School clampdown on 'the wrong trousers' (From Daily Echo)

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
"The school had changed its uniform for the start of term", meaning that the parents had to replace the old ones? How much did that cost each parent? “The school has a hardship fund and have helped lots of families to buy uniform". How many people are humiliated at having to grovel for funds to but their kids their Uniform? I agree the pupils should take pride in their appearance but limitting the choice is a bit OTT, perhaps the School has shares in Uniform Manufactures or the shops that exclusively sell them?

Shoong wrote:
Congrats to Krista Dawkins. The rules are the rules and it looks like notice was given that was quite clear. As soon as you make an exception they'll al be doing it. School hopefully should be about discipline. It's not a fashion show, as much as I'm sure teenage girls would like it to be!

Irate Wintonian wrote:
Appreciate that the colour should be correct for the uniform, but to specify the cut of the trousers to that degree is a step too far.

midanburyway wrote:
i can remember when i went to school in the seventies, there is always gonna be the 'uncool' kids.....i was one of them and i dont want my daughter to be treated like i was.....i have just trudged around town looking for school trou sers for her and it is not an experience i want to repeat again soon....had a letter before the holidays about the sort of trousers they should be wearing, but to recieve a text message yesterday to remind me is over the top...glad to see my taxes that pay for the achools is put to good use sending bullying texts...and they better not send my child home using this excuse either...

IronLady2010 wrote:
This is exactly where so many problems in society come from!! Parents blatantly ignoring instructions from the school and no doubt bragging to their kids they are going to ignore the letter of instruction.

Why do we then expect certain kids to turn out as yobs later in life when the parents are telling them it's ok to ignore rules and regulations.

Makes me so angry!.

IronLady2010 wrote:
This is exactly where so many problems in society come from!! Parents blatantly ignoring instructions from the school and no doubt bragging to their kids they are going to ignore the letter of instruction.

Why do we then expect certain kids to turn out as yobs later in life when the parents are telling them it's ok to ignore rules and regulations.

Makes me so angry!.

IronLady2010 wrote:
This is exactly where so many problems in society come from!! Parents blatantly ignoring instructions from the school and no doubt bragging to their kids they are going to ignore the letter of instruction.

Why do we then expect certain kids to turn out as yobs later in life when the parents are telling them it's ok to ignore rules and regulations.

Makes me so angry!.

hays1179 wrote:
rules are rules my daughter was sent home yesterday for not wearing correct shoes and so were many other kids and that was at chamberlayne collage for the arts i think uniform sets a standard and children should wear the correct uniform especially when it is a mixed school th girls dress to impress the boys and its not right !!

BillyTheKid wrote:
Awful lot of assumptions here. How about this :

Has anyone seen the school prospectus ? Are the rules for uniform as clear as this Dawkins woman maintains ?

What do we think of people associated with "zero tolerance", "toughtalking", and "crackdown"s ? Is this the appropriate way to negotiate with parents and develop a sound foundation for home/school liason ? How are you going to have the kind of influence that a headteacher needs to be able to demonstrate if you deliberately put people's backs up ?

Look at the good schools in Southampton and Hampshire and ask yourselves this : why are they NOT having problems ? Perhaps they have heads who are confident, calm and respectful, rather than apparently bad-tempered, defiant tyrants who gain nothing more than notoriety.

Martin Caine wrote:
Strangely enough our youngest just finished school at St Aldhams Academy in Poole, were everyone had to wear exactly the same uniform, fair play to the school they paid for the uniforms not the parents but it was interesting to see that even with this regimental idea they ended up with the worst grades in the UK, I personally think a child is more comfortable in clothes of choice and thus will be more relaxed and learn more and after all is it not the child's education that is paramount ?

Martin Caine wrote:
Strangely enough our youngest just finished school at St Aldhams Academy in Poole, were everyone had to wear exactly the same uniform, fair play to the school they paid for the uniforms not the parents but it was interesting to see that even with this regimental idea they ended up with the worst grades in the UK, I personally think a child is more comfortable in clothes of choice and thus will be more relaxed and learn more and after all is it not the child's education that is paramount ?

BillyTheKid wrote:
Awful lot of assumptions here. How about this :

Has anyone seen the school prospectus ? Are the rules for uniform as clear as this Dawkins woman maintains ?

What do we think of people associated with "zero tolerance", "toughtalking", and "crackdown"s ? Is this the appropriate way to negotiate with parents and develop a sound foundation for home/school liason ? How are you going to have the kind of influence that a headteacher needs to be able to demonstrate if you deliberately put people's backs up ?

Look at the good schools in Southampton and Hampshire and ask yourselves this : why are they NOT having problems ? Perhaps they have heads who are confident, calm and respectful, rather than apparently bad-tempered, defiant tyrants who gain nothing more than notoriety.

Des Olated wrote:

BillyTheKid wrote:
Awful lot of assumptions here. How about this :

Has anyone seen the school prospectus ? Are the rules for uniform as clear as this Dawkins woman maintains ?

What do we think of people associated with "zero tolerance", "toughtalking", and "crackdown"s ? Is this the appropriate way to negotiate with parents and develop a sound foundation for home/school liason ? How are you going to have the kind of influence that a headteacher needs to be able to demonstrate if you deliberately put people's backs up ?

Look at the good schools in Southampton and Hampshire and ask yourselves this : why are they NOT having problems ? Perhaps they have heads who are confident, calm and respectful, rather than apparently bad-tempered, defiant tyrants who gain nothing more than notoriety.

How are you going to have the kind of influence that a headteacher needs to be able to demonstrate if you deliberately put people's backs up

If the parents are going to ignore the headteachers uniform policy are they really likely to support her in other ways.
Good on Ms Dawkins and shame on parents who can't be bothered to demonstrate a little respect for the rules to their children.

BillyTheKid wrote:

Des Olated wrote:

BillyTheKid wrote:
Awful lot of assumptions here. How about this :

Has anyone seen the school prospectus ? Are the rules for uniform as clear as this Dawkins woman maintains ?

What do we think of people associated with "zero tolerance", "toughtalking", and "crackdown"s ? Is this the appropriate way to negotiate with parents and develop a sound foundation for home/school liason ? How are you going to have the kind of influence that a headteacher needs to be able to demonstrate if you deliberately put people's backs up ?

Look at the good schools in Southampton and Hampshire and ask yourselves this : why are they NOT having problems ? Perhaps they have heads who are confident, calm and respectful, rather than apparently bad-tempered, defiant tyrants who gain nothing more than notoriety.

How are you going to have the kind of influence that a headteacher needs to be able to demonstrate if you deliberately put people's backs up

If the parents are going to ignore the headteachers uniform policy are they really likely to support her in other ways.
Good on Ms Dawkins and shame on parents who can't be bothered to demonstrate a little respect for the rules to their children.

"Look at the good schools in Southampton and Hampshire and ask yourselves this : why are they NOT having problems ? Perhaps they have heads who are confident, calm and respectful, rather than apparently bad-tempered, defiant tyrants who gain nothing more than notoriety."

Having spent 30 years as a teacher in the secondary sector, and having worked for some fine headteachers, I can tell you that Ms Dawkins is going about things the wrong way.

All people are doing here is rabble-rousing, fanning the flames, and in fact making things even worse for Dawkins.

Not a good day for diplomacy, I think.

Lone Ranger. wrote:

BillyTheKid wrote:

Des Olated wrote:

BillyTheKid wrote:
Awful lot of assumptions here. How about this :

Has anyone seen the school prospectus ? Are the rules for uniform as clear as this Dawkins woman maintains ?

What do we think of people associated with "zero tolerance", "toughtalking", and "crackdown"s ? Is this the appropriate way to negotiate with parents and develop a sound foundation for home/school liason ? How are you going to have the kind of influence that a headteacher needs to be able to demonstrate if you deliberately put people's backs up ?

