research topic about school uniform

• About The Journalist’s Resource
• Follow us on Facebook
• Follow us on Twitter
• Criminal Justice
• Environment
• Politics & Government
• Race & Gender

Expert Commentary

School uniforms: Do they really improve student achievement, behavior?

This updated collection of research looks at how mandatory school uniforms impact student achievement, attendance and behavior as well as the presence of gangs in public schools.

Republish this article

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License .

by Denise-Marie Ordway, The Journalist's Resource April 20, 2018

This <a target="_blank" href="https://journalistsresource.org/education/school-uniforms-research-achievement/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://journalistsresource.org">The Journalist's Resource</a> and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.<img src="https://journalistsresource.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/cropped-jr-favicon-150x150.png" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Decades ago, uniforms were mostly worn by students who went to private or parochial schools. But as local school boards have focused more on improving standardized test scores and campus safety, a growing number have begun requiring school uniforms — typically, a polo shirt of a particular color paired with navy or khaki pants, skirts or shorts. Nearly 22 percent of public schools in the United States required uniforms in 2015-16 — up from almost 12 percent in 1999-2000, according to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES).

Proponents argue that students will pay more attention to their classwork if they aren’t preoccupied with fashion, and that they’ll be better behaved. Meanwhile, school administrators say uniforms help eliminate gang-related styles and logos. They also make it easier to spot a stranger on campus.

Despite their reported benefits, mandatory uniforms are controversial because a lot of parents and students don’t like the idea of forcing children to dress alike, which they say suppresses freedom of expression. Some families complain about the financial burden of purchasing uniforms in addition to their kids’ other clothing. Years ago, parents also complained that it was difficult to find uniforms, but that ceased to be an issue after large chain stores like Target and Wal-Mart began selling them.

As public schools debate the merits of uniforms — some school boards have been bouncing the idea around for years — it’s important for journalists to know what the research says on this topic. School officials do not always consult academic research before they put a plan on the table.

To help journalists ground their reporting and fact-check claims, Journalist’s Resource has rounded up several academic studies worth reviewing. Reporters may also want to examine reports on uniform use from the NCES, which collects and reports data related to school uniforms, dress codes and book bags in public schools.

——————————–

 “School Discipline, School Uniforms and Academic Performance” Baumann, Chris; Krskova, Hana. International Journal of Educational Management , 2016. DOI: 10.1108/IJEM-09-2015-0118.

Summary: This study examines test scores and student behavior in the United States, Canada and 37 other countries to determine whether uniforms affect student discipline. The researchers found that the highest-performing students are the most disciplined. In addition, “for countries where students wear school uniforms, our study found that students listen significantly better, there are lower noise levels, and lower teaching waiting times with classes starting on time.”

“Dressed for Success? The Effect of School Uniforms on Student Achievement and Behavior” Gentile, Elizabetta; Imberman, Scott A. Journal of Urban Economics , 2012, Vol. 71. doi: 10.1016/j.jue.2011.10.002.

Abstract: “Uniform use in public schools is rising, but we know little about how they affect students. Using a unique dataset from a large urban school district in the southwest United States, we assess how uniforms affect behavior, achievement and other outcomes. Each school in the district determines adoption independently, providing variation over schools and time. By including student and school fixed-effects we find evidence that uniform adoption improves attendance in secondary grades, while in elementary schools they generate large increases in teacher retention.”

“Uniforms in the Middle School: Student Opinions, Discipline Data, and School Police Data” Sanchez, Jafeth E.; Yoxsimer, Andrew; Hill, George C. Journal of School Violence , 2012. DOI: 10.1080/15388220.2012.706873.

Summary: Researchers asked students at an urban middle school in Nevada what they thought of having to wear uniforms. Their public school had adopted a uniform policy after staff members became frustrated with the earlier dress code policy, which resulted in girls wearing revealing clothing and boys wearing shirts with inappropriate messages and images. The study’s main takeaway: The vast majority of students said they dislike uniforms, although some agreed there were benefits. “For example, in reference to gender, more than expected females than males indicated students treated them better with uniforms. Also, fewer females than males got detention for not wearing a uniform or for wearing a uniform inappropriately.”

“Are School Uniforms a Good Fit? Results from the ECLS-K and the NELS” Yeung, Ryan. Educational Policy , 2009, Vol. 23. doi: 10.1177/0895904808330170.

Abstract: “One of the most common proposals put forth for reform of the American system of education is to require school uniforms. Proponents argue that uniforms can make schools safer and also improve school attendance and increase student achievement. Opponents contend that uniforms have not been proven to work and may be an infringement on the freedom of speech of young people. Within an econometric framework, this study examines the effect of school uniforms on student achievement. It tackles methodological challenges through the use of a value-added functional form and the use of multiple data sets. The results do not suggest any significant association between school uniform policies and achievement. Although the results do not definitely support or reject either side of the uniform argument, they do strongly intimate that uniforms are not the solution to all of American education’s ills.”

“Effects of Student Uniforms on Attendance, Behavior Problems, Substance Use, and Academic Achievement” Brunsma, David L.; Rockquemore, Kerry A. The Journal of Educational Research , 1998, Vol. 92. doi: 10.1080/00220679809597575.

Abstract: “Mandatory uniform policies have been the focus of recent discourse on public school reform. Proponents of such reform measures emphasize the benefits of student uniforms on specific behavioral and academic outcomes. Tenth-grade data from The National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988 was used to test empirically the claims made by uniform advocates. The findings indicate that student uniforms have no direct effect on substance use, behavioral problems, or attendance. Contrary to current discourse, the authors found a negative effect of uniforms on student academic achievement. Uniform policies may indirectly affect school environment and student outcomes by providing a visible and public symbol of commitment to school improvement and reform.”

“School Uniforms, Academic Achievement, and Uses of Research” Bodine, Ann. The Journal of Educational Research , 2003, Vol. 97. doi: 10.1080/00220670309597509.

Abstract: “School uniforms are being advocated for a range of social, educational, economic, and familial reasons. In 1998, The Journal of Educational Research (The JER) published an article by D. Brunsma and K. Rockquemore that claims that uniforms correlate negatively with academic achievement, but data presented in this article actually show positive correlation between uniforms and achievement for the total sample, and for all but 1 school sector. Examination of structure of argument reveals that the erroneous claim results from misleading use of sector analysis. Simultaneous with The JER article, and on the basis of the same National Education Longitudinal Study: 1988 database, an Educational Testing Service article reported that no correlation exists between uniforms and achievement. The two articles are contrasted in this study. The effect of new communication technology in amplifying political uses of academic research is discussed.”

“Public School Uniforms: Effect on Perceptions of Gang Presence, School Climate, and Student Self-Perceptions” Wade, Kathleen Kiley; Stafford, Mary E. Education and Urban Society , 2003, Vol. 35. doi: 10.1177/0013124503255002.

Abstract: “This study attempts to clarify the relationships between public school uniforms and some of their intended results: student self-worth and student and staff perceptions of gang presence and school climate. The instruments used in the study included a questionnaire on gang presence and identity, the National Association of School Principals Comprehensive Assessment of School Environments, and the Harter Self-Perception Profile for Children. Participants consisted of 415 urban public middle school students and 83 teachers. Findings indicate that, although perceptions did not vary for students across uniform policy, teachers from schools with uniform policies perceived lower levels of gang presence. Although the effect size was small, students from schools without uniforms reported higher self-perception scores than students from schools with uniform policies. Student and teacher perceptions of school climate did not vary across uniform policy.”

“The Effect of Uniforms on Nonuniform Apparel Expenditures” Norum, Pamela S.; Weagley, Robert O.; Norton, Marjorie J. Family & Consumer Sciences , 1998. doi: 10.1177/1077727X980263001.

Abstract: “The uniform industry has grown steadily the past 20 years with increased attention from employers trying to create a professional image among workers as well as school administrators considering uniforms to curtail school violence. Although an important part of human dress for centuries, uniforms have received little attention from researchers of the clothing market. This study examines the impact of uniform purchases on household expenditures for selected nonuniform apparel subcategories based on an economic model of conditional demand. Expenditure equations are estimated using the 1990-1991 Consumer Expenditure Survey. The results suggest that, on average, consumers do not substitute uniforms for other apparel purchases. Rather, uniforms and nonuniform apparel appear to be complements in consumers’ purchases, resulting in greater household expenditures on nonuniform apparel. These results are a first step in understanding the economic effect that uniform purchases, mandated by employers, schools, or others, have on household clothing expenditures.”

Looking for more research on student achievement? Check out our write-ups on how teacher salaries , school vouchers and school shootings impact learning.   

About The Author

Denise-Marie Ordway

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts

SCHOOL UNIFORMS AND STUDENT BEHAVIOR: IS THERE A LINK?

Arya ansari.

a Department of Human Sciences, College of Education and Human Ecology, The Ohio State University

b Crane Center for Early Childhood Research and Policy, The Ohio State University

Michael Shepard

Michael a. gottfried.

c Graduate School of Education, University of Pennsylvania

Arya Ansari: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing - original draft, Funding acquisition. Michael Shepard: Writing - original draft. Michael Gottfried: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing - review & editing, Funding acquisition.

Whether or not schoolchildren exhibit better behavior in the context of wearing uniforms has been a long-standing area of debate in education. Nonetheless, there has been little empirical inquiry into the benefits or drawbacks of school uniform policies. To contribute new insights to the dialogue, the present investigation used nationally representative data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study Kindergarten Class of 2011 ( n = 6,320) to examine students’ social-behavioral and engagement outcomes across the elementary school years as a function of school uniform policies. In general, students in schools that required school uniforms did not demonstrate better social skills, internalizing and externalizing behavior, or school attendance as compared with students in schools without school uniforms. These associations were true across both public and private schools. There was, however, some indication that low-income students in schools that required uniforms demonstrated better school attendance than low-income students in schools that did not.

Mandatory school uniform policies were first put in place nearly 30 years ago ( Brown, 1998 ), with increased implementation from the 1990s onward ( Han, 2010 ). In the 1995–1996 school year, only 3% of public schools in the U.S. required uniforms, which increased to 20% in 2011–2012 ( Mitchell, 1996 ; U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2013 ). School uniforms mandates are even greater in private schools, with roughly six out of every ten requiring that students wear uniforms (57% in 2011–2012; National Center for Educational Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics, 2013 ). This growth in school uniforms (particularly in the public elementary school sector; 20% in elementary school versus 12% in secondary school) has been attributed to the belief that uniform policies level the playing field in schools and help improve students’ academic achievement and social-behavioral engagement ( Brown, 1998 ; Kaiser, 1985 ; Pate, 2006 ; Ryan & Ryan, 1998 ; U.S. Department of Education, 1996 ) along with student and classroom safety ( Kaiser, 1985 ; Zernike, 2002 ). Reflecting these beliefs, both the Clinton and G.W. Bush administrations encouraged widespread adoption of school uniforms ( Boutelle, 2008 ; Zernike, 2002 ).

