The Instigator
Jacob60rt
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
QandA
Con (against)
Winning
5 Points

School uniforms should not be allowed in schools

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 1 vote the winner is...
QandA
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/31/2013 Category: Education
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 10,441 times Debate No: 39775
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

Jacob60rt

Pro

School uniforms are costly ( contrary to popular belief), destroys personality, the list goes on. The truths are self-evident that students should not be forced wear uniforms, and in the case were schools make uniforms mandatory the students do not even have a say in the matter. It is unjust to make students go through such an attack on their freedoms.
QandA

Con

Thank you for the debate.
I will present my main arguments on why I think that school uniforms should be in schools and are overall beneficial.

1) School uniforms in fact save time and money.

So much time is wasted with students sorting out what clothes to wear on what day. The demand for a variety of clothing pieces is reduced to just the ones that meet school policy. Yes initially uniforms do cost some money but parents save in the long-run. Students don't need a constant closet of clothing combinations to wear to school. The uniform does it all. Uniforms therefore save both time and money.

2) School Uniforms equal the inevitable variety of social class

If there is no uniform then students who come from families of lower economic status may be embarrassed about their cheap clothes they have to wear to school. The uniform fixes this problem. Students don't have to be embarrassed if they can't afford the latest clothing trends. If every student wears identical clothing i.e a uniform then the social status division is much less of an issue and therefore more beneficial to the student. This also potentially reduces bullying.

3) School uniforms improve student safety.

When students are required to wear uniforms, the wearing of gang symbols or colors becomes harder, and therefore, reduces student risk and danger. Also a uniform means that baggy clothing is not allowed, so there is less opportunity to hide weapons or drugs in clothing. Therefore school violence is reduced. School theft is also less of a threat, because there is no ability to steal sneakers, expensive jackets etc. To back this up, schools where uniforms are required have seen a 95 percent decrease in crime, 90 percent decrease in suspensions, and vandalism on school property decreased by 69 percent. Source: (www.educationbug.org)

I feel that uniforms are very beneficial to students. They protect them, make them feel equal and are very convenient
even if the students don't realize it.
Debate Round No. 1
Jacob60rt

Pro

I want to thank you for your arguments in my first debate this truly made my day. To start my rebuttal I will find counterexamples or disprove your claims.

1) You are prepared to state that "school uniforms save both time and money" But that is not exactly true.

a) There is many uniforms that cost from 8 to 50$ a piece, meaning 50$ possibly for a single shirt, polo, skirt, pants, etc.
ab) There is many types of uniforms i.e. Regular uniforms, rally uniforms, p.e. and formal dress uniforms. Thus causing to pay a whole lot of money for clothes were regular will cheaper.

B) The family will still buy regular clothes because since the student will probably want to wear something more comfortable in their free time. Thus defeating the whole "uniforms will save family money" claim.

2) You are prepared to state that uniforms will end a social class discrimination.

A) Families who have less money can only afford to pay for a couple complete uniforms options thus making the student wear the same outfit often causing it to get more worn and more used thus causing wear so the outfit may be torn and worn out. And the student may feel embarrassed to know his/her family can not afford better clothes.

B) Other students will still find ways to gossip and bully other students. Even with the clothes factors out of the equation kids will still bully that is a given fact that has stood the test of time.

3) You are prepared to state that uniforms may improve student safety.

A) There is still going to be a bullying problem causing a unsafe environment
B) People can still hide weapons and drugs in backpacks, in their in their waistband of their pants, and cars if they have one.
C) Uniforms can still be stolen to.

Cited: How much is it.org
http://education.newarchaeology.com... and some various opinions asked at my school.
QandA

Con

I would like to thank my opponent for his response. Now I will give my rebuttal.

1) in relation to my point that "school uniforms save both time and money" you say that there is many types of uniforms that pay a whole lot of money as opposed to normal clothes which are cheaper. You also say that "The family will still buy regular clothes because since the student will probably want to wear something more comfortable in their free time". This is not the case. If you think about it, students wearing normal clothes to school everyday of the week results in a much higher demand for clothes to be washed and ready. This means that sooner or later clothing outfits will be used up and there will be a need to buy more clothes. Whereas with the uniform, it solves the potential problem of constant washing and availability of clothes. Despite it's initial cost, it saves money in the long run there will no demand to buy extra clothing. Also you haven't touched off my second part of the point that uniform also saves time so that still stands.

2) I never once claimed that uniforms will end social class discrimination, I merely said that it fixes the problem of students being embarrassed about their clothes. Therefore the uniform reduces the perceptive division of social class as every student is wearing the same thing.

You say "Families who have less money can only afford to pay for a couple complete uniforms options thus making the student wear the same outfit often causing it to get more worn and more used thus causing wear so the outfit may be torn and worn out".

I still attend school. I have 1 school jumper, 2 shirts and 2 pairs of trousers that last the whole school year. There is little to no wear or tear on them. If a student is careful with their uniform then it can last for a very long time. And of course if a family is scarce in money then I think we can safely say that in that case a uniform would be taken care of very well. Now of course bullying will always exist, with or without uniforms but nobody is talking about a uniform putting an end to bullying; just potentially reducing it on ONE level. If everyone wears the same clothes then it is harder to delineate social class division in theory. It's not a means to an end but at least it helps as opposed to non-uniform schools where picking out different social classes is much more evident.

3) Again yes there is always going to be a bullying problem but the uniform again reduces it on one aspect. Yes students can bully other students about many other things, but not about there clothes in this case so therefore this is a benefit. A student's own clothes do no such thing in hindering bullying.

