The Instigator
18ABS01
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points
The Contender
ender95
Con (against)
Losing
1 Points

School Uniforms Should Not Be Required in Schools

Do you like this debate?NoYes+5
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
18ABS01
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/26/2012 Category: Education
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 69,352 times Debate No: 26610
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)

 

18ABS01

Pro

School uniforms do not help students an any way at all. The take away students ability to express themselves through their clothes and how do they reduce bullying at all? Also, we are entitled to a free education. Therefore, students should not be required to buy uniforms. There have been studies done on if uniforms help kids academically at all and almost all of them have shown that uniforms have absolutely no effect at all on kids academic performance. That's why school uniforms should not be required in schools.
ender95

Con

In modern-day society, school uniforms provide many advantages to student"s education. First off, school uniforms diminish the amount of bullying within schools by removing the opportunity to judge someone, by their appearance"everyone is dressed the same thus, judgment is forestalled. As my opponent has stated, school uniforms do remove the expression threw clothes; however, children find many other forms of expression: threw gestures, action, and voice"the implementation of school uniforms will not remove their individuality. If school uniforms were to be used throughout all schools worldwide, test scores probably would sky-rocket; due to the removal of such distractions as fashionable apparel. In addition, though school uniforms do cost money to begin with, it really is not all that much. We are granted the right as Americans to a free, public education; but this is only true to a degree. Each class has its own fees, advance placement classes require you to pay a bit of money in order to take the tests to receive credit; what harm would thirty to forty dollars do? Where it is true that school uniforms are not necessary, they could provide such advantages as higher academic achievements, and a decrease upon what bullying does exist.
Note: My opponent stated that there were studies that were preformed, that indicated that school uniforms have no direct impact upon academic standings; I would not mind seeing these studies, in the next round.
Debate Round No. 1
18ABS01

Pro

Okay, yes, by having everyone dress the same it may reduce some bullying. But, guess what? It would be such a small difference it wouldn't really matter. The most common reason people get bullied is their body size or how they act. Uniforms wouldn't help that at all. Also, uniforms DO take away children's privelege to express themselves and be who they want to be through their clothing. If you don't allow them to be who they are, how will they ever learn to just stand out and show their true colors? Bullying is intolerable, yes, but when kids are bullied sometimes they learn to ignore it and be wo they are. Some people take the bad with the good and learn to stand up to bullying. When people are bullied, they often learn things from it when they're older. They learn to, ignore it, stand up for yourself, etc. School uniforms just take away children's voices even a little bit more than they already are (as stated by Ducttpaeoverthescars).
Some parents feel that the safety of students is compromised by uniforms. In the events of natural disasters or emergencies, such as earthquakes, tornadoes, fires or terrorist attacks, it would be really hard for parents to identify their child from the midst of a milieu of similarly clothed children. Contrary to popular belief, even with uniforms on, certain children will get picked on by others. Cliques will still be formed and students will find ways (such as weight, complexion, financial status) to pass judgment upon their peers. School uniforms are very often unflattering, and it can damage a child's self-image. Also, school uniforms are just a Band-Aid on the school violance. And kids that are forced to wear uniforms will just be bullied by kids in other schools for having to wear uniforms.
You said that $30-40 isn't that much. But for some families that is just way too much money. And we are entitled to a free education. They can still have dress codes because those do good, but telling students exactly what to wear is just too far.
Here is one of those studies I was talking about:
University of Missouri assistant professor, David Brunsma reached a different conclusion. In his 2004 book, The School Uniform Movement and What It Tells Us About American Education: A Symbolic Crusade, Brunsma reviewed past studies on the effect of uniforms on academic performance. He also conducted his own analysis of two enormous databases, the 1988 National Educational Longitudinal Study and the 1998 Early Childhood Longitudinal Study. Brunsma concluded that there is no positive correlation between uniforms and school safety or academic achievement.
ender95

Con

1)Rebuttal:
Argument 1: "School uniforms do not help students an any way at all."
My opponent has stated that "School uniforms do not help students an any way at all." however; he later goes on to say, "Yes, by having everyone dress the same it may reduce some bullying"" This indicates that my opponent is slightly contradictive, no fault of his own.

Argument 2: Expression of one"s true self:
My opponent has stated that in order to express one"s self, you must have the right to dress how one might feel; however, he also stated that: "most common reason people get bullied is their body size or how they act." This alludes to my statement of, "As my opponent has stated, school uniforms do remove the expression threw clothes; however, children find many other forms of expression: threw gestures, action, and voice." Thus, school uniforms do not remove any such freedom of expression that children cannot replace by some other form of articulation.

Argument 3: Identification:
My opponent has brought up a very valid point: "In the events of natural disasters or emergencies, such as earthquakes, tornadoes, fires or terrorist attacks, it would be really hard for parents to identify their child from the midst of a milieu of similarly clothed children." In the event of such an event, parents would be incapable of coming to the aid of their child. It is up to the teachers, or administration, (the adult in charge) to provide the necessary amount of super-vision to insure the children"s safety. Often times parents are at work so would be incapable of materializing at the scene of the disaster, to help their child any way, thus my opponent"s argument is rendered invalid.

