Is Uniforms a Good Way to Improve Assessment and Encouragement?

The school equipment has a fairly short and somewhat controversial story. For all practical purposes, school clubs are as we know today their roots in the British public education system. To show clarity, British public school equals American private schools and US public schools equals British state schools.

Until the middle of the 19th century, British public schools were preserved of a wealthy elite, later Mandarin, the British Empire. Anyway, they were completely disorderly, with students behaving a lot like they wanted. Uniform began to introduce as a way to prevent more discipline and team spirit and quickly received recognition in public schools. Quite unbelievably, some of these uniforms are still relatively unchanged today.

As usual, the middle class, which traditionally sent its children to smaller, exclusive but private companies, began to adopt fashion for uniforms that had been approved by former socialists. In 1870, education offered a compulsory school for all UK compulsory education, and many new state schools naturally agreed to a kind of uniform policy that had been so popular in the private sector.

From that time, all through until the school year 1960 was almost universal in the UK.

The experience of the United States is somewhat different. School uniform (except in Catholic or Parochial schools) was actually unknown. Many schools had clothing codes, which were exclusive but distinctive. Blue jeans and high heel, for example, could be banned, but students were not told what to wear.

This is precisely the system described by our President of Uniforms, which began at her school in Southern Houston in the late 1950s, and as she brings a significant improvement in discipline and levels.

In 1996, President Clinton told the Secretary of Education, Richard W Riley, to send a handbook on school activities to every school district in the country. The manual set out the state's position and set guidelines for all schools that could shape their uniform requirements. The government showed that the approval of school work would reduce violence and wit in schools, but did not go as far as to make uniform mandatory and the decision was left behind by individual schools.

The government's appearance was clearly not shared by parents, students or school leaders. In 1998, only 11% of primary schools had adopted a coherent policy, and in 2000 this figure had only increased to 15.5%.

The decision to approve a uniform was not consistent throughout the country.
Schools in the suburbs had a relatively lower frequency of recording, possibly reflecting the efforts of a family of parents who are very politicians.

Spokesmen for every discussion of school discussions entail entrenched and almost Polish opposition views, and there are fog statistics and statistics available to support either suggestion.

Are they really useful for improving discipline and motivation? I believe, and South Houston's experience points out I'm right!

Employees reported a significant reduction in violence and neglect and on average aboard boosted two levels of academic achievement by the end of the year as a coherent strategy was introduced. Could it just be parallel? It seems strong enough.

There is no doubt that when the school adopts a uniform policy, it sends clear and unambiguous messages to parents and students. That is, this is an inclusive organization, all of which are considered equal and will be treated as such. The school is about learning, not showing or score fashion.

Some would believe that children hate uniforms, but many children will say it themselves, but the facts believe this opinion. Children, when participating in an organization with a uniform, you can not wait to get into it.

Most of us have an innate need to belong, to find part of a group, to find and understand our peers, and if we can have their admiration and respect. This is not just about children; It applies to members in the local section of Hell Angels aware.

Of course, one of the obvious signs of individual groups is unified.

When giving a child with uniform, you give the moment for approval within a group, opportunity to belong to it and feel part of it.

Those who fight against the united will say that by putting a child in uniform, you take your constitutional right to freedom of expression. Nevertheless, it is not interesting to keep in mind that left to oneself, children to a greater or lesser degree will choose uniforms. This may not be the same, but just look at what group of teenagers and what do you see? Brand X shoes, Brand Y jeans, baseball hat on your back – or droopy pants! So much for the expression!

According to Warren: "With more than thirty years of decline in basic understanding and standard of acceptable tolerance in a polite society, school standards may be necessary to try to restore our children a sense of respect, self-defense, respect for education, and awareness of what is appropriate there. "1

The design of a uniform can be such that it does not rule out an individual's expression by allowing minimal use of buttons and tags.

Furthermore, if students clearly see that they can not express their uniqueness by wearing a great style of clothing, they are much more likely to try to do it with their success.

Wearing uniformity and identification with the group has some other minorities that have been exploited by the Army for centuries. The main part is the wearing of the uniform with the sense of loyalty to the group. It is unacceptable to drop or prevent the group. The same spirit who works in the infantry also works in the classroom – "together we can do it!"

It is curious that before many of those rewarding individualism do not really take this very prominent phenomenon, without our forces being worse than useless.

An important part of psychology in group work and self-esteem is the feeling of security that is not obviously odd or "different".