Notwithstanding these proposed benefits and encouragement to adopt school uniform policies, there are many opponents. Anti-uniform groups argue that mandatory uniforms violate First Amendment rights of students and can lead to an authoritarian learning atmosphere that inhibits learning ( Brown, 1998 ). More broadly, critics argue that student achievement, behavior, and self-esteem will decrease rather than increase ( Brunsma, 2006 ) and that classroom stratification will not only remain, but uniforms could add further financial hardship on low-income families who now must purchase required clothing ( Brunsma, 2006 ; Portner, 1996 ). In general, opponents argue that uniform policies may only serve as a stop-gap policy in addressing issues of economic and educational equality that, ultimately, allows policy makers and practitioners to delay making difficult decisions to reform public education ( DeMitchell, 2006 ).

Despite these ongoing debates, there has been little empirical inquiry into the benefits or drawbacks of school uniforms, and the studies that do exist are limited, dated, and largely focus on academic outcomes ( Bodine, 2003 ; Brunsma, 2004 ; Brunsma, 2006 ; Holloman et al., 1998; Kohn, 1998 ; Murray, 1997 ; Pate, 1999 ; Yeung, 2009 ). This is a glaring gap in knowledge because students’ social-behavioral skills, especially in the earliest years of school, are critical in determining their future social, educational, and economic success ( Heckman & Rubinstein, 2001 ; Heckman et al., 2006 ; Imberman, 2011 ; Jacob, 2002 ; Segal, 2008 ). These findings, combined with the growth in uniform policies across the U.S., necessitate further empirical work to understand whether learning in the context of school uniforms is linked to differential measures of student success. Accordingly, the present study uses nationally representative data to explore whether: (a) elementary school-aged students across the United States demonstrated higher social-behavioral functioning and engagement in schools with uniform policies as compared with students in schools without uniform policies and (b) these associations vary across key subgroups of students. In doing so, the present investigation represents one of the first national snapshots of the outcomes of school uniforms in elementary schools.

The Purpose of Uniforms

School uniforms historically have been used in a variety of circumstances (e.g., military personnel, medical professionals, athletic teams) to signify to both wearers and observers of their expected roles. It has been argued that uniforms serve dual purposes: (a) to differentiate nonmembers from members and (b) to signal to the actor and the audience that certain set of behaviors are expected ( Joseph, 1986 ). Uniforms symbolize group membership and can define group boundaries, promote group goals, and reduce role conflict ( Stanley, 1996 ). They may also promote conformity to group norms, which may reduce group infighting and discrimination ( Huss, 2007 ). Thus, administrators and policy makers have viewed uniforms as a means of altering the climate of a school in cases of violence, disruptive behaviors, or social stratification.

Enacting school uniform policies can be viewed from theoretical persepctives that higlight the role of the environments that students interact with as a key influence on their development. For example, according to Social Learning Theory, individuals are argued to respond to a combination of: (a) cognitive factors, such as knowledge, expectations, and attitudes; (b) behavioral factors, such as skills, practice, and self-efficacy; and (c) environmental factors, such as social norms, access in community, and influence on others (Grusec, 1994). These cognitive, behavioral, and environmental factors are hypothesized to interact with each other in a process known as reciprocal determinism (Grusec, 1994). Thus, theoretically, it is argued that school uniforms may change the school environment, resulting in a shift in the reciprocal determinism equation that could improve the trajectory of the student body. Social learning theory also rests on the notion that individuals create meaning for things that they interact with both through their personal interactions and their interaction with others ( Huss, 2007 ). That is, individuals create meaning based off their own experience as well as through learning the expectations and meanings other people give to these same objects. Grounded in this perspective, many administrators and policy makers have equated school uniforms with private schools, which are perceived as secure, safe, and orderly places of learning ( Huss, 2007 ).

School Uniforms in Practice

One major consideration pro-school uniform groups cite is student safety. Past school uniform policies have been introduced as a way to equalize the school culture/setting to support students and reduce gang attire and activity, increase school safety, and decrease clothing theft ( Daugherty, 2002 ; Kaiser, 1985 ; Stanley, 1996 ; Zernike, 2002 ). Thus, from risk-taking perspective, school uniforms are often viewed as a way of mitigating risks to vulnerable populations, including fear of intimidation and discrimination. But beyond safety considerations, school uniforms have other proposed benefits: Increased student discipline, increased respect for teachers, promotion of group spirit, higher academic standards maintained through uniformity, decreased strain on parental budgets, and a decrease in student’s concerns for social status through fashion ( Kaiser, 1985 ). These benefits may also increase academic achievement, as a third of teachers either agreed or strongly agreed that student misbehavior disrupted their teaching ( Robers et al., 2012 ).

On the other hand, opponents of school uniforms argue that there is not enough empirical evidence to support its implementation and that students may seek out other ways to individuate themselves even in schools with uniforms, such as becoming disruptive in class or rebel against authority (Gentile & Imberman, 2011). In the limited research that does exist, there is some indication that uniforms may restrict students’ ability to express themselves, and thus, results in lower-levels of self-esteem ( Wade & Stafford, 2003 ). Accordingly, through seeking conformity in clothing, schools may actually be undermining efforts to understand and appreciate diversity in the student body ( Howe, 1996 ). Opponents of school uniforms also cite a variation of the Hawthorn effect that may account for any observed differences in student outcomes where uniforms are mandatory ( Posner, 1996 ). More specifically, it is argued that differences in student outcomes are caused by a change in the way adults perceive uniformed students and not the way in which students behave or learn. If this hypothesis is correct, then meaningful change may be brought about without mandating uniforms among the student body.

Empirical Evidence regarding School Uniforms

As noted above, despite the extensive public discourse surrounding the implementation of school uniforms in the United States, there has been limited research that has examined its effectiveness. However, the handful of studies that have examined the benefits of school uniforms, although dated, present inconclusive evidence. For example, evidence from two school districts in Florida utilizing a pre-post test design found that elementary school-aged students significantly improved their academic test scores in the year post-uniform implementation ( Pate, 1999 ). In contrast, with samples of elementary ( Brusnma, 2006 ) and high school students ( Brunsma & Rockquemore, 1998 ), other researchers have found that students in schools with uniform policies demonstrated lower levels of (or declines in) academic achievement as compared with students in schools without uniforms. And, yet, other studies have documented no consistent differences in students’ academic outcomes as a function of school uniform policies ( Draa, 2005 ; Stevenson & Chunn, 1991 ; Yeung, 2009 ).

Although still limited, the evidence for school uniforms is equally mixed when considering students’ non-academic outcomes. Studies ranging from elementary to high school from school districts in Ohio and Virginia and in the southwest U.S. reveal that school attendance was better in schools with uniforms than those without uniforms ( Draa, 2005 ; Gentile & Imberman, 2011; Hoffler-Riddick & Lassiter, 1996 ) and that school uniform implementation resulted in a decline in disciplinary infractions and a higher sense of school belonging ( Han, 2010 ; Hoffler-Riddick & Lassiter, 1996 ; Pate, 2006 ; Peters, 1996 ). Secondary school teachers’ perceptions of students’ peer relations, engagement in violent behavior, and integrity have also been found to improve when uniforms were worn ( Huss, 2007 ; Wade & Stafford, 2003 ; Sanchez et al., 2012 ; Tucker, 1999 ). Other research, however, reveals largely null or negative associations between school uniforms and elementary and secondary school students’ attendance and social-behavior ( Brunsma & Rockquemore, 1998 ; Gentile & Imberman, 2011; Han, 2010 ).

The Present Study

When taken together, despite theoretical assertions and the policy rehteoric surronding school uniforms and their benefits for the student body, the extant literature has yielded inconclusive evidence. Thus, whether school uniforms help level the playing field in schooling, which is important for children from ethnically and economically diverse backgrounds, or whether uniforms amplify disparities and serve as obstacles to being in school is unclear. Accordingly, the present investigation sought to add to our knowledgebase by leveraging a contemporary and nationally representative sample of elementary school-aged students to evaluate whether K-5 students’ school behavior and engagement outcomes differ in schools with and without uniforms. As part of this effort, we also consider the extent to which any patterns vary for students across the income and skill distributions and across school sectors. Given the inconclusive evidence discussed above, we did not make directional hypotheses. But in addressing these research questions, we build upon the limited, dated understanding of whether school uniforms are associated with students’ social, behavioral, and engagement outcomes in the crucial early years of development.

Data for the present investigation were drawn from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study – Kindergarten Class of 2010–11 (ECLS-K: 2011; Tourangeau et al., 2015 ). The ECLS-K is a nationally representative sample of students who were followed from kindergarten entry through the end of fifth grade. To ensure a nationally representative sample, the ECLS-K: 2011 first sampled within geographic regions, then public and private schools, and finally students were stratified by race/ethnicity. For our purposes, we used data from the surveys administered to parents, teachers, and school administrators. Given the nature of the data on school uniform policies (for more details, see below), we limited our sample to children who: (a) remained in the same schools between kindergarten and fifth grade and (b) had administrator reported data of school uniform policies from the kindergarten wave of data collection. This restriction resulted in a final sample of 6,320 students.

Table 1 presents descriptive statistics for all focal covariates, separated by school uniform policy and Table 2 presents descriptive statistics for all study outcomes.

Weighted descriptive statistics for focal covariates, stratified by schools with and without uniform policies

Weighted descriptive statistics for focal outcome variables.

Note . Estimates correspond to means and those in brackets correspond to standard deviations.

School uniforms.

During the spring of kindergarten, school administrators were given a survey that included a question about whether students were required to wear uniforms. Although similar questions were asked again in first and second grade, these surveys were: (a) only asked of administrators of students who switched to new schools (and only a handful of children changed between schools with and without uniforms) and (b) no uniform data were available for students who switched schools after second grade, hence our focus on students who remained in the same elementary schools between kindergarten and fifth grade. Accordingly, we used these reports from kindergarten to create a binary variable that indicated whether students attended elementary schools with or without a uniform policy.

Student outcomes.