Argument 4: "And kids that are forced to wear uniforms will just be bullied by kids in other schools for having to wear uniforms."
If a doctrine of mandatory school uniforms for all public schools was enforced, then this would not be an issue"all students would be warning them, besides those who are home-schooled; thus, this would not be an issue.

Rebuttal-over

"You said that $30-40 isn't that much. But for some families that is just way too much money. And we are entitled to a free education. They can still have dress codes because those do well, but telling students exactly what to wear is just too far."

I did state that $30-40 really would be a minimal impact, compared to the amount of money that students in "free, public education" currently have to pay. As a senior in high school, taking three advance placement courses, and participating in three clubs, I have already had to pay $800.00 in fees. In addition, my little sister who is a freshman, and is taking no honors or advance placement classes but is partaking in a sport, has already had to pay $500.00 in fees. Compared to $1300, thirty to forty dollars is insignificant. My mother makes less than $30000 per year, so I can understand the argument of "That could be just too much on some people." It is rare in my house hold that we are able to have meals every night, but even when my sister had to wear uniforms for her school, we managed.

As for the second half of your statement, what is the difference between a dress code and school uniforms? The dress code is a doctrine that dictates exactly what you can ware, by outlining parameters of what you may not ware"hats, belts, flip-flops, etc. are all examples of things that have made the list, here in the Washoe county of Nevada. School uniforms provide several advantages"no longer will students have to worry about whether or not their clothing will be confiscated by the school because of indecent or "violation of the dress code," protection of their skin in scientific environments will be insured"lack of open-toed shoes, long pants to provide against acid burns to legs, etc."protection during physical education, the list goes on. Where it is true to a degree that cleaks will still exist no matter if there are uniforms or not, the effect of bullying can still be decreased when considering the aspect of clothing.

My opponent has stated that bullying is bad, but it is ok"people often times live, learn, and cope"but what about those who have not "lived," or "learned?" Bullying starts in schools, and spreads to work places. If one is bullied, and survives, that person often times caries resentment on threw life, returning the bullying favor to those around them. The original bully continues to do so, and no one learns. For some key examples of when bullying went too far, and could have been avoided"we only need to look to Amanda Todd, or the incident at Virginia tech.

Due to lack of time, further arguments will come in round 3. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
18ABS01

Pro

Argument 1: "School uniforms do not help students an any way at all"
My opponent stated that I was being contradictory by saying "School uniforms do not help students an any way at all" and "Yes, by having everyone dress the same it may reduce some bullying" but I also stated that it would effect bullying in such a little way that it doesn't matter because barely any bullies bully people on what they wear. (And btw, I'm a girl)
Argument 2: Expression of one's true self
My opponent has stated "School uniforms do remove the expression threw clothes; however, children find many other forms of expression: threw gestures, action, and voice." And yes, people can express themselves threw their gestures, actions, and voices but most people express themselves the most they dress with the different colors and styles.
Argument 3: Identification
I stated: "In the events of natural disasters or emergencies, such as earthquakes, tornadoes, fires or terrorist attacks, it would be really hard for parents to identify their child from the midst of a milieu of similarly clothed children." Their are conditions where the parents would need to come to the aid of their children and they would need to identify their children. Like if their was a bad earthquake, fire, tornado, or terrorist attack and some people got killed or stuck in the rubble and the parents would then leave their work because they really care about their children.
Argument 4: "And kids that are forced to wear uniforms will just be bullied by kids in other schools for having to wear uniforms."
Maybe the home schoolers would bully the public schoolers.

Dress codes just state light restrictions. At my school the dress code is "No butt, no boobs, no belly". Whereas school uniforms say exactly what you have to wear.
As I stated before "University of Missouri assistant professor, David Brunsma. In his 2004 book, The School Uniform Movement and What It Tells Us About American Education: A Symbolic Crusade, Brunsma reviewed past studies on the effect of uniforms on academic performance. He also conducted his own analysis of two enormous databases, the 1988 National Educational Longitudinal Study and the 1998 Early Childhood Longitudinal Study. Brunsma concluded that there is no positive correlation between uniforms and school safety or academic achievement."
Also, 98% of students that I interviewed said they would be unhappy to be forced to wear uniforms. If kids are too unhappy they will be likely to drop out.
ender95

Con

Rebuttal to my opponent"s rebuttal:

Argument #1:
My opponent has conceded to the correctness of my assertion, to the inaccuracy of her argument. My opponent has also made a claim""barely any bullies bully people on what they wear.""without any concrete evidence.

Argument #2:
My opponent has once more, agreed to my statement, that children find many other ways to express themselves, mean while making an assertion: "but most people express themselves the most they dress with the different colors and styles." Without any substantial evidence to enforce her assertion.

