#OPINION | Unform the Uniform
by Rafa Escareal
“When you put on a uniform, there are certain inhibitions you accept.” This saying by US General and President Dwight D. Eisenhower is often said to American civilians entering the military. In order to enter, one must forego several things — their family and friends, their former home, their former career. The uniform symbolizes unity among a group with the same objectives. This is the same in many institutions — factories, prisons, schools.
The first recorded use of the school uniform was in 1552 in Christ’s Hospital, a public boarding school in England; its use continues up to this day. Nathan Joseph in his book Uniforms and Nonuniforms: Communication Through Clothing says that a school uniform is considered one if it “serves as a group emblem” and “certifies an institution’s legitimacy.” Subsequently, due to such nature of the school uniform, it ends up “suppress[ing] individuality.” Now, at this time where we continually value more our identity and expression, isn’t it time we let go of this school uniform system?
Unfreedom of expression
To start, the school uniform counters the revolutions of the modern age: freedom of expression, LGBTQ+ rights, and resurgence of independent arts and fashion among others.
The very nature of the school uniform implies that students are restricted from presenting themselves through their personal styles, which include clothing, hair, and accessories. This in itself already restrains their freedom of expression, as what one chooses to wear is an expression of one’s personal identity.
The school uniform system also places students in an unequal standing with other members of the school community (i.e. teachers, staff, and administration). In the case of PSHS, students have to abide by, at times unnecessarily strict uniform and grooming rules. Examples are stated in the Student Handbook, such as the material of upper and lower garments, the measurements of hair, or the location of accessories in the body. Students can be reported for non-compliance once caught in violation of such rules, especially by discipline officers or assigned teachers of the day. On the other hand, other members of the community follow a more tolerant dress code; they are expected to wear certain clothes or color as well on certain days. However, they do not face reports for hair length and color, as well as accessories or shoes.
Issues surrounding clothing policies such as uniform codes are especially relevant for transgender and gender diverse students. As uniforms were initially made on heteronormal standards, most transgender and non-binary students are required and forced to conform to the uniform, grooming, and accessory policies of their biological sex, and are bullied for wearing or even requesting otherwise. In other schools, students can even be sent home for doing so. According to Toomey, Syvertsen, and Shramko (2018), transgender youth are 2–4 times as likely as cisgender youth to suffer from mental health issues such as stress and depression, arising from rejection and discrimination towards their identity and expression.
Schools tend to defend the implementation of school uniforms for students to be simple and practical. The PSHS Handbook states that it implements school uniforms for students to “fulfill their obligations without unnecessary distractions.” To an extent, this reasoning makes a point, due to the economic differences between students that can be manifested through clothing and grooming. However, since students undergo physiological changes during their time in school, uncomfortable clothing could pose a greater distraction than different clothing, since this affects their self-perception and, to an extent, their reception of information in school.
The removal of the school uniform system would benefit students as it would allow them equal standing in terms of dress codes, and subsequently, freedom to choose how to express oneself. Choosing what one wants to wear is an expression of one’s ideals and beliefs, and therefore one’s identity, which is fundamental for students to establish while in their adolescent stage.
The supposed benefits
The strict implementation of uniform policies on details such as hair and number of accessories shows that a school vigorously tries to maintain an image to present, and this can lead to other implications on its school community. Faculty and staff are made to be guards or watchdogs, ready to reprimand students due to the littlest deviation from the school’s uniform policies. Students are then forced to follow such policies in fear of disciplinary reprimands rather than willful obedience. The uniform then becomes an obligation that students wear for conformity, instead of a symbol that students wear with pride.
Several proponents from the 1990s to the present vehemently defend that school uniforms have positive effects on the academic performance of its students. Cases such as the Long Beach Unified uniform policy of 1994, stated that school uniforms, when implemented, largely reduced absenteeism and drug use, as well as improved academic achievement in students. However, Brunsma and Rockquemore (1998) and other later researches state that school uniforms actually have no correlation or are in fact negative, if any, to academic achievement across several grade levels. Other factors may have contributed more greatly to such an improvement, such as curriculum and security policies implemented at the same time as the uniform policy.
Image of the school
These proponents may also defend that school uniforms present an image of the school, with its students therefore representing the school; however, the uniform is not the sole method of doing so. Student culture is a far more vital factor in the image of a school, especially in colleges, where students are divided into numerous schools or faculties. The image of the school can be manifested through other things such as the people’s mannerisms, colloquial language, and shared interests. The image of a school, therefore, is not only visual and exterior, but also sometimes interior and beyond the senses.
In 1965, the then-Student Government of PSHS pushed for a school uniform for two reasons: economy and identity, the latter since the school was very recently established, and it needed to establish its identity somehow. The school uniform policy was then materialized. However, 54 years later, the school is ever flourishing with its culture of love for science, and even sports and music — things that it can identify with, even without a school uniform.
A more progressive way to dress
Moving forward, it would be beneficial to push for a dress code policy instead of a school uniform policy. Progressive high school dress code policies, such as in Evanston Township High School, allows its students to dress freely, and prohibits discrimination of any person or group based on “race, sex, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, ethnicity, religion, cultural observance, household income or body type/size.”
However, this generally free clothing policy does not equate to complete freedom of speech and expression. As the school is a professional setting, a basic standard of clothes (at least a shirt, pants, and shoes for Evanston) must be established. Clothes that are permitted must still ensure that sensitive body parts are covered and hate speech is not expressed through this free clothing and accessorizing. Uniform clothing, if necessary, may be implemented in formal events and other school-sanctioned activities such as competitions.
In terms of reprimands, students should not be reported for dress code offenses and, more so, be excluded from classes or sent home for a mere wrong choice of clothing, unless absolutely necessary. Faculty and staff should be more understanding to communicate properly with students who violate the code, and they should instead give warnings in order for students to better comply with the dress code.
Similar policies already exist in the country. For example, most colleges in the Philippines implement a dress code policy for its students; a notable exception is UST, which still imposes penalties on its students for wearing improper uniform. In fact, since 2008, the Department of Education does not require school uniforms for public elementary and secondary schools, in order to alleviate financial burdens to families in need.
The implementation of a dress code policy must go hand-in-hand with awareness and discourse on SOGIE (sexual orientation, gender identity and expression), and other social class issues, which lead to discrimination based on clothing and expression. More importantly, they must come with a genuine practice of respect for others regardless of sex, gender, race, or economic standing, and empowerment of minorities who are discriminated based on their clothing choices.
The debate on school uniforms has been had and continues to ensue, and neither side of the debate has been fully successful. However, in this age of free expression, what should society value more: uniformity, or individuality?