In the fall and spring of kindergarten and again in the spring of each subsequent grade, teachers reported on students’ socio-emotional skills. These questions were derived from the Social Skills Rating System (SSRS; Gresham & Elliott, 1990 ). This tool is based a 4-point scale (0 = never to 3 = very often ) that includes four subscales: Interpersonal skills (5 items; α = .86–.87), self-control (4 items; α =.80–.82), internalizing behavior problems (4 items; α = .76–.79), and externalizing behavior problems (5 items; α = .86–89). Teachers also reported on students’ approaches to learning with a measure developed by NCES (6 items; α = .91–.92). Similar to Claessens and colleagues (2009), we collapsed these indicators into three dimensions: Internalizing behavior problems , externalizing behavior problems , and social skills (a combination of approaches to learning and socioemotional skills).

In addition to children’s socio-emotional development, students’ teachers also reported on students’ school absences every year (0 = no absences , 1= 1–4 absences , 2 = 5–7 absences , 3 = 8–10 absences , 4 = 11–19 absences , and 5 = 20 or more absences ). To increase interpretability, we recoded the scale values to equal the midpoint of the response options (e.g., 1–4 absences was recoded as 2.5 absences). Students who were never absent (scale value of 0) and those who were absent for 20 or more days of the school year (scale value of 5) were coded as being absent for 0 and 20 days, respectively. Note that, during kindergarten through third grade, children had one primary teacher across subject areas who reported on children’s school attendance. In fourth and fifth grade, however, students had different teachers for different subject areas. In these grades, both students’ English language arts teacher and their science or math teacher responded to questions of absenteeism. Because the correlations of absenteeism across subject areas were high, we created a composite of fourth, and then, fifth grade absences.

Analysis Plan

All analyses were estimated within Stata ( StataCorp, 2009 ). These models included robust standard errors to safeguard against violations of normality and missing data were accounted for with 50 imputed datasets using chained equations. All models were also weighted to be nationally representative and error term were clustered at the school level. To minimize the possibility of spurious associations, all models controlled for a large number of child and family covariates. These indicators capture children’s characteristics (i.e., gender, race/ethnicity, English language learner status, and an indicator for whether a parent rated the child as having poor health), children’s educational experiences (i.e., enrollment in full-day kindergarten, school type, and the number of hours that the child spent in center-based prekindergarten and before/after school care during the kindergarten year), household characteristics (i.e., household structure, number of siblings, poverty status, parent education, parent employment, number of books in the home, home learning activities), and school-going practices and routines (i.e., whether the child took a school bus to school, how far the child lived from school, in miles, number of breakfasts and dinners that the family regularly had together at home). In addition, all models (except for models predicting absenteeism) adjusted for lagged dependent variables from kindergarten entry. Given the large number of outcomes, we also make a p -value adjustment for multiple comparisons using the Benjamini adjustment (Benjamini & Hochberg, 1995).

With the above analytic framework in mind, we employed several different methodological specifications to determine whether students demonstrated different outcomes based on school uniform policies. Our first model was based within an OLS regression framework. Importantly, the above is after taking into account a student’s own school entry skills and the control measures. Thus, our first set of analyses considered whether, conditional on covariates, students in schools with uniforms demonstrated greater improvements in outcomes between kindergarten and fifth grade as compared with students who attend schools without uniforms. Notwithstanding the rich control measures included in this study, it is important to note that schools with uniform policies may differ in other observed and unobserved ways, which would make it difficult to isolate the outcomes of school uniform policies from the effects of other factors. To limit this possibility, we estimated three additional models.

Our second specification addressed the possibility of variation at the state-level that may influence the associations between school uniform policies and student outcomes. We did so by implementing state-fixed effects for the full sample of children. Consequently, our state-fixed effects models hold constant all state-wide factors that were the same for students in schools with and without school uniform policies in the same state. Although state-fixed effects account for state-to-state variation, there may be variation at a more granular level in the implementation of school uniforms. Therefore, our third specification was based within a county fixed effects framework, which may be particularly important in a study of school uniform policies, as decisions about school uniforms can stem from county factors. Therefore, county fixed effects help to control for county-to-county variation that exists in school uniform policies and student outcomes. As before, both the state- and county-fixed effects models adjusted for lagged dependent variables and the full set of covariates discussed above.

Even though state- and county fixed effects account for observed and unobserved differences at key levels, and thus, increase confidence in the reported associations, there may be concerns about the overlap between schools with and without uniform policies. Accordingly, our fourth and final specification was based within a propensity score matching framework ( Rosenbaum & Rubin, 1983 ). Although propensity scores do not change the causal identification strategy, this methodology does consider whether there is overlap in the unmatched sample and the functional form assumptions that are driving our findings. For our matching models, we used the nearest neighbor method (with up to four matches) with a caliper of .05, allowing a sufficient overlap between students in schools with and without school uniforms. Given this specification, we successfully matched approximately 65% of students (the number of matches varied across the 50 imputed datasets). Importantly, before matching, the average standardized mean difference between conditions was approximately 18% of a standard deviation, but after matching, the average standardized mean difference was roughly 3% of a standard deviation (see Table 1 ). Moreover, none of the covariates were significantly different across conditions after matching, suggesting that balance was successfully achieved (descriptives available from authors). Accordingly, regression models were re-estimated within these matched samples and included all covariates when predicting outcomes (doubly robust estimation; Funk et al., 2011 ).

Once the main effects of school uniforms were examined in these various ways, we then examined potential variation in the benefits of school uniforms as a function of child and school characteristics. Specifically, we examined variation in associations as a function of child socioeconomic status and initial skills, and as a function of the type of school children attended. It is important to note that, given the small number of private schools of different types, we collapsed our school type indicator into public versus private for our moderation analyses. To estimate heterogeneity in associations, we estimated a new set of regression models that included interaction terms between the focal indicator for school uniforms and the moderators of interest. Our focal moderation analyses were estimated with the full set of covariates.

We begin with a descriptive presentation of the types of schools that had school uniform policies along with the students who attended those schools. We then present our main effect analyses before we turn to a discussion of heterogeneity in outcomes and close with set of supplemental analyses. With that said, and as can be seen in Table 1 , roughly 28% of students across the U.S. attended schools that required a uniform. When looking across different types of schools, we find that 78% of Catholic schools that students attended had a uniform requirement as compared with only 54% of other religious schools and 43% of other private schools. And, among public school students, only 21% attended schools with a uniform policy. In terms of the student body, we find that schools with uniforms served a larger number of Black (20%) and Hispanic (40%) children and English Language Learners (27%) than schools without school uniforms (8–18%). In contrast, White children were more likely to be served in schools without uniforms (64% vs. 31%), whereas schools with uniform policies served a larger share of children from low-income families (52%) than schools without uniform policies (41%). Other descriptives stratified by schools with and without uniform policies are presented in Table 1 .

Students’ Behavior and School Uniforms

Having established the descriptive snapshot of the schools with school uniform policies along with the student body, we next examined whether students demonstrated different outcomes based on school uniform policies. Two overall patterns are evident in Table 3 with regard to the associations between school uniforms and children’s social skills, behavioral problems, and school absences. First, the associations between school uniforms and students’ outcomes were almost entirely null and the effect sizes across outcomes and grade levels were roughly 3% of a standard deviation. In fact, of the 24 associations estimated within our baseline model with an assortment of covariates, only one emerged as statistically significant and none were statistically significant with a Benjamini adjustment, leaving us with little confidence of a statistically-significant link between school uniforms and students’ outcomes. Second, the magnitude of the estimated associations derived from our baseline OLS model did not change substantially when we estimated models with state- and county fixed effects, nor when we implemented propensity scores (see Table 3 ). Taken together, there seems to be no meaningful differences in students’ social-behavioral and attendance outcomes between kindergarten and fifth grade as a function of school uniforms.

Results from models examining the outcomes of school uniforms between kindergarten and fifth grade.

Note. Coefficients in bold were statistically significant at p < .05 with a Benjamini false discovery adjustment. All estimates are weighted and account for the complex sampling design. Models include a full set of controls. All continuous predictors and outcomes have been standardized to have a mean of 0 and standard deviation of 1 and, thus, coefficients can be interpreted as effect sizes. Estimates in brackets correspond to standard errors.

Heterogeneity in Student Outcomes

Having established the average associations between school uniforms and student outcomes, our next set of analyses examined heterogeneity in these associations as a function of children’s school entry skills, socioeconomic status, and the type of school students attended. In the main, there was no consistant evidence of variation in outcomes as a function of school type nor students’ baseline skills. There was, however, some indication that the links between school uniforms and absenteeism varied as a function of socio-economic status. More specifically, the attendance benefits of school uniforms were approximately 20% of a standard deviation larger for low-income students as compared with more affluent students. Accordingly, even though school uniforms had no links to attendance for higher-income students, in first ( p <.01), fourth ( p < .05), and fifth ( p < .05) grade, low-income students who attended schools with uniforms demonstrated fewer absences than those in schools without uniforms. And although not statistically significant, similar patterns emerged in second and third grade (ES = .10–.13)

Supplemental Analyses of Students’ Experiences in School

In addition to the kindergarten through fifth grade outcomes reported as part of our focal analyses, students also reported on their school belonging (14 items, α = .90; e.g., closeness with teachers and classmates), experiences of bullying (4 items, α = .81; e.g., teasing, name calling), and social anxiety (3 items, α = .88; worrying about what others think) in fifth grade, which are aspects of the school experience that have been at the center of school uniform debates (e.g., Gentile & Imberman, 2011; Han, 2010 ; Howe, 1996 ; Huss, 2007 ; Kaiser, 1985 ; Pate, 2006 ; Sanchez et al., 2012 ). Although all students reported on these additional items, these surveys were not administered to students in the earlier grades. But to highlight the other potential outcomes of school uniform mandates, we estimate supplemental models that consider the links between school uniforms and these self-reported outcomes, net of the covariates outlined above. But because these variables were not collected in kindergarten entry, these models did not include lagged controls.

As can be seen in Table 4 , results from our covariate adjusted models revealed that students in schools with uniform policies reported no differences in their social anxiety, and experiences with victimization, but they did report lower levels of school belonging (ES = 16% of a standard deviation, p < .001) as compared with students in schools without school uniforms. These findings largely replicated when accounting for state- and county-fixed effects along with propensity scores (see Table 4 ) and remained statistically significant with a Benjamini adjustment. And, as before, there was no evidence of heterogeneity.

Results from models examining the associations between school uniforms and students’ self-reported outcomes in fifth grade

School uniform policies have grown in the thirty years since their introduction in the United States, both in the public and private education sectors ( U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2013 ). This growth has fostered debate among pro- and anti-uniform advocates ( Boutelle, 2008 ; Brown, 1998 ; Brunsma, 2006 ; DeMitchell, 2006 ; Kaiser, 1985 ; Pate, 2006 ; Portner, 1996 ; Ryan & Ryan, 1998 ; Zernike, 2002 ). To date, however, these debates have been grounded in both limited and dated empirical evidence, especially in the formative elementary school years ( Bodine, 2003 ; Brunsma, 2004 , 2006 ; Draa, 2005 ; Gentile & Imberman, 2011; Han, 2010 ; Kohn, 1998 ; Murray, 1997 ; Pate, 1999 ; Yeung, 2009 ).