Look at the good schools in Southampton and Hampshire and ask yourselves this : why are they NOT having problems ? Perhaps they have heads who are confident, calm and respectful, rather than apparently bad-tempered, defiant tyrants who gain nothing more than notoriety.

How are you going to have the kind of influence that a headteacher needs to be able to demonstrate if you deliberately put people's backs up

If the parents are going to ignore the headteachers uniform policy are they really likely to support her in other ways.
Good on Ms Dawkins and shame on parents who can't be bothered to demonstrate a little respect for the rules to their children.

"Look at the good schools in Southampton and Hampshire and ask yourselves this : why are they NOT having problems ? Perhaps they have heads who are confident, calm and respectful, rather than apparently bad-tempered, defiant tyrants who gain nothing more than notoriety."

Having spent 30 years as a teacher in the secondary sector, and having worked for some fine headteachers, I can tell you that Ms Dawkins is going about things the wrong way.

All people are doing here is rabble-rousing, fanning the flames, and in fact making things even worse for Dawkins.

Not a good day for diplomacy, I think.

As you have spent 30 years as a teacher in secondary education perhaps you can tell us what Ms Dawkins should be doing.
.
By the way ..... after 30 years teaching . welcome to the Real World

DBTM wrote:
"There is a generation who now almost automatically rebel against everything in authority and encourage their offspring to do the same"

This would suggest that there some deliberate, thought out action behind this.Unfortunately, I think it is worse than this. There is a minority of people(hopefully it will remain a minority!) who just don't care about the consequences of their behaviour towards the rest of society.
If my children were sent home for not following uniform rules, I would feel embarrassed rather than angry.

BillyTheKid wrote:

Des Olated wrote:

BillyTheKid wrote:
Awful lot of assumptions here. How about this :

Has anyone seen the school prospectus ? Are the rules for uniform as clear as this Dawkins woman maintains ?

What do we think of people associated with "zero tolerance", "toughtalking", and "crackdown"s ? Is this the appropriate way to negotiate with parents and develop a sound foundation for home/school liason ? How are you going to have the kind of influence that a headteacher needs to be able to demonstrate if you deliberately put people's backs up ?

Look at the good schools in Southampton and Hampshire and ask yourselves this : why are they NOT having problems ? Perhaps they have heads who are confident, calm and respectful, rather than apparently bad-tempered, defiant tyrants who gain nothing more than notoriety.

How are you going to have the kind of influence that a headteacher needs to be able to demonstrate if you deliberately put people's backs up

If the parents are going to ignore the headteachers uniform policy are they really likely to support her in other ways.
Good on Ms Dawkins and shame on parents who can't be bothered to demonstrate a little respect for the rules to their children.

"Look at the good schools in Southampton and Hampshire and ask yourselves this : why are they NOT having problems ? Perhaps they have heads who are confident, calm and respectful, rather than apparently bad-tempered, defiant tyrants who gain nothing more than notoriety."

Having spent 30 years as a teacher in the secondary sector, and having worked for some fine headteachers, I can tell you that Ms Dawkins is going about things the wrong way.

All people are doing here is rabble-rousing, fanning the flames, and in fact making things even worse for Dawkins.

Not a good day for diplomacy, I think.

George4th wrote:

BillyTheKid wrote:

Des Olated wrote:

BillyTheKid wrote:
Awful lot of assumptions here. How about this :

Has anyone seen the school prospectus ? Are the rules for uniform as clear as this Dawkins woman maintains ?

What do we think of people associated with "zero tolerance", "toughtalking", and "crackdown"s ? Is this the appropriate way to negotiate with parents and develop a sound foundation for home/school liason ? How are you going to have the kind of influence that a headteacher needs to be able to demonstrate if you deliberately put people's backs up ?

Look at the good schools in Southampton and Hampshire and ask yourselves this : why are they NOT having problems ? Perhaps they have heads who are confident, calm and respectful, rather than apparently bad-tempered, defiant tyrants who gain nothing more than notoriety.

How are you going to have the kind of influence that a headteacher needs to be able to demonstrate if you deliberately put people's backs up

If the parents are going to ignore the headteachers uniform policy are they really likely to support her in other ways.
Good on Ms Dawkins and shame on parents who can't be bothered to demonstrate a little respect for the rules to their children.

"Look at the good schools in Southampton and Hampshire and ask yourselves this : why are they NOT having problems ? Perhaps they have heads who are confident, calm and respectful, rather than apparently bad-tempered, defiant tyrants who gain nothing more than notoriety."

Having spent 30 years as a teacher in the secondary sector, and having worked for some fine headteachers, I can tell you that Ms Dawkins is going about things the wrong way.

All people are doing here is rabble-rousing, fanning the flames, and in fact making things even worse for Dawkins.

Not a good day for diplomacy, I think.

Crestwood has very good Ofsted reports so they must be doing something right!
>
Besides, the parents were first advised by letter back in May!
The follow up letter was in July.
How many letters do you expect a school to send out?!

midanburyway wrote:
i can remember when i went to school in the seventies, there is always gonna be the 'uncool' kids.....i was one of them and i dont want my daughter to be treated like i was.....i have just trudged around town looking for school trou sers for her and it is not an experience i want to repeat again soon....had a letter before the holidays about the sort of trousers they should be wearing, but to recieve a text message yesterday to remind me is over the top...glad to see my taxes that pay for the achools is put to good use sending bullying texts...and they better not send my child home using this excuse either...

southy wrote:
Forcing uniforms onto kids is brain conditioning

elvisimo wrote:
Brain conditioning. Hmm another pearl of wisdom. Perhaps they should wear what the want, turn up when they want?

The lax attitude is part way resposible for a sea of unemployable youngseters who whilst not willing to put the effort in at school turn their nose up at the jobs that their "effort" has made them qualified for.

mtdiablo wrote:
Well it's not southy

southy wrote:
Forcing uniforms onto kids is brain conditioning

Georgem wrote:

elvisimo wrote:
Brain conditioning. Hmm another pearl of wisdom. Perhaps they should wear what the want, turn up when they want?

The lax attitude is part way resposible for a sea of unemployable youngseters who whilst not willing to put the effort in at school turn their nose up at the jobs that their "effort" has made them qualified for.

Exactly. Like it or not, a lot of workplaces have a dress code. You have to look very hard to find a workplace that doesn't require at least some discipline from everyone there. School is supposed to prepare you for real life, avoiding these issues is letting the kids down, if you ask me.

bullsbags wrote:
Good on her and whilst she is at it I could think of plenty of other rules and regs she should implement . Obviously there are plenty of good kids about but there is a percentage who need to learn the meaning of words like RESPECT and DISCIPLINE
Half of these kids will leave school and never work or contribute to society and will expect the rest to suport them with all the material possessions they desire because it's their right
Well actually it isn't
I'd also bring back national service for any school leaver who does not have a job or goes onto further education
RANT OVER

bullsbags wrote:
Good on her and whilst she is at it I could think of plenty of other rules and regs she should implement . Obviously there are plenty of good kids about but there is a percentage who need to learn the meaning of words like RESPECT and DISCIPLINE
Half of these kids will leave school and never work or contribute to society and will expect the rest to suport them with all the material possessions they desire because it's their right
Well actually it isn't
I'd also bring back national service for any school leaver who does not have a job or goes onto further education
RANT OVER

Shoong wrote:

southy wrote:
Forcing uniforms onto kids is brain conditioning

Well, if there was an exam in talking absolute hogwash, then you'd be a A+ student.

Perhaps they should be wearing tin foil hats as well.

southy wrote:

mtdiablo wrote:
Well it's not southy

It is the Japanese and South Koreans have been doing this for a very long time, its to prepairs kids to work in a Corporations conditions not to think just react

southy wrote:

Georgem wrote:

elvisimo wrote:
Brain conditioning. Hmm another pearl of wisdom. Perhaps they should wear what the want, turn up when they want?

