The Instigator
eosh89
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Mirza
Con (against)
Winning
23 Points

Should all schools use uniform dress codes?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 5 votes the winner is...
Mirza
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/1/2012 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,933 times Debate No: 21621
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (5)

 

eosh89

Pro

Students would be better off in schools if it was mandatory they wear uniforms.
Mirza

Con

I'll make the round short because we have five debate rounds, and I want to see if my opponent is willing to even respond.

-- Arguments --

1. Uniforms are unnecessary

There's no actual evidence that school uniforms are necessary for improving anything that is about education. At best, studies show that schools which impose uniforms often produce better students than schools with clothing freedom. However, correlation does not imply causation. The schools that do best are often those with children of upper middle-class parents, private schools, etc. If they implement school uniform policies, that doesn't mean the school uniforms produce better students. There's no logical reason to conclude that.

2. Limitation of personal expression

School uniforms place severe limitations on the individual's right to express himself. Why should a child spend at least decade of his life being forced to wear specific clothes for almost half of daytime? It's nonsensical. Every humans wishes to express himself one way or another. Some people prefer wearing clothes with all sorts of different colors to express their creativeness, others like to keep it classy, etc. The school should be a place where children are taught to be open-minded. That doesn't happen when they're constantly forced to wear specific dress.

3. High expenses

Schools uniforms are expensive regardless of the PoV. There are two ways of paying the cost of school uniforms: Through taxpayers who have to pay additional funds for public education, and through parents who have to carry out the expenses on their own. If a school funds school uniforms on its own, then that is a burden of all taxpayers whose incomes go to the public education. This is unnecessary because the money is better off spent at replacing old books and improving other educational material. If the parents are paying for school uniforms, then a burden is placed on lower-income families who need to spend money on other educational material. Regardless of who pays, it's expensive. Money isn't well spent in this case.

-- Conclusion --

I'll cut the first round here. I hope my opponent is willing to seriously debate this. In short, I conclude that school uniforms are highly unnecessary, because there is no hard evidence to support their alleged merits, money is better off spent on other educational material, and school uniforms in general restrict something modern societies value heavily (i.e., freedom of expression). Supporters of school uniforms often argue that the school isn't a place where you express yourself, but where you learn. However, they tend to forget that expressing yourself and learning aren't two mutually exclusive acts. And being able to express yourself is also something you learn. Schools should teach that to kids.

Resolution negated.
Debate Round No. 1
eosh89

Pro

I do not understand all your irrelevant mentioning of "if my opponent takes this seriously" but to move forward I would love to address all 3 different points you made in the first round. For starters I did not say it was necessary to wear them I stated schools would be better off if they did enforce a uniform code. Every one knows that just because you put a blue sweater with letter on a child, it will not make that child smarter. What it will do is give all children an opportunity to escape bullying situations that result because of the clothing a child wears. All too often children are bullied because their shoes are too old or they aren't wearing a popular expensive brand. Expensive brands are a materialist value that kids thrive on but not all kids have the resources for.

That leads me into your point of the fact that uniforms are expensive. Not necessarily. If you buy 2-3 uniforms for a child they can use that Monday to Friday for the rest of the year and most likely into the following year. The only other clothes that child needs is for time spent outside of school. Cutting down the Monday to Friday wear and tear that clothes go to will help them last long. It may be expensive to purchase uniforms but it is more of an investment to save money in the long run.

You also say it is a limit of expression. While I do agree with this to an extent I must point out that children need to be able to express themselves beyond what they wear! If it is truly valuable to a child to express themselves then they will find other ways to do so. Clothes are certainly not the only form of expression. It would make for great conditioning for children to learn expression through non materialistic ways and help build their character.
Mirza

Con

Pro doesn't understand why I wanted to find out if he took this debate seriously. I said that I made the previous round short because I have no idea whether or not he would respond. His opening statement was one sentence long.

Rebuttals

Pro claims that he didn't state it was necessary to wear school uniforms, but that enforcing them would make schools better off. I never claimed he said it, so that's irrelevant. What I made clear was that schools can achieve any kind of success without implementing school uniform policies. Pro's disagreement is entirely unsupported by facts.