With that said, Social Learning Theory posits that individuals rely on a combination of cognitive, behavioral, and environmental factors to learn how to act in a given situation. This process, known as reciprocal determinism, has been raised by policymakers and adminstrators to suggest that school uniform policies have downstream effects on students because it influences the environment of school children and alters the complex reciprocal determinism equation (Grusec, 1994). Accordingly, the present study sought to add to this literature on the going to school in the context of school uniforms in elementary schools by bringing a longitudinal and national perspective to school uniforms and aspects of students’ development that are relatively understudied, but that are known to drive long-term educational and life success ( Heckman & Rubinstein, 2001 ; Heckman et al., 2006 ). In doing so, several key themes emerged.

First, the results of the present investigation illustrate consistent and largely null findings at the aggregate level as a function of school uniform policies. That is, students who attended schools with and without school uniform mandates, on average, demonstrated similar social skills, externalizing and internalizing problems, and school attendance patterns between kindergarten and fifth grade after adjusting for children’s characteristics and their educational experiences, household characteristics, and school-going practices and routines. Effect size were close to zero, suggesting no meaningful differences as a function of school uniform policies. Importantly, this pattern of largely null findings remained consistent even with the inclusion of state and county fixed effects that accounted for geographic variation as well as when propensity score matching was used. But when looking at students’ own self-reports of their engagement and well-being in fifth grade, we found that students in schools with uniforms reported lower levels of school belonging than students in schools that did not require uniforms.

When taken together, these null—and in some cases negative—findings are both similar to prior studies that have documented null or negative associations ( Brunsma & Rockquemore, 1998 ; Gentile & Imberman, 2011; Han, 2010 ), but stand in contrast with other studies that show benefits of school uniforms for children’s socio-emotional development ( Huss, 2007 ; Wade & Stafford, 2003 ; Sanchez et al., 2012 ; Tucker, 1999 ). Although we can only speculate why these differences emerge between the current investigation and some of the extant literature, one must consider the fact that many of the prior studies done on school uniforms have been restricted to specific school districts (e.g., Draa, 2005 ; Gentile & Imberman, 2011; Hoffler-Riddick & Lassiter, 1996 ), whereas the current study presents a national perspective. But with regards to the Social Learning Theory perspective, there is no evidence to suggest school uniforms changed the environment of school children, at least with respect to their social behavior.

One might also wonder why there were largely null associations for broader indicators of social behavior (as reported on by teachers) as compared with negative associations for students’ own self-reports. Of most relevance is the fact that these benchmarks were different: Teachers reported on broader indicators of students’ social and behavioral adjustment, whereas students reported on more specific outcomes related to their school experiences. Thus, including indicators from both the teacher and student perspective presents a more well-rounded and balanced portrait of the outcomes of school uniform policies. But with respect to the lower levels of school belonging in schools with uniforms, one possibility worth considering is that students’ fashion choices are likely to be only one potential source of belonging. Accordingly, what these results make clear is that the argument that school uniforms create cohesion among students and give students a sense of identity is not true, at least in this study sample ( Brown, 1998 ; Kaiser, 1985 ; Pate, 2006 ; Ryan & Ryan, 1998 ; U.S. Department of Education, 1996 ).

The second key theme that emerged from the present investigation was that the magnitude of associations between elementary schools with (versus without) a school uniform mandate and students’ social and behavioral problems did not consistently vary as a function of children’s socio-economic status nor their school entry skills. That is, school uniforms did not address issues of economic and educational equality that have been at the center of much of the pro-uniform debates and the very reason many school officials and school systems require students to wear uniforms ( DeMitchell, 2006 ). Just as importantly, even with the large differences in the rates of school uniform mandates between public and private schools ( National Center for Educational Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics, 2013 ), we documented no differences in the outcomes of school uniform policies and student outcomes across different school sectors. Put another way, the associations between school uniforms and students’ socio-emotional, behavioral, and engagement outcomes were comparable (and in most instances close to zero) in both public and private schools. Taken together, what the results suggest is that the outcomes of school uniforms are far more similar than different for students of different backgrounds and for students enrolled in different types of schools across the United States.

With that said, one of the only consistent patterns that did emerge (and the third and final key theme) was that low-income children demonstrated fewer absences between first and fifth grade in schools with uniforms as compared with low-income children in schools without uniforms. The above is noteworthy given that absenteeism is at its highest point in the early elementary school years ( Ansari & Pianta, 2019 ) and there is long-standing evidence to suggest that low-income children are doubly at risk: They are more likely to be absent from school (Morrissey et al., 2013) and they are more likely to experience reduced learning due to absences as compared with their more advantaged peers ( Gershenson et al., 2017 ). Given the above, there has been longstanding interest in identifying in which contexts school absences are lowest, particularly for groups of vulnerable children (e.g., Rogers & Feller, 2018 ; Robinson et al., 2018 ). Accordingly, what the results of the present study suggest, is that school uniforms may be one context in which low-income students have fewer instances of absences; with that said, the mechanism for reduced absenteeism was not feelings of school belonging.

Despite these contributions to the extant literature, the results of the present investigation should be interpreted in light of some limitations. First and foremost, students were not randomly assigned to attend schools with and without uniforms. Consequently, our findings should be interpreted with caution as there might be unobservable confounds. With that said, a correlation is necessary for a causal effect and what our findings underscore is that there is no correlational support, on average, for school uniform policies; and in a few instances, the associations that did emerge between school uniform policies and student outcomes were in the opposite direction (i.e., negative). Second, although the present study presents a national snapshot of the outcomes of school uniforms between kindergarten and fifth grade, what is missing is an examination of longer-term outcomes in secondary school and beyond. In other words, our study cannot determine the potential associations for student outcomes of interest for middle or high school students. Additional research is needed to better understand the associations between school uniform policies and student outcomes in the older grades and. Third, because administrators in the ECLS-K were not asked about school uniforms on a yearly basis, the present study could not consider within school changes in uniform policies. Likewise, very few students changed between schools with and without uniforms and, consequently, we also could not examine within child change (i.e., child fixed effects models). For the above reasons, we limited or sample to students who remained in the same school between kindergarten and fifth grade to reduce any bias that may stem from school mobility or other unknown confounds. The above is of note because it limits the generalizability of our findings. Finally, our study relied largely on teacher reports of children’s socio-emotional skills because information from other sources was not consistently available across the elementary grades. The above is of note because our benchmarks for children’s socio-emotional development are based on teachers’ perceptions and may be biased. With that said, it is important to keep in mind that: (a) there are few, if any, large-scale and nationally representative studies that have more objective measures of socio-emotional development and (b) as part of our supplemental analyses, we also examined students’ own reports of their ties to their schools.

With these limitations and future directions in mind, the results of the present investigation bring a contemporary and national perspective to the ongoing debates surrounding school uniforms. In the main, despite the argument that school uniforms have the potential to improve students’ social-behavioral and engagement outcomes ( Daugherty, 2002 ; Kaiser, 1985 ; Stanley, 1996 ; Zernike, 2002 ), and shifting the process of reciprocal determinism (Grusec, 1994), the findings from the present study suggest otherwise: There is no conclusive evidence to suggest that students in schools with uniform mandates demonstrated stronger social-behavioral and engagement outcomes than students in schools without such mandates, and there was little evidence of heterogeneity. In fact, when examining students’ own reports of their school experiences, those in schools that required uniforms demonstrated higher levels of victimization and lower-levels of school belonging. If replicated with different samples and methods in the future, what these results suggest is that school uniforms may not be the most effective way to improve students’ social, behavioral, and engagement outcomes.

Research Highlights

• We examine elementary-aged students’ social-behavioral and engagement outcomes as a function of school uniform policies.
• Students in schools that required school uniforms did not demonstrate better social behavior or school attendance than students in schools without school uniforms.
• Associations were true across both public and private schools, but low-income students in schools with school uniforms demonstrated better school attendance.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the support of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R03 HD098420-02). Opinions reflect those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the granting agency.

Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

• Ansari A, & Pianta RC (2019). School absenteeism in the first decade of education and outcomes in adolescence . Journal of School Psychology , 76 , 48–61. 10.1016/j.jsp.2019.07.010. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bodine A (2003). School uniforms, academic achievement, and uses of research . The Journal of Educational Research , 97 , 67–71. [ Google Scholar ]
• Boutelle M (2008). Uniforms: Are they a good fit? The Education Digest , 73 , 34–37. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brown TJ (1998). Legal issues and the trend towards school uniforms.Eric Digets Ed 447 588 . Retrieved from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED447588.pdf
• Brunsma DL (2004). The school uniform movement and what it tells us about American education . Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Education. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brunsma DL (2006). School uniform policies in public schools . Principal , 85 , 50–53. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brunsma DL, & Rockquemore KA (1998). Effects of student uniforms on attendance, behavior problems, substance use, and academic achievement . The Journal of Educational Research , 92 , 53–62. [ Google Scholar ]
• DeMitchell TA (2006). School uniforms: There is no free lunch . Teachers College Record . Retrieved from: http://www.tcrecord.org/Content.asp?ContentID=12891
• Daugherty RF (2002). Leadership in action: Piloting a school uniform program . Education , 123 , 390–393. [ Google Scholar ]
• Draa VAB (2005). School uniforms in urban public high schools.(Doctoral dissertation) . Retrieved from ERIC Document Reproduction Service. (No. ED497409)
• Funk MJ, Westreich D, Wiesen C, Stürmer T, Brookhart MA, & Davidian M (2011). Doubly robust estimation of causal effects . American Journal of Epidemiology , 173 , 761–767. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gentile E, & Imberman SA (2012). Dressed for success? The effect of school uniforms on student achievement and behavior . Journal of Urban Economics , 7 , 1–17. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gershenson S, Jacknowitz A, & Brannegan A (2017). Are student absences worth the worry in U.S. primary schools? Education Finance and Policy , 12 , 137–165. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gresham FM, & Elliott SN (1990). The social skills rating system . Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service. [ Google Scholar ]
• Han S (2010). A mandatory uniform policy in urban schools: Findings from the school survey on crime and safety: 2003–04 . International Journal of Education Policy and Leadership , 5 , 1–13. [ Google Scholar ]
• Heckman JJ, & Rubinstein Y (2001). The importance of noncognitive skills: Lessons from the GED testing program . American Economic Review , 91 , 145–149. [ Google Scholar ]
• Heckman JJ, Stixrud J, & Urzua S (2006). The effects of cognitive and noncognitive abilities on labor market outcomes and social behavior . Journal of Labor Economics , 24 ( 3 ), 411–482. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hoffler-Riddick PY, & Lassiter KJ (1996). No more “Sag Baggin’“: School uniforms bring the focus back to instruction . Schools in the Middle , 5 , 27–28. [ Google Scholar ]
• Holloman LO, LaPoint V, Alleyne SI, Palmer RJ, & Sanders-Phillips K (1996). Dress-related behavioral problems and violence in the public school setting: Prevention, intervention, and policy: A holistic approach . Journal of Negro Education , 65 , 267–281. [ Google Scholar ]
• Howe H (1996). School uniforms: Leaning toward the Spartans and away from the Athenians . Education Week , 15 , 36. [ Google Scholar ]
• Huss JA (2007). The role of school uniforms in creating an academically motivating climate: Do uniforms influence teacher expectations? Journal of Ethnographic & Qualitative Research , 1 , 31–39. [ Google Scholar ]
• Imberman SA (2011). Achievement and behavior in charter schools: Drawing a more complete picture . The Review of Economics and Statistics , 93 , 416–435. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jacob BA (2002). Where the boys aren’t: Non-cognitive skills, returns to school and the gender gap in higher education . Economics of Education Review , 21 , 589–598. [ Google Scholar ]
• Joseph N, & Houston G (1986). Uniforms and Nonuniforms: Communication through Clothing . New York: Greenwood. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kaiser SB (1985). Social Psychology of Clothing and Personal Adornment . New York: Macmillan. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kohn A (1998). What to look for in a classroom . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mitchell A (1996). Clinton will advise schools on uniforms . New York Times , 24 . [ Google Scholar ]
• Morrissey TW, Hutchison L, & Winsler A (2014). Family income, school attendance, and academic achievement in elementary school . Developmental Psychology , 50 ( 3 ), 741–753. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Murray RK (1997). The impact of school uniforms on school climate . Nassp Bulletin , 81 , 106–112. [ Google Scholar ]
• National Center for Educational Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics, 2013. (2013). Retrieved June 29, 2020, from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_233.50.asp
• Pate SS (1999). The influence of a mandatory school uniform policy . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Career and Technical Education, Orlando, FL. Retrieved from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED458695.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• Pate SS (2006). The Influence of a Mandatory School Uniform Policy in a Rural and an Urban School District. In Brunsma DL (Ed.). Uniforms in Public Schools: A Decade of Research and Debate , 3–11. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education. [ Google Scholar ]
• Peters KC (1996). Can uniforms improve school climate? Thrust for Educational Leadership , 25 , 36–37. [ Google Scholar ]
• Portner J (1996). Uniforms get credit for decrease in discipline problems . Education Week .
• Posner M (1996). Perception versus reality: School uniforms and the “Halo Effect” . The Harvard Education Letter , 12 , 1. [ Google Scholar ]
• Robers S, Zhang J, & Truman J (2012). Indicators of school crime and safety: 2011. NCES 2012–002/NCJ 236021 . National Center for Education Statistics .
• Robinson CD, Lee MG, Dearing E, & Rogers T (2018). Reducing student absenteeism in the early grades by targeting parental beliefs . American Educational Research Journal , 55 , 1163–1192. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rogers T, & Feller A (2018). Reducing student absences at scale by targeting parents’ misbeliefs . Nature Human Behaviour , 2 , 335–342. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rosenbaum PR, & Rubin DB (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects . Biometrika , 70 , 41–55. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ryan RP, & Ryan TE (1998). School uniforms: Esprit de corps . School Community Journal , 8 , 81–84. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sanchez JE, Yoxsimer A, & Hill GC (2012). Uniforms in the middle school: Student opinions, discipline data, and school police data . Journal of School Violence , 11 , 345–356. [ Google Scholar ]
• Segal C (2008). Classroom behavior . Journal of Human Resources , 43 ( 4 ), 783–814. [ Google Scholar ]
• Stanley MS (1996). School uniforms and safety . Education and Urban Society , 28 , 424–435. [ Google Scholar ]
• StataCorp. (2009). Stata User’s Guide, Release 11 .College Station, TX: Stata Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Stevenson Z Jr, & Chunn EW (1991). Uniform policy/dress codes: School staff and parent perceptions of need and impact . Washington, DC: District of Columbia Public Schools. (ERIC Document Reporduction Servuce No. ED 331 933). [ Google Scholar ]
• Tourangeau K, Nord C, Lê T, Sorongon AG, Hagedorn MC, Daly P, & Najarian M (2015). Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 2010–11 (ECLS-K: 2011). User’s Manual for the ECLS-K: 2011 Kindergarten Data File and Electronic Codebook, Public Version. NCES 2015–074 . National Center for Education Statistics .
• Tucker WH (1999). How student uniforms impact teacher perceptions of climate in urban public middle schools .
• U.S. Department of Education. (1996). Manual on School Uniforms . Washington, D.C.: Office of Elementary and Secondary Education. [ Google Scholar ]
• U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2019). Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2018 (NCES 2019–047), Indicator 19 .
• Wade KK, & Stafford ME (2003). Public school uniforms: Effect on perceptions of gang presence, school climate, and student self-perceptions . Education and Urban Society , 35 , 399–420. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yeung R (2009). Are school uniforms a good fit? Results from the ECLS-K and the NELS . Educational Policy , 23 , 847–874. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zernike K (2002). With student cheating on the rise, more colleges are turning to honor codes . New York Times , 2 . [ Google Scholar ]

Dressed for Success? The Effect of School Uniforms on Student Achievement and Behavior

Uniform use in public schools is rising, but we know little about how they affect students. Using a unique dataset from a large urban school district in the southwest United States, we assess how uniforms affect behavior, achievement and other outcomes. Each school in the district determines adoption independently, providing variation over schools and time. By including student and school fixed-effects we find evidence that uniform adoption improves attendance in secondary grades, while in elementary schools they generate large increases in teacher retention.

We gratefully acknowledge funding and support from the American Education Finance Association New Scholars Award. We also thank Aimee Chin, Steven Craig, Julie Berry Cullen, Chinhui Juhn, Melinda Sandler Morrill, Stuart Rosenthal, two anonymous referees and seminar and conference participants at the Institute for Research on Poverty Summer Research Workshop, University of California - San Diego, University of Texas at Dallas, University of Houston Center for Public Policy, Texas Camp Econometrics, as well as the American Education Finance Association and Southern Economic Association annual meetings. Finally, we thank Mykhailo Sitiuk for excellent research assistance. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research.

MARC RIS BibTeΧ

Download Citation Data

• data appendix

Published Versions

More from nber.

In addition to working papers , the NBER disseminates affiliates’ latest findings through a range of free periodicals — the NBER Reporter , the NBER Digest , the Bulletin on Retirement and Disability , the Bulletin on Health , and the Bulletin on Entrepreneurship  — as well as online conference reports , video lectures , and interviews .

Do uniforms make schools better?

by: Marian Wilde | Updated: March 1, 2024

Print article

Schools, parents, and students frequently clash over the issue of regulating what students may and may not wear to school. These controversies often pegged to the culture war of the moment touch on everything from gender and sexuality to politics, race, and religion. In 2021, a group of about 50 students in Georgia protested their middle school’s dress code for being discriminatory against BIPOC girls by wearing t-shirts every Friday emblazoned with the words “sexist,” “racist,” and “classist.” In 2022, a fight between students, staff, and police officers broke out at a Pennsylvania high school when hats and hoodies were banned as part of a revision by the school board to the school’s dress code. And in 2023, two Michigan middle schoolers, via their mother, sued their school district after they were banned from wearing “Let’s Go Brandon” sweatshirts.

Are school uniforms the best solution to this contentious debate? If every student is wearing the same outfit, will a host of campus problems be solved? Researchers are divided over how much of an impact — if any — dress policies have on student learning. There are multiple studies with conflicting conclusions, plus books such as 2018’s The Debate About School Uniforms , but the argument wears on, with a list of pros and cons on each side.

Why do some public schools have uniforms?

In the 1980s, public schools were often compared unfavorably to Catholic schools. Noting the perceived benefit that uniforms conferred upon Catholic schools, some public schools decided to adopt a school uniform policy.

President Clinton provided momentum to the school uniform movement when he said in his 1996 State of the Union speech, “If it means teenagers will stop killing each other over designer jackets, then our public schools should be able to require their students to wear school uniforms.”

The pros and cons of school uniforms

According to proponents, school uniforms:.

• Help prevent gangs from forming on campus

• Encourage discipline

• Help students resist peer pressure to buy trendy clothes

• Help identify intruders in the school

• Diminish economic and social barriers between students

• Increase a sense of belonging and school pride

• Improve attendance

Opponents contend that school uniforms:

• Violate a student’s right to freedom of expression

• Are simply a Band-Aid on the issue of school violence

• Make students a target for bullies from other schools

• Are a financial burden for poor families

• Are an unfair additional expense for parents who pay taxes for a free public education

• Are difficult to enforce in public schools

Uniforms vs. dress codes

Schools and districts vary widely in how closely they adhere to the concept of uniformity.

What’s a dress code?

Generally, dress codes are more relaxed than uniform policies. Sometimes, however, dress codes are quite strict with requirements that are potentially viewed as biased based on race or gender. In 2020, two Black male students in Texas, cousins with West Indian heritage, were suspended for wearing dreadlocks in supposed violation of the district’s hair and grooming policy, part of the dress code. The elder one, a senior, was told he couldn’t attend prom or graduation until his dreads were trimmed. In 2022, girls on the track team at an Albany, NY high school were sent home for wearing sports bras at practice.

Uniforms are certainly easier for administrators to enforce than dress codes, largely because the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) can be depended upon to protect a student’s “right to express themselves.” The ACLU believes dress codes are often used to, “shame girls, force students to conform to gender stereotypes… punish students who wear political and countercultural messages. Such policies can be used as cover for racial discrimination… Dress codes can also infringe on a student’s religious rights…” To successfully enforce a dress code, insists the ACLU, the school must prove the student’s attire, “is disruptive to school activities.”

The ACLU’s dress code stance is regularly supported by federal courts , like the 2023 lower court ruling in North Carolina that ended a charter school decree that girls couldn’t wear pants to school. ACLU lawyers claimed this violated Title IX because the dress code “discriminated against female students by limiting their ability to fully participate in school activities, such as using the playground.” The U.S. Supreme Court later declined to take up a case challenging the lower court’s ruling.