The lax attitude is part way resposible for a sea of unemployable youngseters who whilst not willing to put the effort in at school turn their nose up at the jobs that their "effort" has made them qualified for.

Exactly. Like it or not, a lot of workplaces have a dress code. You have to look very hard to find a workplace that doesn't require at least some discipline from everyone there. School is supposed to prepare you for real life, avoiding these issues is letting the kids down, if you ask me.

And end up with a bunch of adults that do not think freely and only to react.

southy wrote:

Georgem wrote:

elvisimo wrote:
Brain conditioning. Hmm another pearl of wisdom. Perhaps they should wear what the want, turn up when they want?

The lax attitude is part way resposible for a sea of unemployable youngseters who whilst not willing to put the effort in at school turn their nose up at the jobs that their "effort" has made them qualified for.

Exactly. Like it or not, a lot of workplaces have a dress code. You have to look very hard to find a workplace that doesn't require at least some discipline from everyone there. School is supposed to prepare you for real life, avoiding these issues is letting the kids down, if you ask me.

And end up with a bunch of adults that do not think freely and only to react.

St Retford wrote:

bullsbags wrote:
Good on her and whilst she is at it I could think of plenty of other rules and regs she should implement . Obviously there are plenty of good kids about but there is a percentage who need to learn the meaning of words like RESPECT and DISCIPLINE
Half of these kids will leave school and never work or contribute to society and will expect the rest to suport them with all the material possessions they desire because it's their right
Well actually it isn't
I'd also bring back national service for any school leaver who does not have a job or goes onto further education
RANT OVER

That's one way of looking at it. Personally, I believe the children are our future. Teach them well and let them lead the way. Show them all the beauty they possess inside. Give them a sense of pride to make it easier. Let the children's laughter remind us how we used to be

DBTM wrote:
"Look at the good schools in Southampton and Hampshire and ask yourselves this : why are they NOT having problems"

My son goes to a good school in Hampshire that doesn't have any problems. Perhaps it is because they enfore the unifrom rules?

"Has anyone seen the school prospectus ? Are the rules for uniform as clear as this Dawkins woman maintains ?"

20 pupils sent home and the rest of them kept on. That would suggest to me that: yes, the rules are clear enough

St Retford wrote:

southy wrote:

Georgem wrote:

elvisimo wrote:
Brain conditioning. Hmm another pearl of wisdom. Perhaps they should wear what the want, turn up when they want?

The lax attitude is part way resposible for a sea of unemployable youngseters who whilst not willing to put the effort in at school turn their nose up at the jobs that their "effort" has made them qualified for.

Exactly. Like it or not, a lot of workplaces have a dress code. You have to look very hard to find a workplace that doesn't require at least some discipline from everyone there. School is supposed to prepare you for real life, avoiding these issues is letting the kids down, if you ask me.

And end up with a bunch of adults that do not think freely and only to react.

You're right, but what about the paradox of these students' uniform individuality? If they were left to their own devices, they'd all come in wearing stupid skinny jeans, a t-shirt featuring some band they never listen to but perceive to be 'cool' and a big floppy cardigan.

At least the uniform the school give them looks quite nice.

southy wrote:

Shoong wrote:

southy wrote:
Forcing uniforms onto kids is brain conditioning

Well, if there was an exam in talking absolute hogwash, then you'd be a A+ student.

Perhaps they should be wearing tin foil hats as well.

Since when have Uniforms been part of an exam.

southy wrote:

Georgem wrote:

elvisimo wrote:
Brain conditioning. Hmm another pearl of wisdom. Perhaps they should wear what the want, turn up when they want?

The lax attitude is part way resposible for a sea of unemployable youngseters who whilst not willing to put the effort in at school turn their nose up at the jobs that their "effort" has made them qualified for.

Exactly. Like it or not, a lot of workplaces have a dress code. You have to look very hard to find a workplace that doesn't require at least some discipline from everyone there. School is supposed to prepare you for real life, avoiding these issues is letting the kids down, if you ask me.

And end up with a bunch of adults that do not think freely and only to react.

Des Olated wrote:

southy wrote:

Georgem wrote:

elvisimo wrote:
Brain conditioning. Hmm another pearl of wisdom. Perhaps they should wear what the want, turn up when they want?

The lax attitude is part way resposible for a sea of unemployable youngseters who whilst not willing to put the effort in at school turn their nose up at the jobs that their "effort" has made them qualified for.

Exactly. Like it or not, a lot of workplaces have a dress code. You have to look very hard to find a workplace that doesn't require at least some discipline from everyone there. School is supposed to prepare you for real life, avoiding these issues is letting the kids down, if you ask me.

And end up with a bunch of adults that do not think freely and only to react.

How is wearing school uniform denying the right to think freely?
Georgem is correct, most occupations require some form of "uniform".
An employer expects and has the right to demand that it's employees to conform to it's workplace rules & allowing children to believe they can do/act as they want is setting them up for a very big reality check or unemployment.

Des Olated wrote:
Billy;
"Having spent 30 years as a teacher in the secondary sector, and having worked for some fine headteachers, I can tell you that Ms Dawkins is going about things the wrong way"

Billy, the policy towards uniform & discipline has become increasingly liberal for years; do you, in your 30 years experience believe the quality of schooling and education of students leaving has improved correspondingly?

southy wrote:

Des Olated wrote:

southy wrote:

Georgem wrote:

elvisimo wrote:
Brain conditioning. Hmm another pearl of wisdom. Perhaps they should wear what the want, turn up when they want?

The lax attitude is part way resposible for a sea of unemployable youngseters who whilst not willing to put the effort in at school turn their nose up at the jobs that their "effort" has made them qualified for.

Exactly. Like it or not, a lot of workplaces have a dress code. You have to look very hard to find a workplace that doesn't require at least some discipline from everyone there. School is supposed to prepare you for real life, avoiding these issues is letting the kids down, if you ask me.

And end up with a bunch of adults that do not think freely and only to react.

How is wearing school uniform denying the right to think freely?
Georgem is correct, most occupations require some form of "uniform".
An employer expects and has the right to demand that it's employees to conform to it's workplace rules & allowing children to believe they can do/act as they want is setting them up for a very big reality check or unemployment.

Its brain conditioning ready for working for a coporates, like Mcdondles, do as your told and dont think.

BillyTheKid wrote:

Des Olated wrote:
Billy;
"Having spent 30 years as a teacher in the secondary sector, and having worked for some fine headteachers, I can tell you that Ms Dawkins is going about things the wrong way"

Billy, the policy towards uniform & discipline has become increasingly liberal for years; do you, in your 30 years experience believe the quality of schooling and education of students leaving has improved correspondingly?

This is not what the discussion is about. I thought we were discussing confrontation as a method of coercing parents and children into observing the rules. In my "30 years experience" I found that confrontation never works. Negotiation and choice are the keys.

southy wrote:

Des Olated wrote:

southy wrote:

Georgem wrote:

elvisimo wrote:
Brain conditioning. Hmm another pearl of wisdom. Perhaps they should wear what the want, turn up when they want?

The lax attitude is part way resposible for a sea of unemployable youngseters who whilst not willing to put the effort in at school turn their nose up at the jobs that their "effort" has made them qualified for.

Exactly. Like it or not, a lot of workplaces have a dress code. You have to look very hard to find a workplace that doesn't require at least some discipline from everyone there. School is supposed to prepare you for real life, avoiding these issues is letting the kids down, if you ask me.

And end up with a bunch of adults that do not think freely and only to react.

How is wearing school uniform denying the right to think freely?
Georgem is correct, most occupations require some form of "uniform".
An employer expects and has the right to demand that it's employees to conform to it's workplace rules & allowing children to believe they can do/act as they want is setting them up for a very big reality check or unemployment.

