Uniforms Effective In Middle Schools

Franz Kafka, a major figure of twentieth-century literature, when talking of uniforms once said “As far as I have seen at school...they aimed at blotting out one’s individuality.” To a teacher, uniforms are the perfect way to control the unpredictability of young students, but to a student, these pieces of cloth serve a larger purpose of attempting to suppress unique traits. Though uniforms attempt to limit these differemnces, their presence does not entirely eliminate these distinctions. Uniforms are not effective in United States middle schools because of the essence of the distinctiveness of each individual student that allows their differences to be exposed no matter what.

The use of uniforms to eliminate the strong differences in children’s clothes due to their contrasting socioeconomic levels does not work; the financial status of students is still determinable even with uniforms. This is because that, even with the implementation of uniforms, students and their families will still be able to afford varying ranges and amounts of

clothes because of their respective incomes. A student from a more financially stable household will most likely own multiple uniform shirts and pants in a variety of colors, while a student from a lower income household may only have one tattered uniform to wear. Also, the financial differences between the households of students are exposed through the quality and appearance of the students’ uniforms as less financially stable students frequently have uniforms that are more worn or that are not from “name brand” stores, in opposition to students from families that obtain a larger income.
In addition, schools with uniforms do not rid the presence of students’ uniqueness in choosing items from difference clothing stores.

For example, “name brand” clothing is still prominent in schools with uniforms, but it shifts to other brands that carry uniform items or trendy accessories. New “name brand” and must-have items for students with uniforms often become bags, shoes, socks, or jewelry, because the competitive nature of children to have the best items is present, and the implementation of uniforms does not change that. Since students are no longer allowed to express themselves through the shirts or pants they wear to school, they turn to other accessories, like the aforementioned shoes, in attempts to distance themselves from the likeness of others. Therefore, uniforms do not effectively provide equal opportunities for students or make them all the same; the differences of students force their way out into the

open.
One claim frequently used by fervent supporters of uniforms in schools is that uniforms make a significant positive impact on peer pressure and the way students view themselves, because bullying amounts are reduced as students are unable to be made fun of for how they are dressed. However, the use of uniforms in schools forces children who like to make fun of others to put emphasis on flaws in other students’ characters, academic abilities, or physical features instead of the way students are dressed. With tight-fitting uniforms, female students with curves or larger busts, are easily identifiable, and this paves the way for bullying of students whose body types are not flattered by school uniforms. Students are all different in some way, so there will always be factors that varying amongst them, and bullies will pinpoint these factors, even with uniforms.
Students’ individuality will always be expressed in some way, with uniforms or without them. Uniforms do not make school experiences even for students, because the innate variations between them do not allow for them to be made the same. However, although students’ imbalances do sneak through the barrier of uniforms, in attempt to control innate factors and give equal chances to students through these clothing regulations, some easy ways of student expressions are lost. Do uniforms truly achieve uniformity?