Check with your school to see what the dress code is, as they can be fairly specific. In Tulsa, Oklahoma, for example, the dress code prohibits :

• Symbols, mottoes, words or acronyms that convey crude, vulgar, profane, violent, death-oriented, gang-related, sexually explicit, or sexually suggestive messages.
• Symbols, mottoes, words or acronyms advertising tobacco, alcohol, or illegal drugs or drug paraphernalia.
• Symbols, mottoes, words or acronyms identifying a student as a member of a secret or overtly antisocial group or gang or that identifies a student as a member of an organization that professes violence or hatred toward one’s fellow man.
• Visible and permanent tattoos/brands incompatible with the standards set forth herein shall be covered to prohibit their display.
• Excessively large or baggy clothes

What’s a uniform?

School uniforms worldwide can widely range from nondescript to bizarre. (Extreme examples from China, Australia, and the UK on this YouTube video ) Most public school outfits in the USA are quite casual, with a “ common type ” for boys often a polo shirt in a solid color, with pants in khaki, black, or navy blue. A girl’s uniform is often a skirt and a white buttoned-up shirt. Dress shoes are frequently required for both genders.

In the United States, low-income families spend an average of $249 on a child’s school uniform annually, far less than the typical Australian student’s $578. But still, the cost is sometimes viewed as unfair because public education is intended to be free, paid by tax dollars, not “a stress for families on lower incomes.” The ACLU believes that public schools should provide free school uniforms , because the expense is unconstitutional, and it increases wealth inequity.

What research says about school uniforms

In 2006, Virginia Draa, professor at Youngstown State University, reviewed the impact of school uniforms at 64 public high schools that had larger percentages of economically disadvantaged and minority students than other urban schools. Her conclusion surprised her: “I really went into this thinking uniforms don’t make a difference, but I came away seeing that they do… I was absolutely floored.” Her analysis determined that the schools with uniforms improved their students attendance, and graduation rates rose an average almost 11 percent.

In 2022, Ohio State University and University of Pennsylvania researchers reached a contrary opinion in their report titled “ School Uniforms and Students Behavior: Is There a Link? ” Their view was that, in general, evidence that school uniforms improve social skills in the students was “inconclusive.” The solitary praise they provided to uniform-wearing was noting there was “some indication that low-income students in schools that required uniforms demonstrated better school attendance than low-income students in schools that did not.”

What to believe? Jury is still out.

What do students think about uniforms?

A student discussion: pros and cons of uniforms

Editor’s note: This video is part of our high school milestones series about communication skills. The students in this video discuss the pros and cons of school uniforms.

A University of Nevada, Reno, survey of 1,848 middle school students, published in 2022, revealed that 90 percent did not like wearing a uniform to school . Only 30 percent believed the uniforms “might reduce discipline issues, a mere 17 percent thought the uniform helped them focus at school, 34 percent believed their school was safer due to the uniforms and 37 percent said, “I worry less about my appearance” due to the uniform requirement.”

An earlier study, also in Nevada, displayed similar unpopularity with newly instituted uniforms among middle school students. However, when the researchers looked into school discipline and local police records and compared them to the prior year’s data, discipline referrals were down 10 percent, there were 63 percent fewer police log reports, and incidences of graffiti, fights, and gang-related activity were all down.

It’s a big issue

A new trend is the mounting pressure to establish dress codes for teachers. Apparently, the same casual mindset toward revealing outfits is cropping up in the ranks of our teachers.

The debate over uniforms in public schools encompasses many larger issues than simply what children should wear to school. It touches on issues of school improvement, freedom of expression, and hot-button culture wars. It’s no wonder the debate rages on.

Homes Nearby

Homes for rent and sale near schools

Why your neighborhood school closes for good – and what to do when it does

5 things for Black families to consider when choosing a school

6 surprising things insiders look for when assessing a high school

Surprising things about high school

Yes! Sign me up for updates relevant to my child's grade.

Please enter a valid email address

Thank you for signing up!

Server Issue: Please try again later. Sorry for the inconvenience

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

The effectiveness of school uniforms on students' academic achievement and overall classroom behavior

RELATED PAPERS

Julius Montes

Amra Sabic-El-Rayess

Cynthia Istook

IASET US , simple jain

jingkai xie

Shem Mwalw'a

simple jain

Journal of Consumer Studies and Home Economics

Final Year Project

Mujeeb O L A N R E W A J U Akinwale

Online Submission

World Bank, mimeo

Mercy Ngatia

Bulgarian Comparative Education Society

Vimbi Mahlangu

European Journal of Education Studies

Anthony Amonjenu

European Journal of Oral Sciences

Elias Ponce

Scottish Educational Review

Rachel Shanks

University of Aberdeen

Robbayani Shoghiro

Dr Venudhar Routiya

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Articles on School uniform

Displaying all articles.

School uniforms are meant to foster a sense of belonging and raise achievement – but it’s not clear that they do

Rachel Shanks , University of Aberdeen

Once a form of ‘social camouflage’, school uniforms have become impractical and unfair. Why it’s time for a makeover

Johanna Reidy , University of Otago

A religious symbol, not a knife: at the heart of the NSW kirpan ban is a battle to define secularism

Renae Barker , The University of Western Australia

Afro hair: How pupils are tackling discriminatory uniform policies

Remi Joseph-Salisbury , University of Manchester

Social media has made school children more fashion conscious than ever – and parents are footing the bill

Emily Moorlock , Sheffield Hallam University

School uniforms: what Australian schools can do to promote acceptance of gender diversity

Victoria Rawlings , University of Sydney and Debra Hayes , University of Sydney

School uniform policies need to accommodate students’ cultural practices

Why do schools want all students to look the same?

Amanda Mergler , Queensland University of Technology

Why do we still make girls wear skirts and dresses as school uniform?

Does wearing a school uniform improve student behavior?

Todd A. DeMitchell , University of New Hampshire

Hidden costs of state education are stigmatising poorer pupils

Pat Thomson , University of Nottingham

Related Topics

• Discrimination
• Free speech
• School uniforms

Top contributors

Senior Lecturer, School of Early Childhood and Inclusive Education, Queensland University of Technology

Senior Lecturer, The University of Western Australia

Senior Lecturer, University of Sydney School of Education and Social Work, University of Sydney

Professor Emeritus of Education Law & Labor, University of New Hampshire

Professor of Education and Equity, University of Sydney

Senior Lecturer in Marketing, Sheffield Hallam University

Presidential Fellow in Ethnicity and Inequalities, University of Manchester

Lecturer, Department of Public Health, University of Otago

Senior Lecturer in Education, University of Aberdeen

Professor of Education, University of Nottingham

• X (Twitter)
• Unfollow topic Follow topic

Should Students Have to Wear School Uniforms?

• History of School Uniforms

Traditionally favored by private and parochial institutions , school uniforms are being adopted by US public schools in increasing numbers. According to a 2020 report, the percentage of public schools that required school uniforms jumped from 12% in the 1999-2000 school year to 20% in the 2017-18 school year. School uniforms were most frequently required by elementary schools (23%), followed by middle (18%), and high schools (10%).

The first recorded use of standardized dress in education may have been in England in 1222, when the Archbishop of Canterbury mandated that students wear a robe-like outfit called the “ cappa clausa .” The origin of the modern school uniform can be traced to 16th Century England, when the impoverished “charity children” attending the Christ’s Hospital boarding school wore blue cloaks reminiscent of the cassocks worn by clergy, along with yellow stockings. As of Sep. 2014, students at Christ’s Hospital were still wearing the same uniform, and according to the school it is the oldest school uniform still in use. When Christ’s Hospital surveyed its students in 2011, 95% voted to keep the traditional uniforms. Read more history…

Pro & Con Arguments

Pro 1 School uniforms deter crime and increase student safety. In Long Beach, California, after two years of a district-wide K-8 mandatory uniform policy, reports of assault and battery in the district’s schools decreased by 34%, assault with a deadly weapon dropped by 50%, fighting incidents went down by 51%, sex offenses were cut by 74%, robbery dropped by 65%, possession of weapons (or weapon “look-alikes”) decreased by 52%, possession of drugs went down by 69%, and vandalism was lowered by 18%. [ 64 ] One year after Sparks Middle School in Nevada instituted a uniform policy, school police data showed a 63% drop in police log reports, and decreases were also noted in gang activity, student fights, graffiti, property damage, and battery. A peer-reviewed study found that schools with uniform policies had 12% fewer firearm-related incidents and 15% fewer drug-related incidents than schools without uniforms. [ 25 ] [ 69 ] School uniforms also prevent students from concealing weapons under baggy clothing, make it easier to keep track of students on field trips, and make intruders on campus more visible. Frank Quatrone, superintendent in the Lodi school district of New Jersey, states, “When you have students dressed alike, you make them safer. If someone were to come into a building, the intruder could easily be recognized.” [ 6 ] [ 38 ] Further, school uniforms create a level playing field among students, reducing peer pressure and bullying. When all students are dressed alike, competition between students over clothing choices and the teasing of those who are dressed in less expensive or less fashionable outfits can be eliminated. Research by the Schoolwear Association found that 83% of teachers thought “a good school uniform… could prevent bullying based on appearance or economic background.” Arminta Jacobson, Founder and Director of the Center for Parent Education at the University of North Texas, states that uniforms put “all kids on the same playing field in terms of their appearance. I think it probably gives them a sense of belonging and a feeling of being socially accepted.” [ 5 ] [ 91 ] And, school uniforms prevent the display of gang colors and insignia, reducing gang activity and pressure to join on school property. The U.S. Department of Education’s Manual on School Uniforms stated that uniform policies can “prevent gang members from wearing gang colors and insignia at school” in order to “encourage a safe environment.” Educators in the Long Beach Unified School District have speculated that the sharp reduction in crime following the introduction of school uniforms was a result of gang conflicts being curbed. Osceola County, Florida School Board member Jay Wheeler reports that the county’s schools had a 46% drop in gang activity after their first full school year with a mandatory K-12 uniform policy. Wheeler explains that “clothing is integral to gang culture… Imagine a U.S. Armed Forces recruiter out of uniform trying to recruit new soldiers; the success rate goes down. The same applies to gang recruitment.” [35] [37] [67] [ 35 ] [ 37 ] [ 67 ] Read More