Its brain conditioning ready for working for a coporates, like Mcdondles, do as your told and dont think.

St Retford wrote:

bullsbags wrote:
Good on her and whilst she is at it I could think of plenty of other rules and regs she should implement . Obviously there are plenty of good kids about but there is a percentage who need to learn the meaning of words like RESPECT and DISCIPLINE
Half of these kids will leave school and never work or contribute to society and will expect the rest to suport them with all the material possessions they desire because it's their right
Well actually it isn't
I'd also bring back national service for any school leaver who does not have a job or goes onto further education
RANT OVER

That's one way of looking at it. Personally, I believe the children are our future. Teach them well and let them lead the way. Show them all the beauty they possess inside. Give them a sense of pride to make it easier. Let the children's laughter remind us how we used to be

Des Olated wrote:

St Retford wrote:

bullsbags wrote:
Good on her and whilst she is at it I could think of plenty of other rules and regs she should implement . Obviously there are plenty of good kids about but there is a percentage who need to learn the meaning of words like RESPECT and DISCIPLINE
Half of these kids will leave school and never work or contribute to society and will expect the rest to suport them with all the material possessions they desire because it's their right
Well actually it isn't
I'd also bring back national service for any school leaver who does not have a job or goes onto further education
RANT OVER

That's one way of looking at it. Personally, I believe the children are our future. Teach them well and let them lead the way. Show them all the beauty they possess inside. Give them a sense of pride to make it easier. Let the children's laughter remind us how we used to be

St Retford - Whitney?

punterman wrote:
I feel so angry about the way Krista Dawkins has handled this, I have written a letter to the local education authority and to the chairman of the Governors.
She talks about working in Sainsburys you would need a uniform well I hope you enjoy your new uniform when you end up working there

Des Olated wrote:

BillyTheKid wrote:

Des Olated wrote:
Billy;
"Having spent 30 years as a teacher in the secondary sector, and having worked for some fine headteachers, I can tell you that Ms Dawkins is going about things the wrong way"

Billy, the policy towards uniform & discipline has become increasingly liberal for years; do you, in your 30 years experience believe the quality of schooling and education of students leaving has improved correspondingly?

This is not what the discussion is about. I thought we were discussing confrontation as a method of coercing parents and children into observing the rules. In my "30 years experience" I found that confrontation never works. Negotiation and choice are the keys.

Why is there confrontation? - the head teacher has decided a dress code, end of, or do you think the tail should wag the dog?.
As I've said the liberalisation of attitudes towards dress & discipline have done no favours at all & if this is a step back to better standards then I and all parents should fully support her.

BillyTheKid wrote:

DBTM wrote:
"Look at the good schools in Southampton and Hampshire and ask yourselves this : why are they NOT having problems"

My son goes to a good school in Hampshire that doesn't have any problems. Perhaps it is because they enfore the unifrom rules?

"Has anyone seen the school prospectus ? Are the rules for uniform as clear as this Dawkins woman maintains ?"

20 pupils sent home and the rest of them kept on. That would suggest to me that: yes, the rules are clear enough

"Enfore the unifrom rules". What is that exactly ? Bet your son doesn't ask for help with his homework !

The question was why do ALL the good schools....etc, and you quote ONE as an example.

I repeat : Have you read the Crestwood prospectus ?

If you are just going to go on what you read in the Echo, and what things "suggest" to you, we're not going to get anywhere, are we ?

southy wrote:

Des Olated wrote:

southy wrote:

Georgem wrote:

elvisimo wrote:
Brain conditioning. Hmm another pearl of wisdom. Perhaps they should wear what the want, turn up when they want?

The lax attitude is part way resposible for a sea of unemployable youngseters who whilst not willing to put the effort in at school turn their nose up at the jobs that their "effort" has made them qualified for.

Exactly. Like it or not, a lot of workplaces have a dress code. You have to look very hard to find a workplace that doesn't require at least some discipline from everyone there. School is supposed to prepare you for real life, avoiding these issues is letting the kids down, if you ask me.

And end up with a bunch of adults that do not think freely and only to react.

How is wearing school uniform denying the right to think freely?
Georgem is correct, most occupations require some form of "uniform".
An employer expects and has the right to demand that it's employees to conform to it's workplace rules & allowing children to believe they can do/act as they want is setting them up for a very big reality check or unemployment.

Its brain conditioning ready for working for a coporates, like Mcdondles, do as your told and dont think.

Georgem wrote:

Des Olated wrote:

St Retford wrote:

bullsbags wrote:
Good on her and whilst she is at it I could think of plenty of other rules and regs she should implement . Obviously there are plenty of good kids about but there is a percentage who need to learn the meaning of words like RESPECT and DISCIPLINE
Half of these kids will leave school and never work or contribute to society and will expect the rest to suport them with all the material possessions they desire because it's their right
Well actually it isn't
I'd also bring back national service for any school leaver who does not have a job or goes onto further education
RANT OVER

That's one way of looking at it. Personally, I believe the children are our future. Teach them well and let them lead the way. Show them all the beauty they possess inside. Give them a sense of pride to make it easier. Let the children's laughter remind us how we used to be

St Retford - Whitney?

Well, of course. Everybody's searching for a hero. People need someone to look up to. I never found anyone who fulfilled my needs. A lonely place to be. So I learned to depend on me.

punterman wrote:
I agree that having a uniform policy in place is important as it is a good thing to look smart.
But I think for Krista Dawkins to have sent 20 pupils home is way over the top. No concern for their safety or that parents would have to come out of work. She handled this in totally the wrong manner. A warning letter or phone the parents but sending pupils home where they are potentially missing out on valuable learning time.

punterman wrote:

George4th wrote:

BillyTheKid wrote:

Des Olated wrote:

BillyTheKid wrote:
Awful lot of assumptions here. How about this :

Has anyone seen the school prospectus ? Are the rules for uniform as clear as this Dawkins woman maintains ?

What do we think of people associated with "zero tolerance", "toughtalking", and "crackdown"s ? Is this the appropriate way to negotiate with parents and develop a sound foundation for home/school liason ? How are you going to have the kind of influence that a headteacher needs to be able to demonstrate if you deliberately put people's backs up ?

Look at the good schools in Southampton and Hampshire and ask yourselves this : why are they NOT having problems ? Perhaps they have heads who are confident, calm and respectful, rather than apparently bad-tempered, defiant tyrants who gain nothing more than notoriety.

How are you going to have the kind of influence that a headteacher needs to be able to demonstrate if you deliberately put people's backs up

If the parents are going to ignore the headteachers uniform policy are they really likely to support her in other ways.
Good on Ms Dawkins and shame on parents who can't be bothered to demonstrate a little respect for the rules to their children.

"Look at the good schools in Southampton and Hampshire and ask yourselves this : why are they NOT having problems ? Perhaps they have heads who are confident, calm and respectful, rather than apparently bad-tempered, defiant tyrants who gain nothing more than notoriety."

Having spent 30 years as a teacher in the secondary sector, and having worked for some fine headteachers, I can tell you that Ms Dawkins is going about things the wrong way.

All people are doing here is rabble-rousing, fanning the flames, and in fact making things even worse for Dawkins.

Not a good day for diplomacy, I think.

Crestwood has very good Ofsted reports so they must be doing something right!
>
Besides, the parents were first advised by letter back in May!
The follow up letter was in July.
How many letters do you expect a school to send out?!

Must have imporved since I went there. It was probably one of the worst schools in Eastleigh - so its a nice to hear its finally improved

DBTM wrote:

BillyTheKid wrote:

DBTM wrote:
"Look at the good schools in Southampton and Hampshire and ask yourselves this : why are they NOT having problems"

My son goes to a good school in Hampshire that doesn't have any problems. Perhaps it is because they enfore the unifrom rules?

"Has anyone seen the school prospectus ? Are the rules for uniform as clear as this Dawkins woman maintains ?"

20 pupils sent home and the rest of them kept on. That would suggest to me that: yes, the rules are clear enough

"Enfore the unifrom rules". What is that exactly ? Bet your son doesn't ask for help with his homework !

The question was why do ALL the good schools....etc, and you quote ONE as an example.

I repeat : Have you read the Crestwood prospectus ?

If you are just going to go on what you read in the Echo, and what things "suggest" to you, we're not going to get anywhere, are we ?

Blimey! I hope you were more patient with your pupils whilst teaching them, especially if they were dyslexic.
I am using what I read in the Daily Echo because that is what we are commenting on. Is it not what you are basing your assumptions upon?
I don't need to read the prospectus, the parents do. If some of them did not understand it, all they had to do was seek clarification. If they had any interest, that is!
I was taking my son's school as an example. I didn't think it was that difficult to understand.
And, lastly: I am not an expert in diplomacy, but making patronising, obtuse and demeaning comments surely doesn't come into it.
I am glad you've retired from teaching, sir, because I would hate the idea of my children being taught by someone as arrogant and suffering from a superiority complex as you seem to be.
Wishing you a good day.

punterman wrote:

midanburyway wrote:
i can remember when i went to school in the seventies, there is always gonna be the 'uncool' kids.....i was one of them and i dont want my daughter to be treated like i was.....i have just trudged around town looking for school trou sers for her and it is not an experience i want to repeat again soon....had a letter before the holidays about the sort of trousers they should be wearing, but to recieve a text message yesterday to remind me is over the top...glad to see my taxes that pay for the achools is put to good use sending bullying texts...and they better not send my child home using this excuse either...

I completely 100% agree with comment.
Schools should be focussed on learning not sending out stupid text messages.

St Retford wrote:

Des Olated wrote:

BillyTheKid wrote:

Des Olated wrote:
Billy;
"Having spent 30 years as a teacher in the secondary sector, and having worked for some fine headteachers, I can tell you that Ms Dawkins is going about things the wrong way"

Billy, the policy towards uniform & discipline has become increasingly liberal for years; do you, in your 30 years experience believe the quality of schooling and education of students leaving has improved correspondingly?

This is not what the discussion is about. I thought we were discussing confrontation as a method of coercing parents and children into observing the rules. In my "30 years experience" I found that confrontation never works. Negotiation and choice are the keys.

Why is there confrontation? - the head teacher has decided a dress code, end of, or do you think the tail should wag the dog?.
As I've said the liberalisation of attitudes towards dress & discipline have done no favours at all & if this is a step back to better standards then I and all parents should fully support her.

Do you think educational standards haven't improved?

solomum wrote:
It is a fact that when we go to work or school smartly dressed, then we feel more confident and focused. If we are dressed slovenly, our attitude to work or learning decreases. My secondary school uniform was pleated skirt, blouse and cardigan, no trousers allowed. Just to point out it was an all girls school, before the smart alec's on here start making comments about boys in skirts. On freezing winter days there were a few who would turn up in Jeans, myself included (quick change after mum left for work) and we were promptly sent home with a phone call and letter to our parents. At the time I thought this was grossly unfair and ridiculous, but then I was a 14 year old with a 14 yr old mind. On the occasions that I did try to get away with wearing jeans, my attitude was not one ready for learning, but one for breaking the rules and getting one up on the teachers. I never did get one up on the teachers and the grounding that followed never made my attempts worthwhile anyway. Strangely though a lot of the parents that are my generation have never outgrown this 14 yr old mindset and then support their own children in breaking the rules. GROW UP MUM AND DAD and your children then may have a chance of raising the next generation responsibly.

St Retford wrote:

bullsbags wrote:
Good on her and whilst she is at it I could think of plenty of other rules and regs she should implement . Obviously there are plenty of good kids about but there is a percentage who need to learn the meaning of words like RESPECT and DISCIPLINE
Half of these kids will leave school and never work or contribute to society and will expect the rest to suport them with all the material possessions they desire because it's their right
Well actually it isn't
I'd also bring back national service for any school leaver who does not have a job or goes onto further education
RANT OVER

That's one way of looking at it. Personally, I believe the children are our future. Teach them well and let them lead the way. Show them all the beauty they possess inside. Give them a sense of pride to make it easier. Let the children's laughter remind us how we used to be

solomum wrote:
It is a fact that when we go to work or school smartly dressed, then we feel more confident and focused. If we are dressed slovenly, our attitude to work or learning decreases. My secondary school uniform was pleated skirt, blouse and cardigan, no trousers allowed. Just to point out it was an all girls school, before the smart alec's on here start making comments about boys in skirts. On freezing winter days there were a few who would turn up in Jeans, myself included (quick change after mum left for work) and we were promptly sent home with a phone call and letter to our parents. At the time I thought this was grossly unfair and ridiculous, but then I was a 14 year old with a 14 yr old mind. On the occasions that I did try to get away with wearing jeans, my attitude was not one ready for learning, but one for breaking the rules and getting one up on the teachers. I never did get one up on the teachers and the grounding that followed never made my attempts worthwhile anyway. Strangely though a lot of the parents that are my generation have never outgrown this 14 yr old mindset and then support their own children in breaking the rules. GROW UP MUM AND DAD and your children then may have a chance of raising the next generation responsibly.

Des Olated wrote:

southy wrote:

Des Olated wrote:

southy wrote:

Georgem wrote:

elvisimo wrote:
Brain conditioning. Hmm another pearl of wisdom. Perhaps they should wear what the want, turn up when they want?

The lax attitude is part way resposible for a sea of unemployable youngseters who whilst not willing to put the effort in at school turn their nose up at the jobs that their "effort" has made them qualified for.

Exactly. Like it or not, a lot of workplaces have a dress code. You have to look very hard to find a workplace that doesn't require at least some discipline from everyone there. School is supposed to prepare you for real life, avoiding these issues is letting the kids down, if you ask me.

And end up with a bunch of adults that do not think freely and only to react.

How is wearing school uniform denying the right to think freely?
Georgem is correct, most occupations require some form of "uniform".
An employer expects and has the right to demand that it's employees to conform to it's workplace rules & allowing children to believe they can do/act as they want is setting them up for a very big reality check or unemployment.

Its brain conditioning ready for working for a coporates, like Mcdondles, do as your told and dont think.

Southy, sorry, but you are an idiot.
Forget McD's, a uniform is in many guises; a bank worker might for example be expected to wear a shirt & tie, companies provide branded clothing, at no point does a "uniform" require a disconnect of an individual's thought process or brain conditioning.
Of course, if you don't like how your employer wants you to dress find another job but if you want to keep the job suck it up - same with the school, want to go there? dress as they require!

southy wrote:

Des Olated wrote:

southy wrote:

Des Olated wrote:

southy wrote:

Georgem wrote:

elvisimo wrote:
Brain conditioning. Hmm another pearl of wisdom. Perhaps they should wear what the want, turn up when they want?

The lax attitude is part way resposible for a sea of unemployable youngseters who whilst not willing to put the effort in at school turn their nose up at the jobs that their "effort" has made them qualified for.

Exactly. Like it or not, a lot of workplaces have a dress code. You have to look very hard to find a workplace that doesn't require at least some discipline from everyone there. School is supposed to prepare you for real life, avoiding these issues is letting the kids down, if you ask me.

And end up with a bunch of adults that do not think freely and only to react.

How is wearing school uniform denying the right to think freely?
Georgem is correct, most occupations require some form of "uniform".
An employer expects and has the right to demand that it's employees to conform to it's workplace rules & allowing children to believe they can do/act as they want is setting them up for a very big reality check or unemployment.

Its brain conditioning ready for working for a coporates, like Mcdondles, do as your told and dont think.