Yes people can hide weapons or drugs in backpacks but with the uniform it reduces the chance of weapons being on the students physical person which potentially reduces the ability of harming other students. Again a student's own clothes do no such thing.

Yes uniforms can be stolen too but what do you think is more likely, that a student steals a uniform or that a student steals clothes that appeal to them such as designer sneakers, jackets etc. It is much more likely that student steals what they don't have than what they do have.

Again as previously stated, schools where uniforms are required have seen a 95 percent decrease in crime, 90 percent decrease in suspensions, and vandalism on school property decreased by 69 percent.

I would like to point out that my opponent has not shown any such statistics that favour non-uniform schools in his argument or cited source. Also I would like to say to my opponent that stating that bullying will exist anyway, or that uniforms can still be stolen etc. is not really making a case that "school uniforms should not be allowed in schools".
Debate Round No. 2
Jacob60rt

Pro

As this debate comes to said close I will like to thank my opponent for this debate. In your first claim that uniforms save time, I have never seen or heard a student be late for school because I couldn't find anything to wear, or some other reason to be tardy. Also we must not infringe upon the rights of the student. The right to individuality is vital for academic development. Individuality boost self-confidence and if the student is self confident they can get focus on what is important, learning. We must embrace and celebrate individuality. If everyone clothes look similar a student may feel weak or worthless even since they are just another face in a indifferent crowd.

You say that uniforms will reduce the ability of harming other students. This is just a simple band-aid that will not solve the problem of school violence therefore uniforms do not provide safety but only a false security. Uniforms are in fact a burden to families who are paying for a free education for there children. Uniforms may prove difficult to enforce in public schools. And a study showed buy the today show says that families pay 15% extra money for uniforms. These facts of my argument provide sufficient evidence that we should hold on to our freedom of choice and that uniforms should not be allowed in schools. Also my opponent filled to notice I did cite and have statics in my argument .
QandA

Con

When I mean that a uniform saves time I mean the time spent on making sure clothes are constantly washed and ready, sorting out which outfits to wear on what day etc. The uniform is much more convenient when it comes to such aspects.

I don't feel that uniforms breach the individuality of a student. If everyone is wearing the same clothes then there is no one to feel insecure or not confident about their clothes. You have made the statement that individuality is vital for education but you have no reference to back up this claim. You say that "If everyone clothes look similar a student may feel weak or worthless even since they are just another face in a indifferent crowd." I feel that it is more likely for a student to feel weak or worthless if they are forced to potentially wear cheap clothes all the time rather than wearing what everyone else is wearing (uniform), which creates an equal barrier.

Yes I have previously made the claim that "uniforms will reduce the ability of harming other students" and I have backed this up with a reference. Again I never said it would eliminate violence or bullying, just that it reduces it on certain levels. If anything, normal clothes entice bullying on many levels such as class division, abuse over different fashion styles etc. You say that it is a simple band aid that will not fix the problem, however:
1) it certainly fixes it more than normal clothes do.
2) A band-aid is much better than an open wound, don't you think?

"Uniforms are in fact a burden to families who are paying for a free education for there children."
There is an obvious contradiction in this statement, I am not sure what you mean by "paying for a free education" however buying uniforms is no much more of a burden than paying for bills, groceries, mortgages etc. I could also be argued that having to have a constant and continuous amount of clothes bought and ready is more of an inconvenience (in non-uniform) schools than buying a one for all uniform. Not to mention my points regarding more safety, less crime etc.

"a study showed buy the today show says that families pay 15% extra money for uniforms". Again you have failed to actually cite a link to this reference. This results in a straw-man fallacy.

You say that this "fact" provides evidence that we should hold on to our freedom of choice and that uniforms should not be allowed in schools. Again this makes little sense. How can making an uncited claim that "families pay 15% extra money for uniforms" be evidence that we should hold on to our freedom of choice and that uniforms should not be allowed in schools? I do not see a correlation between these claims. I again reiterate that in my opponents only cited source there is no statistics to back up his claims.

I do not feel my opponent has successfully attempted to refute my points or to try and make a real case for his stance on the matter. His argument was more of a "why bother?" type stance than a "reasons" stance. As a result I feel I have been able to refute my opponents arguments points while making a strong case for my stance at the same time, including valid sources. (without trying to sound arrogant or condescending in any way).

I do however thank my opponent for the debate though. It has been a pleasure and I wish you luck.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by wiploc 3 years ago
wiploc
RFD:

S&G: Pro's was worse, but Con had problems too. Pro's was bad enough that I'd have voted the point if Con hadn't had problems.

Sources: Con's statistical argument was the most persuasive. I don't normally vote source points, but Un-sourced, it would have been an implausible claim. I might have ignored it without the citation.

Persuasion: Con wrote, "schools where uniforms are required have seen a 95 percent decrease in crime, 90 percent decrease in suspensions, and vandalism on school property decreased by 69 percent." That's the most persuasive argument in the debate. Pro has the burden of proof; he has to show that schools shouldn't have uniforms. If these statistics are right, then there are legitimate reasons for some schools to have uniforms. Pro had no significant comeback to this argument. Some of Pro's arguments seemed, as Con pointed out, weak: When Con said that uniforms reduce bullying, Pro said the don't eliminate bullying; but reducing bullying is still a good and worthwhile thing.
Posted by MrLiberal 3 years ago
MrLiberal
There is something called the Universal Declaration of Human Right. Uniforms go against it.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by wiploc 3 years ago
wiploc
Jacob60rtQandATied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments.