 T- Shirt 91.2 Tank Top 28.9 Suit 0.8 Tennis Shoes 78.9 Flip Flops/Sandals 40.4 Dress Shoes/High Heels 32.5 Hooded Sweatshirt 78.9 Sweater 44.7 Fleece 33.3 Strapless Top 4.4 Bare Midriff Shirt 10.5 Sweat/Warm-Up Pants 52.6 Jeans 94.7 Pajama Pants 5.3 Khakis 42.3 Cargo Pants 29.8 Shorts 34.2 Table 3: Students’ Self-Reported Clothing Choices

In comparison to the students’ testimony of what they wear to school everyday, the following table is a list of articles of clothing and the percentage of teachers who labeled the article as ‘inappropriate.’

% of Teachers Who Label Articles of Clothing as ‘Inappropriate’ Collared Shirt 0 T-Shirt 5 Tank Top 57.5 Suit 0 Tennis Shoes 0 Flip Flops/Sandals 12.5 Dress Shoes/High Heels 2.5 Hooded Sweatshirt 2.5 Sweater 0 Fleece 0 Strapless Top 95 Bare Midriff Shirts 90 Visible Underwear 100 ‘Hip Hugger’ Pants 22.5 Sweat Warm-Up Pants 12.5 Jeans 0 Pajama Pants 60 Khakis 0 Cargo Pants 0 Shorts 10 Tight Fitting Pants 37.5 Table 4: Teachers’ Self-Reported Articles of Inappropriateness Lastly, when polled on their personal opinion of school uniforms, faculty offered a wide array of answers, varying from “Excellent!” to “It’ll never happen.” Most faculty members, however, offered more defined and insightful arguments that have been covered within the context of this research project. For example, some faculty members discuss the role dress plays in expressing one’s individuality; “I don’t think that [school uniforms] would be a popular choice in a high school…Older kids like to show their individuality via clothing.” “School uniforms are especially beneficial in the elementary

Articles of Clothing

level but not as much in the high school since I believe it’s important that students are allowed to express their individuality.” Many faculty members supported the idea of school uniforms, but were also realistic about their implementation and offered alternatives. “School uniforms are a great idea that would never be accepted in PNHS. A well-written dress code would be a good step in the right direction.” “I think [school uniforms] are a great idea…It’s easier to monitor uniforms than all of the variations of a dress code…A stricter dress code would be beneficial.” One faculty member witnessed the “success” of school uniforms but advocates the ability for school uniforms to “be purchased at various stores for price comparison.” Another faculty member witnessed the determination of students’ identify themselves while continuing to abide by the uniform policy. “[I] taught at [a] school with uniforms – students make other distinctions – shoes, rings, necklaces – even gang affiliations grew strong –only the gang could wear brand X. One gang had Adidas while another gang had Nike.” Lastly, while many administrators mentioned concern for the logistics of policy enforcement, one faculty member encompasses both this concern and the overall atmosphere of dress in PNHS; “I think in a public school [school uniforms] would be difficult to enforce. I think PNHS should have a strict policy on underwear showing and midriffs showing. This is distracting to me as a married, heterosexual female. I can’t imagine how it is for a male student or teacher.”

Recommendations
School Uniforms: A Conclusive Look at the Advantages and Disadvantages This paper has presented two arguments dealing with the topic of school uniforms. One school of thought believes school uniforms, despite empirical evidence, helps lower the rates of violence, absences, truancy, theft, among other negative attributes. This school of thought also believes that uniforms play a psychological role in the classroom, that is, uniforms blur socioeconomic lines and unify a student body, thus allowing them to focus more on academics and self-expression through academically constructive means. Contrary to this school of thought are those who are against school uniforms. This school of thought argues that uniforms suppress individuality, violate one’s First Amendment right to Freedom of Expression, and do not affect the levels of violence, absenteeism, truancy, theft, and school pride among other attributes. Empirical evidence provided by nationally representative longitudinal studies support the neutrality of uniforms in affecting the levels of these attributes while actually having a negative effect on academic achievement, specifically in the area of reading. Despite the contradictions, several characteristics should be taken into account when deciding on a uniform policy. recommendations: The following subsections are published

Steps for Adopting a School Uniform Policy With an overwhelming amount of supportive arguments, many schools are feeling parental and administrative pressures to implement school uniforms. The implementation process, however, is plagued with complications, clauses, and contingencies. In order to

achieve a more fluent transition, acceptance, and employment of a uniform policy, these externalities of the implementation process need to be addressed and handled with extreme care. Attempting to minimize the externalities, the Manual on School Uniforms offers guidelines under which implementation is least resistant. These guidelines include: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Get parents involved from the beginning Protect students’ religious expression Protect students’ other rights of expression Determine whether or not to have a voluntary or mandatory school uniform policy When a mandatory school uniform is adopted, determine whether to have an “opt out” provision Do not require students to wear a message Assist families that need financial help Treat school uniforms as part of an overall safety program (“Manual” 1996, p.2). However, should a school decide not to adopt a uniform policy, Loren Siegel, Director of Public Education, American Civil Liberties Union and a well-respected researcher of school uniforms, offers several alternatives to school uniforms in her publication, “Point of View: School Uniforms.” These alternatives include: Since school violence mirrors that of society at large, schools should seriously confront and discuss issues of racism and cultural conflict; “Safe corridor” programs should be supported to protect the safety of students as they go to and from school; School entrances should be secured; More extracurricular activities and clubs should be established; Open-mike assemblies should be held on a regular basis to give students the opportunity to express themselves; Programs to help student find part-time jobs should be established Conflict resolution techniques should be taught (peer mediation) (Siegel 1996, p.1). David Brunsma, upon concluding that school uniforms have a statistically significant negative attribute on one’s ability to learn, perception of school safety, drug

use, absenteeism, and “further exacerbate the academic achievement problems witnessed” in largely minority schools, offers alternative factors that are statistically supported to have a positive influence on a students’ ability to learn and the overall improvement of the educational system: Parental involvement in schooling; Communications between students and parents about schooling; Student preparedness for academic work; Positive approaches to learning; Pro-school attitudes and peer groups that support these attitudes; Positive educational climates; Safe schools (Brunsma2001b, p.34). A Self-Critique of this Research Paper Having completed this research paper, there are several critiques of the methodology that would be considered should further research be conducted. First, due to time constraints, the researcher could not analyze PNHS data on detentions, absences, violence, truancy, and theft. During the researcher’s observations, several accounts of theft took place, including a massive spree of cellular phone, purse, and cash theft. Judging from the popularity of this event among student and faculty conversations, it appears that theft is a relatively rare occurrence. Secondly, the quantitative data collected by the researcher was not analyzed through the Ordinary Least Squares model and multivariate regression and compared to national standards to test proposed hypothesis. This research technique was not completed due to a lack of national data being comparable to the collected student and faculty surveys. Therefore, no null or alternative hypothesis could be compared against critical regions in order to reject data with 95% significance.

Conclusion Taking into account the quantitative data collected through student and faculty surveys, the literature reviewed, and the qualitative data collected through fourteen weeks of observations, it is determined that PNHS does not need to implement a school uniforms policy; for several reasons: 1. PNHS fosters a strong academic environment. With their installment of the International Baccalaureate Certification and Advanced Placement programs, many students focus on academic achievement. Despite the recent changes in the socio-economic classes of the students’, the variance of dress at PNHS is narrow enough where it does not segregate. In other words, though the variation in dress represents different socioeconomic classes, the range of classes remains concentrated. While the ethnicity of the students is becoming more diverse, pro-active school programs informing students about diversity are deterring any racial tensions. Therefore, despite the increase in minority, the pro-school climate that is engrained in PNHS has yet to be altered. An enhanced security system with video cameras, circulating hall monitors with radios, and a local law enforcement agent are present at the school before, during, and after school hours and at all school events. The parking lot is also monitored so that no illegal activities can be conducted on the schools property.

2.

3.

4.

However, if PNHS should choose to adopt a school uniform policy, the following should be taken into account: • • Purses and handbags should be prohibited in classrooms. The use of luxury handbags, exceeding prices of $400, defeats the purpose of blurring socioeconomic lines. A uniform policy should also enforce a particular way of carrying the uniform. For example, skirts for females should be with a range above the knee. Pants for men should sit at the waist and under no circumstances should undergarments be shown. These characteristics, particularly short skirts which nearly reveal one’s curvature for females and pants that sit far below the waist as to show nearly all of the undergarment, a currently prevalent in PNHS. The colors of the adopted uniform should be a combination of the school colors and other solid, neutral colors that students may already have in their wardrobe, thereby reducing the transaction costs of implementing a uniforms policy while remaining unbiased in gender associations. With the diversification, specifically an increase in low-income families among residents of the school district, school uniforms should be subsidized by

•

•

exogenous sources in order to provide for a more successful implementation of a uniform policy.