Southy, sorry, but you are an idiot.
Forget McD's, a uniform is in many guises; a bank worker might for example be expected to wear a shirt & tie, companies provide branded clothing, at no point does a "uniform" require a disconnect of an individual's thought process or brain conditioning.
Of course, if you don't like how your employer wants you to dress find another job but if you want to keep the job suck it up - same with the school, want to go there? dress as they require!

Now you got it Bank personals expected to wear shirt and tie, but not a uniform, they are expected to also, its not compulsory, they have the freedom, in truth there are more jobs that do not require a uniform than there are where it is required.
All that should berquired as a kid is to be clean and tidy and no more.
Times when a uniform is needed is on school outting or repersenting a school and no more than that.
This thing about school unifrom as only came about since the war, before the war only private educated kids had school uniform.

Des Olated wrote:

southy wrote:

Des Olated wrote:

southy wrote:

Des Olated wrote:

southy wrote:

Georgem wrote:

elvisimo wrote:
Brain conditioning. Hmm another pearl of wisdom. Perhaps they should wear what the want, turn up when they want?

The lax attitude is part way resposible for a sea of unemployable youngseters who whilst not willing to put the effort in at school turn their nose up at the jobs that their "effort" has made them qualified for.

Exactly. Like it or not, a lot of workplaces have a dress code. You have to look very hard to find a workplace that doesn't require at least some discipline from everyone there. School is supposed to prepare you for real life, avoiding these issues is letting the kids down, if you ask me.

And end up with a bunch of adults that do not think freely and only to react.

How is wearing school uniform denying the right to think freely?
Georgem is correct, most occupations require some form of "uniform".
An employer expects and has the right to demand that it's employees to conform to it's workplace rules & allowing children to believe they can do/act as they want is setting them up for a very big reality check or unemployment.

Its brain conditioning ready for working for a coporates, like Mcdondles, do as your told and dont think.

Southy, sorry, but you are an idiot.
Forget McD's, a uniform is in many guises; a bank worker might for example be expected to wear a shirt & tie, companies provide branded clothing, at no point does a "uniform" require a disconnect of an individual's thought process or brain conditioning.
Of course, if you don't like how your employer wants you to dress find another job but if you want to keep the job suck it up - same with the school, want to go there? dress as they require!

Now you got it Bank personals expected to wear shirt and tie, but not a uniform, they are expected to also, its not compulsory, they have the freedom, in truth there are more jobs that do not require a uniform than there are where it is required.
All that should berquired as a kid is to be clean and tidy and no more.
Times when a uniform is needed is on school outting or repersenting a school and no more than that.
This thing about school unifrom as only came about since the war, before the war only private educated kids had school uniform.

No, you don't get it at all. Instead of a uniform call it a dress code - make sense? Most employers have some kind of a dress code - shirt & tie, overall, uniform etc or maybe simply no hemlines above crotch level!
Now, this school wants the kids to adhere to a dress code, that's all; they've laid down the rules, plain & simple, they've even communicated this several times to parents who, if they care, would make sure they follow them.
As I said earlier, if the kids want to go to this school simply dress as required!

southy wrote:

Des Olated wrote:

southy wrote:

Des Olated wrote:

southy wrote:

Des Olated wrote:

southy wrote:

Georgem wrote:

elvisimo wrote:
Brain conditioning. Hmm another pearl of wisdom. Perhaps they should wear what the want, turn up when they want?

The lax attitude is part way resposible for a sea of unemployable youngseters who whilst not willing to put the effort in at school turn their nose up at the jobs that their "effort" has made them qualified for.

Exactly. Like it or not, a lot of workplaces have a dress code. You have to look very hard to find a workplace that doesn't require at least some discipline from everyone there. School is supposed to prepare you for real life, avoiding these issues is letting the kids down, if you ask me.

And end up with a bunch of adults that do not think freely and only to react.

How is wearing school uniform denying the right to think freely?
Georgem is correct, most occupations require some form of "uniform".
An employer expects and has the right to demand that it's employees to conform to it's workplace rules & allowing children to believe they can do/act as they want is setting them up for a very big reality check or unemployment.

Its brain conditioning ready for working for a coporates, like Mcdondles, do as your told and dont think.

Southy, sorry, but you are an idiot.
Forget McD's, a uniform is in many guises; a bank worker might for example be expected to wear a shirt & tie, companies provide branded clothing, at no point does a "uniform" require a disconnect of an individual's thought process or brain conditioning.
Of course, if you don't like how your employer wants you to dress find another job but if you want to keep the job suck it up - same with the school, want to go there? dress as they require!

Now you got it Bank personals expected to wear shirt and tie, but not a uniform, they are expected to also, its not compulsory, they have the freedom, in truth there are more jobs that do not require a uniform than there are where it is required.
All that should berquired as a kid is to be clean and tidy and no more.
Times when a uniform is needed is on school outting or repersenting a school and no more than that.
This thing about school unifrom as only came about since the war, before the war only private educated kids had school uniform.

No, you don't get it at all. Instead of a uniform call it a dress code - make sense? Most employers have some kind of a dress code - shirt & tie, overall, uniform etc or maybe simply no hemlines above crotch level!
Now, this school wants the kids to adhere to a dress code, that's all; they've laid down the rules, plain & simple, they've even communicated this several times to parents who, if they care, would make sure they follow them.
As I said earlier, if the kids want to go to this school simply dress as required!

I do get it, its still not a uniform, there is a dress code for the House of lords but it do not stop you from having a jeans on, and a number of MPs have done in the pass.
Dress code like for your bankers ect, is an unwriten and not enforce rule.

And like I said school uniforms before the War was only the private educuted kids was seen in them day in and day out.
If its a state school then all they need to is dress neat and tidy and no more than that should be required of them.

DBTM wrote:

BillyTheKid wrote:

DBTM wrote:
"Look at the good schools in Southampton and Hampshire and ask yourselves this : why are they NOT having problems"

My son goes to a good school in Hampshire that doesn't have any problems. Perhaps it is because they enfore the unifrom rules?

"Has anyone seen the school prospectus ? Are the rules for uniform as clear as this Dawkins woman maintains ?"

20 pupils sent home and the rest of them kept on. That would suggest to me that: yes, the rules are clear enough

"Enfore the unifrom rules". What is that exactly ? Bet your son doesn't ask for help with his homework !

The question was why do ALL the good schools....etc, and you quote ONE as an example.

I repeat : Have you read the Crestwood prospectus ?

If you are just going to go on what you read in the Echo, and what things "suggest" to you, we're not going to get anywhere, are we ?

Blimey! I hope you were more patient with your pupils whilst teaching them, especially if they were dyslexic.
I am using what I read in the Daily Echo because that is what we are commenting on. Is it not what you are basing your assumptions upon?
I don't need to read the prospectus, the parents do. If some of them did not understand it, all they had to do was seek clarification. If they had any interest, that is!
I was taking my son's school as an example. I didn't think it was that difficult to understand.
And, lastly: I am not an expert in diplomacy, but making patronising, obtuse and demeaning comments surely doesn't come into it.
I am glad you've retired from teaching, sir, because I would hate the idea of my children being taught by someone as arrogant and suffering from a superiority complex as you seem to be.
Wishing you a good day.

southy wrote:

Des Olated wrote:

southy wrote:

Des Olated wrote:

southy wrote:

Des Olated wrote:

southy wrote:

Georgem wrote:

elvisimo wrote:
Brain conditioning. Hmm another pearl of wisdom. Perhaps they should wear what the want, turn up when they want?

The lax attitude is part way resposible for a sea of unemployable youngseters who whilst not willing to put the effort in at school turn their nose up at the jobs that their "effort" has made them qualified for.

Exactly. Like it or not, a lot of workplaces have a dress code. You have to look very hard to find a workplace that doesn't require at least some discipline from everyone there. School is supposed to prepare you for real life, avoiding these issues is letting the kids down, if you ask me.

And end up with a bunch of adults that do not think freely and only to react.