Pro 2 School uniforms keep students focused on their education, not their clothes. The National Association of Secondary School Principals states, “When all students are wearing the same outfit, they are less concerned about how they look and how they fit in with their peers; thus, they can concentrate on their schoolwork.” And a study by the University of Houston found that elementary school girls’ language test scores increased by about three percentile points after uniforms were introduced. [ 1 ] [ 15 ] Former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton advocates school uniforms as a way to help students focus on learning: “Take that [clothing choices] off the table and put the focus on school, not on what you’re wearing.” Chris Hammons, Principal of Woodland Middle School in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, explains that uniforms “provide for less distraction, less drama, and more of a focus on learning.” [ 30 ] [ 70 ] Wearing uniforms also enhances school pride, unity, and community spirit, which can boost interest in education. A study of over 1,000 Texas middle school students found that students in uniform “reported significantly more positive perceptions of belonging in their school community than reported by students in the standard dress group.” Christopher P. Clouet, former Superintendent of the New London Public Schools in Connecticut, stated that “the wearing of uniforms contributes to school pride.” Arnold Goldstein, PhD, head of the Center for Research on Aggression at Syracuse University, points out that uniforms help troubled students feel they have the support of a community: “There is a sense of belonging.” Further, “teachers perceived an increase in the level of respect, caring, and trust… throughout the school” and “students are made to feel ‘important’ and as if they are a part of a team by wearing a uniform,” according to a peer-reviewed study. [ 3 ] [ 20 ] [ 31 ] [ 33 ] Plus, school uniforms can improve attendance and discipline. A study by researchers at the University of Houston found that the average absence rate for girls in middle and high school decreased by 7% after the introduction of uniforms, and behavioral problems lessened in severity. School uniforms make getting ready for school easier, which can improve punctuality. When uniforms are mandatory, parents and students do not spend time choosing appropriate outfits for the school day. According to a national survey, over 90% of US school leaders believe school uniform or formal dress code policies “eliminate wardrobe battles with kids,” make it “easier to get kids ready in the morning,” and create a “time saving in the morning.” Tracey Marinelli, Superintendent of the Lyndhurst School District in New Jersey, credits the district’s uniform policy for reducing the number of students running late. Lyndhurst student Mike Morreale agrees, stating that “it’s so much easier to dress than having to search for clothes and find out that something doesn’t match.” A Youngstown State University study of secondary schools in Ohio’s eight largest school districts found that school uniform policies improve rates of attendance, graduation, and suspension. [ 1 ] [ 6 ] [ 7 ] [ 27 ] [ 32 ] During the first semester of a mandatory uniform program at John Adams Middle School in Albuquerque, NM, discipline referrals dropped from 1,565 during the first semester of the year prior to 405, a 74% decrease. Macquarie University (Australia) researchers found that in schools across the world where uniform policies are enforced, students “are more disciplined” and “listen significantly better, there are lower noise levels, and lower teaching waiting times with classes starting on time.” [ 68 ] [ 89 ] Wasted time in classrooms is reduced because uniform policies save valuable class time because they are easier to enforce than a standard dress code. Doris Jo Murphy, former Director of Field Experiences at the University of North Texas College of Education, states, “As an elementary assistant principal in two suburban districts, I can tell you that the dress code took up a great deal of my time in the area of discipline… I wished many times that we had uniforms because the issue of skirts or shorts being too short, and baggy jeans and pants on the boys not being pulled up as they needed to be, would have been a non-issue.” Lyndhurst, NJ school district superintendent Tracey Marinelli had a similar experience before a uniform policy was introduced: “Kids were spending time in the office because they were not fulfilling the dress code… That was time away from class.” [ 5 ] [ 6 ] Read More

Pro 3 Students’ legal right to free expression remains intact with mandatory school uniforms. The 1969 U.S. Supreme Court case Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, which concerned the wearing of black armbands to protest the Vietnam War, confirmed that students’ constitutional right to free speech “does not relate to regulation of the length of skirts or the type of clothing.” Wearing one’s own choice of shirt or pants is not the “pure speech” protected by the Constitution. [ 18 ] [ 28 ] In Canady v. Bossier Parish School Board (3-0, 2001), the US Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a school board’s right to implement a mandatory uniform policy, stating that requiring uniforms for the purpose of increasing test scores and improving discipline “is in no way related to the suppression of student speech. [Students] remain free to wear what they want after school hours. Students may still express their views through other mediums during the school day.” [ 18 ] [ 29 ] Besides, students can still express their individuality in school uniforms by introducing variations and adding accessories. Junior high school student Amelia Jimenez wrote in her op-ed for the Pennsylvania Patriot-News that “contrary to popular belief, uniforms do not stop students from being themselves. Uniforms do not silence voices. Students can wear a variety of expressive items, such as buttons or jewlery.” Students can inject their personal style into their daily look with hairstyles, nail polish, and colorful accessories such as bags, scarfs, and fun socks. 54% of eighth-graders said they could still express their individuality while wearing school uniforms. [ 61 ] [ 62 ] [ 65 ] Further, students dressed in uniform are better perceived by teachers and peers. A 1994 peer-reviewed study found that students in uniform were perceived by teachers and fellow students as being more academically proficient than students in regular clothes. The study also found that students in uniform were perceived by peers and teachers as having higher academic potential, and perceived by peers as being better behaved. Students need to learn a balance between free expression and working within the confines of expectations. [ 4 ] Read More

Con 1 School uniforms do not stop bullying and can actually increase violent attacks. “Overall, there is no evidence in bullying literature that supports a reduction in violence due to school uniforms, explains Tony Volk, Associate Professor at Brock University. The oft-quoted improvements to school safety and student behavior in the Long Beach (CA) Unified School District from 1993-1995 may not have resulted from the introduction of school uniforms. The study in which the findings were published cautioned that “it is not clear that these results are entirely attributable to the uniform policy” and suggests that the introduction of new school security measures made at the same time may have been partly responsible. [ 64 ] [ 85 ] Further, a peer-reviewed study found that “school uniforms increased the average number of assaults by about 14 [per year] in the most violent schools.” A Texas Southern University study found that school discipline incidents rose by about 12% after the introduction of uniforms. And, according to the Miami-Dade County Public Schools Office of Education Evaluation and Management, fights in middle schools nearly doubled within one year of introducing mandatory uniforms. [ 14 ] [ 26 ] [ 72 ] [ 73 ] Discipline problems increase in part because school uniforms emphasize the socio-economic divisions they are supposed to eliminate. Most public schools with uniform policies are in low-income neighborhoods (47% of high-poverty public schools required school uniforms vs. 6% of low poverty schools), emphasizing the class distinctions that uniforms were supposed to eliminate. Even within one school, uniforms cannot conceal the differences between the “haves” and the “have-nots.” David L. Brunsma explains that “more affluent families buy more uniforms per child. The less affluent… they have one… It’s more likely to be tattered, torn and faded. It only takes two months [after a uniform policy is implemented] for socioeconomic differences to show up again.” [ 9 ] [ 23 ] Read More

Con 2 School uniforms do not improve attendance, academic preparedness, or exam results. A study that analyzed a national sample of 10th graders found “no effects of uniforms on absenteeism, behavioral problems (fights, suspensions, etc.), or substance use on campus” and “no effects” on “pro-school attitudes, academic preparedness, and peer attitudes toward school.” [14][66] Brunsma also found a “negative effect of uniforms on academic achievement,” and later found that uniforms were equally ineffective on elementary students and eighth graders. A peer-reviewed study found “no significant effects of school uniforms on performance on second grade reading and mathematics examinations, as well as on 10th-grade reading, mathematics, science, and history examinations… [I]n many of the specifications, the results are actually negative.” [ 2 ] [ 14 ] The problems arise because focusing on uniforms takes attention away from finding genuine solutions to problems in education. Spending time and effort implementing uniform policies detracts from more effective efforts to reduce crime in schools and boost student performance. More substantive improvements to public education could be achieved with smaller class sizes, tightened security, increased parental involvement, improved facilities, and other measures. Tom Houlihan, former Superintendent of Schools in Oxford, North Carolina, stated that school uniforms “are a distraction from focusing on systematic and fundamental transformation to improve our schools.” [ 12 ] [ 14 ] [ 42 ] That uniform policies are a distraction is most evident when we realize that the push for school uniforms is driven by commercial interests rather than educational ones. Americans spend around $1 billion on school uniforms every year. Retailer J.C. Penney Co. says school uniforms are “a huge, important business for us.” In one year alone, uniform company Lands’ End spent $3 million on marketing efforts directed at public schools and districts. Multiple studies used to promote the effectiveness of uniforms were partly funded by Lands’ End, and at least one of those studies is “so wholly flawed as to render itself useless,” according to David L. Brunsma. Reuters reported that retailers were “sensing their opportunity… stepping up competition in the uniform aisles and online. Walmart has set up ‘uniform shops’ or temporary boutiques within some stores.” [ 14 ] [ 32 ] [ 43 ] [ 44 ] [ 74 ] The commercialization of school uniforms in public schools also undermines the promise of a free education by imposing an extra expense on families. Parents already pay taxes, and they still need to buy regular clothes for their children to wear when they’re out of school and for dress-down days. The Children’s Commission on Poverty (UK) found that over “95% of parents on low incomes reported difficulties in meeting school-related costs,” including uniforms, despite their children attending tuition-free schools. Anderson, Indiana, parents Laura and Scott Bell argued against their children’s school uniform policy, saying the $641 for their children’s uniforms broke the guarantee of a free public education. In York County, Pennsylvania, a local NBC affiliate reported that some children were missing class because their families couldn’t afford to purchase the required uniforms. And, all of that is before the uniform policies themselves are examined. Most operate like dress codes and are classist, racist, and sexist. [ 10 ] [ 84 ] [ 94 ] Read More