Argument #3:
Logically, a parent would not immediately rush to the rescue of their child, in the case of an extreme natural disaster"even if they were to do so, they would be restricted outside of the danger zone, until paramedics or other such emergency crew extracted all children from the destruction. In that event, recognition of the student would not require clothing, because parent and or guardian would be given permission to identify the wounded or past. I will concede though, that there are some people out there, who will disregard all procedures, and attempt to rush to their child"s defense and rescue; in that case, the clothing would provide a point of approach for the adult"in this case though, more children"s lives would be put at risk, because an untrained person is attempting to extract a body from ruble.

Argument #4:
My opponent is drawing at straws, this argument is completely unnecessary, and hurts my opponent"s case.

End of Rebuttal

Conduct:
My opponents conduct was rather impressive, considering the amount of scrutiny and rejections to her arguments that I put her threw. I was even impressed by the way she handled my mistake upon her gender. I give her many props for that.

SNG:
I am mostly blind, from what I could tell (with my screen reader program doing the reading,) her spelling was relatively flawless; however, her sentence stricter did not very much. Over all though, I did not have any problems interpreting what she was trying to say.

Arguments:
For the most part, her arguments were well put together. There was a few issues, covered in my rebuttals; not, in any way her fault. When there is a bit of biased involved, emotions tend to override what little judgment granted to us as humans.

Sources:
Her first set of sources were well put together, and when asked for what she had referred to, she provided it for me. I would recommend to my opponent to post at the bottom a link, so the voters in her future debates can look at the credibility of her source. Only one other flaw that I could detect. My opponent brought in a bit of statistics. For anyone who has taken a statistics course at the university or college level, you know that voluntary response poles are completely inaccurate. They lack perfect randomization, and the sample pool is usually relatively low. Not to mention, but the pole would naturally retain a bit of response biased"those who wish to impress their peers"and under coverage biased"not everyone might have been asked: jocks, nerds, geeks, etc. I would strongly advise my opponent to stay away from poles that she self-conducts, unless she is using a stratified sampling process with a random number table.

Closing statements:

I would like to thank my opponent for the wonderful debate. I would also like to oppologize to my opponent for referring to her by the wrong gender, during round two. I will not advise the voters to vote for either Con, or pro"if you have read each round you will know who to vote for. I wish the best to you all, and now I will bid you adieu
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Jasenya101 1 year ago
Jasenya101
i feel that uniforms take away kids first amendment... I don't agree with rude arrogant self centered people that agree with that... in that case you mise well take away the constitution...
Posted by kanakuiokanalunui 4 years ago
kanakuiokanalunui
uniforms fuckin suck dick
Posted by observing 4 years ago
observing
In further debates, I'd suggest for both of you to use a spell check program and look up the homonyms for the words you use, because the fact that you scrutinize the other's spelling while making an error yourself, is beyond the realm of ironic and it erases any credibility.
Posted by ellielynch21 4 years ago
ellielynch21
Many people say that uniforms are a good thing because of the fact that everyone looks the same, people will not compare each other, and think that someone has more money or better clothes than someone else. But if everyone is wearing the same thing, then wouldn't it be easier to compare people? Say there were two girls, both wearing khakis and a white collared shirt. What if one girl didn't look as good in the pants as the other girl. It would be easier for someone to say, "That girl looks terrible in those pants" because they are looking at how much better they look on the other girl. And say that that girl gets bullied because of how she looks in those pants. She probably wouldn't have worn those pants if she was given a choice because she was probably aware of how they looked on her. Most likely she has lots of clothes that look good on her, but the uniform isn't one of them. I think that bullying is inevitable in schools today. So if uniforms would only hurt the situation, then why bother?
Posted by Ducttpaeoverthescars 4 years ago
Ducttpaeoverthescars
Although ordering children to wear school uniforms may reduce bullying, I feel school uniforms shouldn't be allowed in school. It takes away children's privileges to express themselves and who they want to be through their clothing. If you don't allow them to be who they are, how will they ever learn to just stand out and show their true colors? Bullying is intolerable, yes, but when kids are bullied sometimes they learn to ignore it and be who they are. Some people take the bad with the good and learn to stand up to bullying. When people are bullied, they often learn things from it when they're older. They learn to, ignore it, stand up for yourself, etc. School uniforms just takes away children's voices even a little bit more than they already are. I agree that they should not be required in schools.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by DeFool 4 years ago
DeFool
18ABS01ender95Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: I have often speculated that there are school teachers who require their students to post debates on this site as part of an assignment. This debate seems to support my suspicion. I gave "convincing arguments" to Pro. English mastery to Con.
Vote Placed by Altilongitude 4 years ago
Altilongitude
18ABS01ender95Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: I could see some people being bullied because of their clothing choices so school uniforms would help with that. I also see the validity of the self expression argument. I think the latter outweighs the former.