Appendix A Thank you for taking this survey. When finished, please return this survey to room 212. Thank you again. How many times did you shop for clothing in the last 30 days?

How much did you spend last time you went clothes shopping?

How many articles of clothing did you purchase during your last shopping trip? With whom did you shop?

At the beginning of the year, did you go “Back to School” shopping? If so, how much did you spend on clothing? How many articles of clothing did you buy?

On a scale from one (1) to five (5), rate the following statements. The setting of the school is one of a social setting. Strongly disagree 1 2 3 4

Strongly Agree 5

The setting of the school is one of an academic setting. Strongly disagree 1 2 3 4

Strongly Agree 5

Students dress inappropriately at school. Strongly disagree 1 2 3 4

Strongly Agree 5

School uniforms would be a distraction. Strongly disagree 1 2 3 4

Strongly Agree 5

School uniforms would enhance school security, pride, academics, and climate. Strongly disagree Strongly agree 1 2 3 What do you wear to school everyday? (circle all that apply) Collared shirt T-shirt Tank top Suit Tennis shoes Flip flops/Sandals Dress shoes/high heels Hooded sweat shirt Sweater Fleece Strapless top Bare midriff shirts 4 5

Sweat/Warm-up pants Jeans Pajama pants Khakis Cargo pants Shorts

On a scale from one (1) to five (5) (one being the lowest; 5 being highest), answer the following: To what degree is dress/fashion stressed in the school environment by other students? No stress 1 Moderate stress 3 Highly stressed 5

2

4

To what degree is dress/fashion stressed in society? No stress 1 Moderate stress 3 Highly stressed 5

2

4

What is your personal opinion on school uniforms? ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Do you have a job? If no, skip the next two questions Y N

How much do you make per hour?

How many hours per week do you work?

Do you have another (outside) source of income (i.e. parental allowance)? If so, how much per week is it?

What percentage of your budget do you spend on clothing? Do you have a credit card? If no, skip the next question.

Do you have an outstanding balance (debt) on your credit card? If so, how much is the amount? Do you read any magazines? If so, which ones?

What is your sex? What is your age? Are you a: Freshman Sophomore

M

F

Junior

Senior

other

Appendix B Thank you for taking this survey. This survey seeks to discover the opinions of professional educators on the topic of school uniforms. While some educators have not had direct interaction with school uniforms, it is asked that you answer all of the questions using your best judgment. When finished, please return this survey to Mr. Weitzel/Mrs. Thole, room 212. Thank you again. How many times did you shop for clothing in the last 30 days? How much did you spend last time you went clothes shopping?

How many articles of clothing did you purchase during your last shopping trip? With whom did you shop?

At the beginning of the year, did you go “Back to School” shopping? If so, how much did you spend on clothing? How many articles of clothing did you buy?

On a scale from one (1) to five (5), rate the following statements. The setting of the school is one of a social setting. Strongly disagree 1 Strongly agree 5

2

3

4

The setting of the school is one of an academic setting. Strongly disagree 1 Strongly agree 5

2

3

4

Some female students dress inappropriately at school. Strongly disagree 1 Strongly agree 5

2

3

4

Some male students dress inappropriately at school. Strongly disagree 1 Strongly agree 5

2

3

4

School uniforms would be a distraction for the students. Strongly disagree 1 Strongly agree 5

2

3

4

School uniforms would allow for students to focus more on academics and less on their peers’ aesthetics. Strongly disagree 1 Strongly agree 5

2

3

4

School uniforms enhance school security, pride, academics, and climate. Strongly disagree 1 5 Strongly agree 2 3 4

There is a need for school uniforms at PNHS. None 1 2 Moderate 3 High 5

4

You support the implementation of a mandatory school uniform policy at PNHS. Strongly disagree 1 Strongly agree 5

2

3

4

You support the implementation of a mandatory school uniform policy with an opt out clause at PNHS. Strongly disagree 1 Strongly agree 5

2

3

4

A teacher’s appearance should be professional (shirt and ties for males; blouse, skirt, or suit for females) when teaching. Strongly disagree 1 Strongly agree 5