Pro claims that school uniforms prevent bullying because some kids will not have to wear old clothes, thus making everyone equal. This isn't true. For everyone to be equal, each individual should first and foremost be allowed to wear what suits him and makes him feel better, rather than what other people forced him to wear. And furthermore, Pro has brought no sources for me to analyze. He has the burden of proof, and is required to bring evidence. He hasn't brought any.

Pro argues that uniforms aren't necessarily expensive. This is untrue. "The education of children whose parents cannot afford to buy them the right school uniform is being put at risk, research suggests. A report by the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux (NACAB) suggests that some children have been threatened with exclusion because they were not wearing the correct uniform." [1] If a concerning number of children risk being excluded due to the expenses of school uniforms, there's a very good reason to believe that school uniforms are highly expensive in many cases. The ridiculously high costs of school uniforms can be read on the first reference.

Moreover, Pro did not dispute the fact that taxpayers have to fund school uniforms. Why should they be entitled to do so? All evidence we have to support the merits of school uniforms is based on correlation-causation data. This cannot justify taking other people's incomes and spending them on non-effective material. Furthermore, Pro's claim that parents who invest in school uniforms will save money in the long term. His explanation is weak. The uniforms will be worn at school - and that's just about exclusively. Most children want to wear their own clothes after school and during other social activities, which means money will have to be spent on clothes on top of the uniform expenses. If children don't wear uniforms, they will mostly wear the same clothes throughout the day. This is cheaper.

"School uniform in itself is not a bad thing. But it can be expensive and that's what we're concerned about." [2]

Pro agrees that school uniforms limit a child's expressions. Although everything should be taken in moderation, I think school uniforms take expression limits beyond what is morally correct. The reason is that if the government has a right to directly force all children to wear school uniforms, then we immediately grant it the right to enforce any kind of possibly-beneficial laws anytime it needs. Children shouldn't grow up getting used to the government telling them how to dress, live their lives, or make them government dependent in general. Pro needs to explain why the government has any sort of right to restrict every human's basic right to free clothing.

Nothing Pro has said is based on evidence. Statistics are complex, and analyzing them takes time. Most statistics about school uniforms and their effects seems to be based purely on correlation-causation arguments.

References

[1] http://news.bbc.co.uk...

[2] Ibid.
Debate Round No. 2
eosh89

Pro

eosh89 forfeited this round.
Mirza

Con

Enjoy the song at least.
Debate Round No. 3
eosh89

Pro

eosh89 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
eosh89

Pro

eosh89 forfeited this round.
Mirza

Con

Pro's forfeit makes him lose the conduct point, and he cited zero sources, so he loses the reference point too.

Pro didn't refute my claim that school uniforms make people unequal, that taxpayers have to pay unnecessary money, and that children are put at risk because of school uniforms. In spite of all that, school uniforms also limit a child's freedom of expression and teaches them that the government should have any kind of authority it wants. This is not a good thing, and Pro did not dispute it.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by johnwagner 5 years ago
johnwagner
Think of all of the advantages concerning uniforms:

Parents and students could relax without the peer pressure of "keeping up with the Jones's" or fitting in with a certain clique.

Expenses would be much lower as the uniform could be one that is not a financial burden on anyone.

Never any turmoil of what to wear for school today.

Eliminates the constant pressures of what is an appropriate item to wear to school.

Funds could be raised by the schools and uniforms purchased for those who qualify for assistance.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by nonentity 5 years ago
nonentity
eosh89MirzaTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Interesting arguments, Mirza. I would have loved it if Pro had presented better arguments and hadn't forfeited. Mirza's last round pretty much sums up my vote.
Vote Placed by TUF 5 years ago
TUF
eosh89MirzaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
eosh89MirzaTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
eosh89MirzaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by 1dustpelt 5 years ago
1dustpelt
eosh89MirzaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: FF. Pro did not refute Con due to FF's. Pro no source.