How is wearing school uniform denying the right to think freely?
Georgem is correct, most occupations require some form of "uniform".
An employer expects and has the right to demand that it's employees to conform to it's workplace rules & allowing children to believe they can do/act as they want is setting them up for a very big reality check or unemployment.

Its brain conditioning ready for working for a coporates, like Mcdondles, do as your told and dont think.

Southy, sorry, but you are an idiot.
Forget McD's, a uniform is in many guises; a bank worker might for example be expected to wear a shirt & tie, companies provide branded clothing, at no point does a "uniform" require a disconnect of an individual's thought process or brain conditioning.
Of course, if you don't like how your employer wants you to dress find another job but if you want to keep the job suck it up - same with the school, want to go there? dress as they require!

Now you got it Bank personals expected to wear shirt and tie, but not a uniform, they are expected to also, its not compulsory, they have the freedom, in truth there are more jobs that do not require a uniform than there are where it is required.
All that should berquired as a kid is to be clean and tidy and no more.
Times when a uniform is needed is on school outting or repersenting a school and no more than that.
This thing about school unifrom as only came about since the war, before the war only private educated kids had school uniform.

No, you don't get it at all. Instead of a uniform call it a dress code - make sense? Most employers have some kind of a dress code - shirt & tie, overall, uniform etc or maybe simply no hemlines above crotch level!
Now, this school wants the kids to adhere to a dress code, that's all; they've laid down the rules, plain & simple, they've even communicated this several times to parents who, if they care, would make sure they follow them.
As I said earlier, if the kids want to go to this school simply dress as required!

I do get it, its still not a uniform, there is a dress code for the House of lords but it do not stop you from having a jeans on, and a number of MPs have done in the pass.
Dress code like for your bankers ect, is an unwriten and not enforce rule.

And like I said school uniforms before the War was only the private educuted kids was seen in them day in and day out.
If its a state school then all they need to is dress neat and tidy and no more than that should be required of them.

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
"The school had changed its uniform for the start of term", meaning that the parents had to replace the old ones? How much did that cost each parent? “The school has a hardship fund and have helped lots of families to buy uniform". How many people are humiliated at having to grovel for funds to but their kids their Uniform? I agree the pupils should take pride in their appearance but limitting the choice is a bit OTT, perhaps the School has shares in Uniform Manufactures or the shops that exclusively sell them?

schoolmum wrote:
I am a Crestwood year 11 mum and i have to say that the basic article is incorrect.My daughter was sent home for wearing the same trousers as last year.She has 6months left of school at school and i have been forced to buy complete new uniform when we were hold it would be flexible for year 11.Where is the flixibility in that.Would you be prepared to buy new uniform for 6months wear.Sending them home,gains nothing other than to denigh them important education before there exams.I should point out Ms Dawkins agreed my daughters trousers were exceptable last year.
I agree Crestwood pupils were given adequate time to get the uniform and given guidance as to what they needed.If i had any other year(7-10)I would say brilliant,but it is stupid and inappropriate for less than 6mths wear + if my daughters uniform was wrong,why were others allowed to break the rules and stay in school.This is starting to look like favouritism and bullying.When are Crestwood Governors going to admit
they should have stpped this happening.Year 11 pupils should be thinking about their exams not worrying about wearing the wrong trousers.My daughter was made to take out her earrings today because they didn't match.1 was gold 1 was acrylic.what difference does that make to whether she gets an "A" or an "E"? Perhaps she would like to comment on that.

schoolmum wrote:
I am a Crestwood year 11 mum and i have to say that the basic article is incorrect.My daughter was sent home for wearing the same trousers as last year.She has 6months left of school at school and i have been forced to buy complete new uniform when we were hold it would be flexible for year 11.Where is the flixibility in that.Would you be prepared to buy new uniform for 6months wear.Sending them home,gains nothing other than to denigh them important education before there exams.I should point out Ms Dawkins agreed my daughters trousers were exceptable last year.
I agree Crestwood pupils were given adequate time to get the uniform and given guidance as to what they needed.If i had any other year(7-10)I would say brilliant,but it is stupid and inappropriate for less than 6mths wear + if my daughters uniform was wrong,why were others allowed to break the rules and stay in school.This is starting to look like favouritism and bullying.When are Crestwood Governors going to admit
they should have stpped this happening.Year 11 pupils should be thinking about their exams not worrying about wearing the wrong trousers.My daughter was made to take out her earrings today because they didn't match.1 was gold 1 was acrylic.what difference does that make to whether she gets an "A" or an "E"? Perhaps she would like to comment on that.

Barbender wrote:
To set an example teachers should wear a uniform, after all most of them are paid more than most parents.

schoolmum wrote:
Are you saying that you are prepared to buy approx £65.00 of uniform for less than 6mths wear.you must have lots of money to burn.This is a very relevant story or you wouldn't be reading it.I expressed my appreciation of the uniform,I think it is very smart and will be an asset to both school and the pupils wearing it.I only have one issue.Why are the year 11's being made to wear it after being told it would be flexible for them as they have left than 6mths to wear it.The school is going back on what it said and i for one would not have gone along with the uniform proposal if i had known it was going to work out like this.I wear a uniform at work and i have never been told i cannot wear slim ankled trousers at any time and these trousers are the real issue.

schoolmum wrote:
Are you saying that you are prepared to buy approx £65.00 of uniform for less than 6mths wear.you must have lots of money to burn.This is a very relevant story or you wouldn't be reading it.I expressed my appreciation of the uniform,I think it is very smart and will be an asset to both school and the pupils wearing it.I only have one issue.Why are the year 11's being made to wear it after being told it would be flexible for them as they have left than 6mths to wear it.The school is going back on what it said and i for one would not have gone along with the uniform proposal if i had known it was going to work out like this.I wear a uniform at work and i have never been told i cannot wear slim ankled trousers at any time and these trousers are the real issue.

sensible mum wrote:
Firstly, as parents, we have not been told to go off and buy a new uniform, we have a year transition period and when our kids grow out of the old, we replace with the new. The new uniform works out cheaper than the old, is smarter and more hard wearing. It was voted in by the majority of parents and we were fully informed of the style of trousers and shoes expected. Anyone who struggles to pay for it are helped financially and this is done confidentially and with sensitivity. My son is still in the old uniform and had no problems because we have read the dozen letters letting us know the acceptable standards. Life is full of rules and regulations and our kids need to learn how to comply and take a pride in their appearance. I work in an establishment with a uniform and if I want to keep my job I respect my employer. In the evening and weekend when I am not representing my company, I can express myself wearing whatever I like. Mrs Dawkins, the majority of parents are right behind you. Well done.

schoolmum wrote:
I am a Crestwood year 11 mum and i have to say that the basic article is incorrect.My daughter was sent home for wearing the same trousers as last year.She has 6months left of school at school and i have been forced to buy complete new uniform when we were hold it would be flexible for year 11.Where is the flixibility in that.Would you be prepared to buy new uniform for 6months wear.Sending them home,gains nothing other than to denigh them important education before there exams.I should point out Ms Dawkins agreed my daughters trousers were exceptable last year.
I agree Crestwood pupils were given adequate time to get the uniform and given guidance as to what they needed.If i had any other year(7-10)I would say brilliant,but it is stupid and inappropriate for less than 6mths wear + if my daughters uniform was wrong,why were others allowed to break the rules and stay in school.This is starting to look like favouritism and bullying.When are Crestwood Governors going to admit
they should have stpped this happening.Year 11 pupils should be thinking about their exams not worrying about wearing the wrong trousers.My daughter was made to take out her earrings today because they didn't match.1 was gold 1 was acrylic.what difference does that make to whether she gets an "A" or an "E"? Perhaps she would like to comment on that.

schoolmum wrote:
if my daughter had grown out of her clothes last year,don't you think i would have bought new ? All I want is for Crestwood to keep to there word.As I pointed out ,if i had a younger child i would agree with them.My daughter looked very smart in her new uniform,it was only the trousers i didn't think warranted replacing for such a short period.When i see what uniform they are allowing i quite frankly can't believe it.As i said before its a if your face fits situation.