2

3

4

The wearing of jeans by teachers on Fridays fosters a more relaxed atmosphere for students. Strongly disagree 1 Strongly agree 5

2

3

4

The wearing of jeans by teachers on Fridays fosters a less academically focused environment. Strongly disagree 1 Strongly agree 5

2

3

4

The wearing of jean by teachers on Fridays has negative affects on their ability to teach. Strongly disagree 1 Strongly agree 5

2

3

4

The wearing of jeans by teachers on Fridays has negative affects on the students ability to learn. Strongly disagree 1 Strongly agree 5

2

3

4

To what degree is dress/fashion stressed in the school environment by other students? No stress 1 Moderate stress 3 Highly stressed 5

2

4

To what degree is dress/fashion stressed in society? No stress 1 Moderate stress 3 Highly stressed 5

2

4

What is your personal opinion on school uniforms? ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________

Of the following choices below, circle articles of clothing you find to be inappropriate for students to wear to school. Collared shirt Hooded sweat shirt Sweat/Warm-up pants T-shirt Sweater Jeans Tank top Fleece Pajama pants Suit Strapless top Khakis Tennis shoes Bare midriff shirts Cargo pants Flip flops/Sandals Visible underwear Shorts Dress shoes/high heels ‘Hip hugger’ pants Tight fitting pants Other:____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________

Do you read any magazines? If so, which ones?

What is your sex? Age: ________

M

F

May I anonymously use your opinions as quotes in my senior thesis?

Y

N

Have you attended a school, as a student, where school uniforms were mandatory? Y N Have you taught in a school where school uniforms were mandatory? How many years experience do you have as a teacher? _____________ Y N

Works Cited Behling, Dorothy. “School Uniforms and Person Perception.” Perceptual and Motor Skills. 1994, 79(2):723-729. Brunsma, David J. and Kerry A. Rockquemore. “The Effects of Student Uniforms on Attendance, Behavior Problems, Substance Use, and Academic Achievement.” The Journal of Educational Research. 13 February, 1998. Brunsma, David J. “School Uniforms: A Critical Review of Literature.” Scientific Research into School Uniforms. 2001b. http://www.geocities.com/school_uniforms/report2.html Brunsma, David J. The Effects if School Uniforms and Student Dress Codes: Final Report for the Mount Carmel School Uniform Case. 15 December, 2001a. Cellucci, A. P. “Uniforms are Good for Learning.” The Standard Times. 21 March 1999. Clinton, William J. Transcript of Presidential Radio Address to the Nation. Washington D.C.: U.S. Newswire, 1996. Estrin, Robin. “In The Wake of Shootings, Schools Scurry to Restrict Dress.” The Standard Times. 30 March 1999. Fussell, Paul. Uniforms: We Are What We Wear. Houghton Mifflin: NY. 2002. Hinchion-Mancini, Gail. “School Uniforms: Dress for Success or Conformity?” The Education Digest. 1997, 63(4): 62. Horovitz, Bruce. “More Parents Are Leaving School Shopping to the Kids.” USA Today. 11 August 2003. 1-2A. Lathwell, Kim. Personal Interview. 16 January, 2004. McCarthey, Molly. “Uniform Proposal Doesn’t Wear Well.” Newsday. 4 March 1996. Mikkelson, Barbara. “Sex Braclets.” Urban Legends Reference Page. 15 December 2003. http://www.snopes.com/risque/school/bracelet.asp Paliokas, Kathleen L. and Ray C. Rist. “Do They Reduce Violence – Or Just Make Us Feel Better?” EducationWeek. 3 April 1996.

Posner, Marc. “Perception versus Reality: School Uniforms and the ‘Halo Effect.’” The Harvard Education Letter. 1996, 12(3). Santrock, John W. Adolescence. McGrawHill: New York. 1999. School Handbook for PNHS. 2004. Tousignant, MaryLou. “Trying Uniforms on for Size.” Washington Post. 1 March 1996. U.S. Census Bureau. “Facts for Features: Back to School.” 11 August 2003. CB03FF.11 http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/2003/cb03ff-11.html U.S. Department of Education. Manual on School Uniforms. 29 February 1996. http://www.ed.gov/updates/uniforms.html Westen, Drew. Psychology: Brain, Behavior, and Culture. Von Hoffman Press: Boston. 2002. “What is Fashion?” http://www.pbs.org/newshour/infocus/fashion/whatisfashion.html


								
To top