Con 3 School uniforms restrict students’ freedom of expression. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees that all individuals have the right to express themselves freely. The U.S. Supreme Court stated in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969) that “it can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” [ 8 ] [ 28 ] In Sweden, a government agency, the School Inspectorate, determined that uniforms were a human rights violation because “dress and appearance should be considered an individual expression, decided by the students themselves.” Clothing choices are “a crucial form of self-expression,” according to the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada, which also states that “allowing students to choose their clothing is an empowering message from the schools that a student is a maturing person who is entitled to the most basic self-determination.” [ 7 ] [ 39 ] Uniforms take away the ability to use clothing as means of expressing support for social causes. Students at Friendly High School in Prince George’s County, MD, were not allowed to wear pink shirts to support Breast Cancer Awareness Month and 75 students received suspensions for breaking the school’s uniform restrictions. Removing these choices can delay the transition into adulthood. Adults make their own clothing choices and have the freedom to express themselves through their appearance. Denying children and teenagers the opportunity to make those choices may make them ill-prepared for the adult world. Adolescents see clothing choices as a means of identification, and seeking an identity is one of the critical stages of adolescence, according to the late developmental psychologist Erik Erikson. [ 11 ] [ 75 ] [ 76 ] [ 79 ] [ 80 ] When students have to wear the same outfits, rather than being allowed to select clothes that suit their body types, they can suffer embarrassment at school. Child and teen development specialist Robyn Silverman says that students, especially girls, tend to compare how each other looks in their uniforms: “As a body image expert, I hear from students all the time that they feel it allows for a lot of comparison… So if you have a body that’s a plus-size body, a curvier body, a very tall body, a very short body, those girls often feel that they don’t look their best.” A study by researchers at Arizona State University found that “students from schools without uniforms reported higher self-perception scores than students from schools with uniform policies.” Some students also find uniforms less comfortable than their regular clothes, which may not be conducive to learning. [ 21 ] [ 24 ] [ 75 ] Further, school uniforms promote conformity over individuality. Chicago, Illinois, junior high school student Kyler Sumter says: “They decide to teach us about people like Rosa Parks, Susan B. Anthony and Booker T. Washington… We learn about how these people expressed themselves and conquered and we can’t even express ourselves in the hallways.” Troy Shuman, a senior in Harford County, Maryland, said the introduction of a mandatory uniform policy to his school would be “teaching conformity and squelching individual thought. Just think of prisons and gangs. The ultimate socializer to crush rebellion is conformity in appearance. If a school system starts at clothes, where does it end?” [ 9 ] [ 60 ] In schools where uniforms are specifically gendered (girls must wear skirts and boys must wear pants), transgender, gender-fluid, and gender-nonconforming students can feel ostracized. Seamus, a 16-year-old transgender boy, stated, “sitting in a blouse and skirt all day made me feel insanely anxious. I wasn’t taken seriously. This is atrocious and damaging to a young person’s mental health; that uniform nearly destroyed me.” Late satirist George Carlin asked, “Don’t these schools do enough damage, making all these children think alike? Now they’re gonna get them to look alike, too?” [ 40 ] [ 86 ] Beyond student preference, parents should be free to choose their children’s clothes without government interference. One of the founders of the Wilson County (Louisiana) Parents Coalition, Richard Dashkovitz, states: “It’s time we let the government know that we are fed up with this. Quit dictating to us what my child should wear… [T]he government is intruding into our private lives, roles as parents and the lives of our children.” According to another parents’ rights group, Asserting Parental Rights — It’s Our Duty, mandatory uniform “policies trample parents’ right to raise children without government interference.” [ 10 ] [ 16 ] Read More

Our Latest Updates (archived after 30 days)

ProCon/Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. 325 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 200 Chicago, Illinois 60654 USA

Natalie Leppard Managing Editor [email protected]

© 2023 Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. All rights reserved

• School Uniforms – Pros & Cons
• Pro & Con Quotes
• Did You Know?

Cite This Page

• Artificial Intelligence
• Private Prisons
• Space Colonization
• Social Media
• Death Penalty
• School Uniforms
• Video Games
• Animal Testing
• Gun Control
• Banned Books
• Teachers’ Corner

ProCon.org is the institutional or organization author for all ProCon.org pages. Proper citation depends on your preferred or required style manual. Below are the proper citations for this page according to four style manuals (in alphabetical order): the Modern Language Association Style Manual (MLA), the Chicago Manual of Style (Chicago), the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA), and Kate Turabian's A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses, and Dissertations (Turabian). Here are the proper bibliographic citations for this page according to four style manuals (in alphabetical order):

[Editor's Note: The APA citation style requires double spacing within entries.]

[Editor’s Note: The MLA citation style requires double spacing within entries.]

66 Uniform Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

🏆 best uniform topic ideas & essay examples, 📌 most interesting uniform topics to write about, 👍 good research topics about uniform.

• School Uniform and Maintenance of Discipline Some prefer to implement the use of school uniform citing various benefits such as improvement of discipline in schools while others see the whole issue of school uniform as a cover up of failed social […]
• Uniform Hospital Discharge Data Set The data is used in the administration of Medicaid and Medicare programs and the standardization of health care. The UHDDS allows the government and health care facilities to have comparable data that can be used […]
• Uniform Policy Should Be Abolished in Asian High Schools Opponents of the school uniform policy assert that it leads to the formation of students who are unlikely to value the ideals of freedom of expression.
• School Uniform Policies Benefits After the analysis of the works of modern researchers on the topic, it was found out that many of them believed school uniform policy implementation to be a good way to reduce crime, decrease the […]
• School Uniform Improving Discipline and Performance The first argument that is often used to support the school uniforms states that they promote the sense of community and evoke pride for the school.
• UniForm Athlete Agent Act: Is UAAA a State or Federal Law? Moreover, the UAAA expects the aspiring participant’s representative to furnish it with valuable information which will allow the student athlete and any other concerned individuals to assess the potential manager properly.
• The Cultural Life of Canadians: A Uniform Culture in Canada The striking feature of Canadian cultural matters is that it is a subject of constant debate in cities and predominantly touches on public visibility, community cohesion and social interaction as the main aspects of cultural […]
• Analysis of Uniform in Japanese Schools In addition, uniforms and the rules of school life contribute to the development of a sense of harmony and collectivism in children.
• The United States Uniform Crime Report’s Aims The Federal Bureau of Investigation provides the reporting agencies with a handbook that outlines how to classify and score offenses to achieve uniformity in crime and crime data definitions.
• Uniform Commercial Code Overview The case scenario is covered under section 2 of the UCC, which involves the sale of goods. Under section 2-204, the conduct of the agreeing parties can point to a contract.
• Agency Law and the Uniform Commercial Code They involve the principal, the third party, and the agent a person working in the name of and the best interest of the principal.
• The Uniform Commercial Code and the UN Convention on Contracts for International Sales of Goods This is the basis for both the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sales of Goods, popularly referred to as the UN Sales Convention and the Uniform Commercial Code.
• The Creation of the Uniform Law Initially, the dispute over the uniformity of laws regulating IP relations has been the result of the controversy that aroused from the different rights that the inventors or patent owners could have in various countries. […]
• The Relationship of Various Uniform Policies on Academic Achievement In a bid to develop the overall standards of schools, the school administration decided to build links with the community by allowing parents to interact with staff members and the students alike.
• The Uniform Crime Statistics Over 5 Years Based on Table 3, Table 4 has been created to show the percent change in rate per 100,000 inhabitants. Table 5 shows the estimated rates of different categories of crime in Smooth Town per 100,000 […]
• The Concept of Uniform Crime Reporting Program In Cool Town and Frown Town, the number of these crimes was rising from 2010 to 2014 but decreased in 2015. In 2015, Happy Town had the highest rates of this crime.
• Crime Data: Collection and Analysis Tools That is why, victimologists tend to use the given data source to create a clear image and highlight the most important tendencies related to the world of crime, its peculiarities, and evolution.
• Contract Types: The Uniform Commercial Code The offer must signify intention to make a contract, definite without being vague so that court can determine the actual intent of the parties in case of dispute and be communicated to the offeree.
• Uniform Carbon Pricing Implementation The difficulty that policy makers are facing is the determination of the marginal abatement cost, which theoretically ought to be placed at the marginal harm charge of a single unit of emissions; to be precise, […]
• Japanese Restaurant Interior and Staff Uniform A picture of the restaurant dining room The decorations used on the walls The main purpose of decorating the restaurant walls is to create an atmosphere that will be conducive for the customers and make […]
• Uniform Substitutes When Group Preferences are Blockwise Dependent
• Uniform Inference on Quantile Effects under Sharp Regression Discontinuity Designs
• Uniform Convergence For Nonparametric Estimators With Nonstationary Data
• Uniform Representation of Product-Limit Integrals with Applications
• Contract and Uniform Commercial Code
• Uniform Convergence Rates For Kernel Estimation With Dependent Data
• Uniform versus Non-uniform Indirect Taxation
• What Is The Time Delay Parameter Uniform
• Uniform Accounting Standards Produce Uniform Financial Analysis
• The Uniform Validity of Impulse Response Inference in Autoregressions
• Uniform Pricing or Pay-as-Bid Pricing: A Dilemma for California and Beyond
• Targeted Enforcement and Aggregate Emissions With Uniform Emission Taxes
• Uniform Code of Military Justice and United States Code
• Does Wearing School Uniform Have An Influence On Student
• Uniform Versus Discretionary Regimes in Reporting Information with Unverifiable Precision and a Coordination Role
• Uniform Pricing as an Optimal Spatial Pricing Policy
• Wearing The United States Army Uniform
• Uniform in Bandwidth Estimation of Integral Functionals of the Density Function
• Uniform Value in Recursive Games
• Uniform Inference for Characteristic Effects of Large Continuous-Time Linear Models
• Spatial Perfect Competition: A Uniform Delivered Pricing Model
• Uniform Civil Code And Indian Secularism
• Uniform Inference in Nonlinear Models with Mixed Identification Strength
• Uniform Working Hours: A Culprit of Structural Unemployment
• Uniform At Work : The Importance Of Uniforms In The Workplace
• Why We Need to Stick with Uniform-Price Auctions in Electricity Markets
• Two Characterizations of the Uniform Rule for Division Problems with Single-Peaked Preferences
• Uniform Service, Uniform Productivity? Regional Efficiency of the Imperial German Postal, Telegraph, and Telephone Service
• Wear and Appearance of the Army Uniform
• Uniform Minimum Standards in the UK Workplace
• Electronic Code And The Uniform Commercial Code
• Uniform Output Subsidies In An Economic Union With Firms Heterogeneity
• Why Do Women Representation Is Far From Uniform Across Organizations
• Uniform-price Auctions for Swiss Government Bonds: Origin and Evolution
• Valid Locally Uniform Edgeworth Expansions for a Class of Weakly Dependent Processes or Sequences of Smooth Transformations
• Underpricing and Market Power in Uniform Price Auctions
• Global Model Uses of United States Uniform Commercial Codes
• Uniform Technical Progress: Can It Be Harmful
• Why School Uniform Is Not Always The Best
• Universal Service and Entry: The Role of Uniform Pricing and Coverage Constraints
• Uniform Inference in Autoregressive Models
• Violations of Uniform Partner Ranking Condition in Two-way Flow Strict Nash Networks
• Uniform Pricing : Good or Bad News About Market Profitability
• Subculture Research Topics
• Fast Fashion Paper Topics
• Public Service Research Topics
• Firefighter Ideas
• Fitness Topics
• Adidas Topics
• Billabong Titles
• Manufacturing Essay Topics
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, January 24). 66 Uniform Essay Topic Ideas & Examples. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/uniform-essay-topics/

"66 Uniform Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." IvyPanda , 24 Jan. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/topic/uniform-essay-topics/.

IvyPanda . (2023) '66 Uniform Essay Topic Ideas & Examples'. 24 January.

IvyPanda . 2023. "66 Uniform Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." January 24, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/uniform-essay-topics/.

1. IvyPanda . "66 Uniform Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." January 24, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/uniform-essay-topics/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "66 Uniform Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." January 24, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/uniform-essay-topics/.