It's a good idea that the child is different from the community and at school is the one who is chosen, harassed or bullied. A well-designed school uniform removes at least some of the visible signs of the difference & # 39 ; immediately.
At the Fort Wayne School Year says "Uniforms, where all students look the same, can prevent solidarity school at school. It can make you look like you're bigger, rather than standing out in a big school. "2

There is also an economic opportunity for a coherent policy. As a trend, the pressure on a parent with the latest fashion footwear, for example, or whatever accessories at the moment, is no longer possible. For the student, the chances are that look at the poor or have failed parents to prevent and avoid stigma avoidance.

When the need to compete financially with fellow students is removed, the child is likely to focus on his education, for himself and the group. In this situation, one more the individual's interest is not entirely subordinate to the group, but it is integrated and enhanced.

Only significant psychological benefits derive from having a uniform policy – it removes the need for both parents and children to decide what to wear school, avoid arguments, stress and anger.

There is reason to believe that uniforms Ngur school can affect school safety. Even at the simplest level, anyone who does not belong in school can be quickly diagnosed and checked out. Likewise, all students who bought to school are in trouble but are in trouble around the community instead.

Most private schools are in such a design process, which is much harder to ensure an offensive weapon on the man, and this should lead students to learn how to apply weapons to the school.

In Columbine's disastrous events, the murderers (one of those who had hidden weapons under his cloakroom) heard the shouting "Everyone with a white hat standing up" in an attempt to isolate sports team members as goals.

Many thieves and murders have been attributed to something as simple as jealousy of designer clothes and adequate consistent strategy that stops stroke.

A secure education environment is ineffective in relation to discipline and motivation. Safe-minded students are more likely to interfere, are more likely to fear going to school and getting more energy to spend time studying. School equipment, to the extent that it contributes to a more secure environment, plays an important role in playing.
The director of the South Shore School, Seattle, quotes saying "Dr. John German, says" This year's visibility at school increased 98 percent, truancy and tardies are down and we have not reported once Depression " 3

One of the things that involves school uniforms has prompted: "Are we OK to lose even one child who can leave school if the uniform is hidden? "

One can ask the answer:" Is it better to lose one child who can leave school or seven or ten who may be killed because their dress was clearly and distinctly different? "

Good grades require classroom and classroom education (at least for testosterone, the biggest disturbance is simply young women who are challenged. Too bad or too short clothing for both sexes is a distraction as a good trend in school life is possible to remove, with the benefit of all those concerned.

Some of the opponents of E uniforms in schools indicate that the design and law enforcement of a coherent policy significantly reduces the time needed for staff to handle their teaching methods. One of them goes so far to say that "creating and maintaining a new uniform policy would reduce the time to improve teaching
and increase participation, both among employees and between employees and students."

Conversely, the matter is the case. to create a policy, but the input of these tasks should include parents, students and other academic staff and teachers. When the policy is in place, the teacher does not have to waste time to be a policeman and decide whether the skirt or pair of bag pants is too short and then it is necessary to monitor the advice and diplomatic issues that may occur.

More than ten years from the initial attempt by the United States Government to promote school uniforms, the arguments recall. Both parties produce statistics to support their views.

Unfortunately, most available numbers are somehow wrong because the population uses the results or the bug in statistical methods.

It has been suggested that there is "no clear indication that uniforms significantly affect performance, only scattered anecdotes."

If these scattered documents came from those who can track performance, they probably have some content. Without taking absolute statistics, let us consider British experience for a moment. Although there are great cultural and demographic differences between the United States and the United Kingdom, we mostly share common hopes and values, a common language, and an extremely desire for our education system to work well.

The fact is that public schools in the UK have had a consistent policy in place for many years. The incidence of murder, intensive care, drug abuse, violent violence, bullying, and generalization in British schools is much lower than in US schools, and a major difference between systems is the likelihood of a uniform policy. It just works.

Sources.

1. Warren LH, "The Benefits of Mandatory School Uniforms," ​​p. 3, downloaded August 21, 2009 from helium.com/items/382723-the-benefits-of-mandatory-school-uniforms?page=3

2. Fort Wayne School Administration "Fort Wayne School Year". Retrieved on 21st August from fwnextweb1.fortwayne.com/adv/special/schoolearear/article0014.html

3. Ministry of Education, USA, February 1996. "Handbook on School Activities". Retrieved August 21, 2009 from ed.gov/updates/uniforms.html

SOURCE SBOBET

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *