The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
4 Points

School uniforms should be required

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/23/2013 Category: Education
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,238 times Debate No: 34104
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




Clothing is one of the best ways for kids to express themselves, and with guidlines and rules, students are able to be themselves without being distracting. It's not fair limiting kid's closet because of uncomfortable uniforms, which could actually hurt one's education, because it may not be comfortable enough for the student to be able to pay attention. Uniforms are too strict.


I hope our debate goes well, and thank you for bringing up this topic.
I appreciate you sharing your personal opinions on school uniforms, but I have to disagree with you.
Clothing may be one of the best ways for students to express themselves, but even you, yourself stated that it is not the only way.
"students are able to be themselves without being distracting"
The above comment is a direct comment posted by yourself. With girls being forced to call home for a change of clothes, and boys yanking up their pants to prevent "sagging" every day, the dress code is being violated every single day, despite the strict rules put before us. All of these violations are distractions towards other students.

A study recently released found school uniform policies helped to improve school safety and student achievement, including grades and test scores, in three diverse public school districts.

In light of the increased emphasis on student achievement since the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, "Implementing a School Uniform Policy: A Case Study of Three Districts" provides additional evidence that school uniform policies can be beneficial to student learning.

Five key and consistent findings emerged in "Implementing a School Uniform Policy", which focused on the Denver Public Schools in Denver, Colorado; the Aldine Independent School District outside of Houston, Texas; and District of Baltimore City Public Schools:

1) Regular use of uniforms can help to improve school safety;

2) Regular use of uniforms can help to improve students' classroom behavior;

3) The affordability of school uniforms versus everyday clothing contributes to wide acceptance of the adoption of such a policy;

4) Uniforms can help to reduce student competition and concerns about "fitting in";

5) Uniforms may contribute to improved student outcomes, including grades and test scores.
Debate Round No. 1


I can already tell this debate will be good, thank you.

I appreciate the fact that it minimizes kids from having to deal with fitting in, but clothing isn't a big factor nowadays. Most kids in my experience determine popularity and such by religion, sexuality, physical features, athleticism, and intelligence. Kids don't look at clothes and judge; kids simply don't have to worry about that anymore.

What about the fact that uniform prices can be out of range for some families? The Department of Education website says, "School uniform and other items that must be purchased in accordance with school rules can be expensive, particularly for low income and large families." ( I come from a family of 13, so we are fortunate to not have to pay for uniforms. A lot of people in the area in which I live are poor and have to resort to free or reduced lunches at school. They definitely can't afford uniforms.

As for results possibly being better, in 2007 it was noted that more than 40 academies with uniforms failed to reach the goal of 30% of students with 5 A's-C's. ( ) David Brunsma, an academic, studied this for 8 years, seeing that though the numbers looked promising, "Uniforms do not make our schools better."

So uniforms are really only good for making a school look god, and who is going to know unless they walk into the school?


"So uniforms are really only good for making a school look god, and who is going to know unless they walk into the school?"
To answer your question, not only people who walk into the school will see the uniforms. There is a school website, and many programs that may be advertised on the county education television station.

The average person spends about $600 a year on new clothes. Even if you are the type of person that enjoys the finer things in life and prefer to only buy clothes that have a designer name tag, you are bound to spend more than $600 a year. Many of these designers will charge their customers over $100 per piece but usually, it is a lot more than that. (

School uniform pants can cost anywhere from $8-$25 depending on the size and brand. The cost of school uniform shirts can be between $7 and $20. This is for the whole year & far more cheaper than without uniforms. (

Now, to bring up a new issue:
The largest and most prominent example of a school uniform policy experiment in the United States is that of the Long Beach Unified School District, the third largest school district in California having 97,000 students in 90 public school programs, with 46 different languages spoken by local students:

"The quantitative outcomes of the policy have been remarkable. Crime report summaries are now available for the five-year post-uniform policy period and reflect that school crime overall has dropped approximately 86%, even though K-8 student enrollment increased 14%. The five categories of school crime where comparisons can be made between 1993 levels and 1999 levels are as follows: (a) sex offenses down 93% (from 57 to 4 offenses); (b) robbery/extortion down 85% (from 34 to 5 cases); " selling or using chemical substances down 48% (from 71 to 37 cases); (d) weapons or look-a-likes down 75% (from 145 to 36 cases); and (e) dangerous devices down 96% (from 46 to 2 cases; LBUSD, 1999). " Analysis of attendance figures has also provided interesting outcomes for the uniform initiative. In the fourth year that school uniforms have been required in K-8 grades, the percent of actual attendance reached almost 95%, noted as the highest point in the 18 years that the district has maintained statistics. Middle schools also registered comparable improvements in student attendance reaching almost 95% (LBUSD, 2002)." (
Debate Round No. 2


School uniforms themselves don't reduce the crime and violence in schools, it is the strict discipline and the way the school operates. Uniforms are simply a band-aid on school violence.
Long Board simply has a better program and ways to keep the kids in order and motivate them. Along with uniforms, the school also developed new policies and regulations in order to bring the violence down.

Also, what was the violence like before uniforms? It's not impressive that it dropped 90% if there was little bullying in the first place.

To conclude, uniforms prevent kids from expressing themselves, it limits their options of what to wear and can affect their decision making skills later in life. Uniforms can cost a lot depending on what school it is. Uniforms can be uncomfortable, and therefore can limit student's attention span and learning ability. And lastly, it's just plain boring, seeing the same clothes over and over, being just like everyone else. Weren't we taught that being exactly the same is bad? That we should stand out?

Thank you for a good debate, best of luck to your future ones.


This was a very please able debate, thank you for bringing up this topic.

"Also, what was the violence like before uniforms? It's not impressive that it dropped 90% if there was little bullying in the first place. "
If it dropped 90%, the violence must have had some impact on the school for them to keep track.
I have also taken the liberty to pull some more statistics on how much safer and less-violent schools have been with uniforms. (This took place in Long Beach California)
Overall, the crime rate dropped by: 91 %
School suspensions dropped by: 90 %
Sex offenses were reduced by: 96 %
Incidents of vandalism went down: 69 %
Assaults in grades K-8 decreased by: 85 %

Also, bringing back up the topic of cost..(where you are again proven wrong)

"Uniforms can cost a lot depending on what school it is"

The cost of uniforms is a concern for some families, but it has been shown that families in which the children wear uniforms spend almost 80 dollars less on clothing for their children for the school year compared to those who do not have children who wear uniforms. Also, 44 percent of the families in which the children wear uniforms believe that it keeps the children more focused on school. (

To conclude, Cited pros of school uniforms include decreased violence in schools and increased discipline of the students. Violence decreases because students are less likely to be picked on for their clothing, as there can be no focus on brand names. Along with this, students who are from poorer families are less likely to feel jealous or ashamed that they do not have the same clothing as those who are from wealthier families. Also, as the children wear the same things, it is difficult, if not impossible, for them to wear gang colors or other types of gang-related items. Discipline among the students increases because any tensions related to fashion or gangs have been lessened and students are more likely to be focused on the learning process.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by TheDarkMuffin 5 years ago
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 Checkmark-1 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: Both used fine sources. Pro managed to be very convincing with the statistics. Pro's grammar and spelling mistake density was lower than Con, which is remarkable and noteworthy in that Con's arguments were shorter. Conduct was fine on both sides.