BillyTheKid wrote:

DBTM wrote:

BillyTheKid wrote:

DBTM wrote:
"Look at the good schools in Southampton and Hampshire and ask yourselves this : why are they NOT having problems"

My son goes to a good school in Hampshire that doesn't have any problems. Perhaps it is because they enfore the unifrom rules?

"Has anyone seen the school prospectus ? Are the rules for uniform as clear as this Dawkins woman maintains ?"

20 pupils sent home and the rest of them kept on. That would suggest to me that: yes, the rules are clear enough

"Enfore the unifrom rules". What is that exactly ? Bet your son doesn't ask for help with his homework !

The question was why do ALL the good schools....etc, and you quote ONE as an example.

I repeat : Have you read the Crestwood prospectus ?

If you are just going to go on what you read in the Echo, and what things "suggest" to you, we're not going to get anywhere, are we ?

Blimey! I hope you were more patient with your pupils whilst teaching them, especially if they were dyslexic.
I am using what I read in the Daily Echo because that is what we are commenting on. Is it not what you are basing your assumptions upon?
I don't need to read the prospectus, the parents do. If some of them did not understand it, all they had to do was seek clarification. If they had any interest, that is!
I was taking my son's school as an example. I didn't think it was that difficult to understand.
And, lastly: I am not an expert in diplomacy, but making patronising, obtuse and demeaning comments surely doesn't come into it.
I am glad you've retired from teaching, sir, because I would hate the idea of my children being taught by someone as arrogant and suffering from a superiority complex as you seem to be.
Wishing you a good day.

What a load of rubbish ! You are just upset because I countered your arrogant, pompous reply.

I'm so glad I'm retired, too ! I can be as arrogant, patronising, obtuse, demeaning, and superior as I like, and dress like a tramp, without having to apologise to anyone !

The truth is, I am very selective. I won't be rude to just anybody. People have to earn my disrespect and rudeness. Saying something daft with no evidence to support it usually does it.

Sending pupils home en masse is confrontational. The proper way to deal with this sort of situation is to call all the pupils in non-uniform clothes into the hall, and sit them down calmly. Tell them, yet again, why you have a uniform policy (school identity, equallity, etc.) "I want you to look smart, as it reflects our achievements. I want you to feel proud when people compliment us. You know that all the good schools wear uniforms, and I'm sure you would not want us to look shabby next to them. You've had many months notification of our policy, so you know I'm going to insist on the uniform rule. But you will have a choice. Each day you turn up in non-regulation clothes, you will forfeit a priviledge. This must happen, as I do not wish to discriminate against the pupils who do respect our policy."

Surely that is a better approach ?

schoolmum wrote:
If you read my comments properly you would understand my daughter went to school in new blazer,white shirt,free school tie and new school jumper,only her trousers were last years and not to the current uniform rules.As a year 11 she,as all year11s were told verbally there uniform would be flexible and they could mix and match last year and
the new uniform.This was confirmed by a memver of staff today so i repeat what i said before that they have gone back on there word meaning that now year 11s have only until 10th to buy the uniform.The rest of the school had all summer.Is that fair or flexible.

Den666 wrote:
I think it was wrong to send the children home, why not inform the parent with a 'must have' correct uniform by... or they will not be allowed back in school..
I work and to have my daughter sent home out of the blue without being able to make arrangements for her care at such notice, when she should have been in school 'care' is wrong.
Also , how did these 'reminder' letters get sent about the uniform because I did not receive one( if it's through the children you cannot guarantee the parents will receive them)
I did not receive an email about it either and the school has my email address.

sam1988 wrote:
This is typical of Krista Dawkins previously Krista Carter from woodland community school, when i was a pupil of woodlands she was the deputy head and she would wait at the school gates every morning checking uniforms, we were supposed to have had the most tiny logo's on our jumper and t-shirts yet these cost around £10 each. My mum could not afford to buy me and my little brother at least 2 of these each so we had plain t-shirts with the correct logo jumper, but she would wait at the school gates every morning for me and my brother check our t-shirts and send us straight back home, this went on for a good few weeks until she got the message my mum really could not afford them and my mother had to speak directly to the head teacher as it was ruining our education!! At the end of the day does having tight trousers stop you from learning???

schoolmum wrote:
We seem to be getting off the real issue.Comments please as to whether
the trousers in the photo are respectable school wear with the new blazer,shirt and tie .My daughter looked extremely smart and a member of the school staff said so too.Please comment
it will be interesting to here what other parents think.Incidently my eldest who is now in a senior job role wearing uniform went to Toynbee and wore these same stile trousers right the way
through.she was NEVER sent home because her trousers were provocative.

solomum wrote:

schoolmum wrote:
We seem to be getting off the real issue.Comments please as to whether
the trousers in the photo are respectable school wear with the new blazer,shirt and tie .My daughter looked extremely smart and a member of the school staff said so too.Please comment
it will be interesting to here what other parents think.Incidently my eldest who is now in a senior job role wearing uniform went to Toynbee and wore these same stile trousers right the way
through.she was NEVER sent home because her trousers were provocative.

Are you referring to the photo of the school girl and her father, where the school girl is wearing too tight trousers and a casual polo shirt which is certainly not smart school uniform or are you referring to the photo that only shows the back of pupils trousers, again showing too tight trousers? Both these photos depict young girls in cheap looking fashion clothing rather than smart school uniform. Ok, the polo shirt is a school one, but designed to be worn as part of a full smart uniform rather than a feeble attempt at making casual clothing look smart. As another poster has said, even in Africa where poverty is rife, parents ensure their children are dressed incredibly smartly and are all wearing the same uniform, giving a sense of pride and of belonging. There again, in poverty stricken countries, the parents spend what little money they do have on feeding and clothing their children rather than on fancy technology that frazzles young minds. As for your previous question of do I have money to burn? Do you class spending money on life's essentials such as school uniform burning money then? Now if I smoked, drank alcohol or spent my income on having fun instead of providing my children with their school uniform then I would answer yes. I don't do any of these things. I hate the cost of school uniform as much as any other parent, but it is essential expenditure. When my children complain that they have not got the latest games console, mobile phone etc they are simply told that they have life's essentials and if there is spare money, it will be spent on family fun, eg going away for a weekend together. But that is not done at the detriment of school uniform. I trust that answers your question.

nickiclaire wrote:
Maybe Crestwood should be more concerned about continuity of care at the school rather than wearing the wrong trousers. A head that only spends a couple of days a week at the school and is trying to run two seems to be much more of an issue than this topic.

truelysaints wrote:
Well done, no ifs or buts. Discipline begins with the small things. A pride in appearance enhances ones self worth and confidence

pam1970 wrote:
i have a 14 yr old boy goes to cantell and hes gone back to school this week wearing black trainers with a grey stripe and cos ive refused to buy him another pair they are saying they will kick him out this situation is mad hes not the only child with no just black trainers so now i am having to buy a new pair and bein a single parent i think is disgusting as long as they clean and tidy wat is the problem???

IronLady2010 wrote:

pam1970 wrote:
i have a 14 yr old boy goes to cantell and hes gone back to school this week wearing black trainers with a grey stripe and cos ive refused to buy him another pair they are saying they will kick him out this situation is mad hes not the only child with no just black trainers so now i am having to buy a new pair and bein a single parent i think is disgusting as long as they clean and tidy wat is the problem???

Did you read the uniform rules or just go along with what your son wanted?

YOU are the parent YOU are responsible for ensuring he has the correct uniform.

Single parent or not, you need to educate your children that they have to abide by rules and not make up their own rules. Give them an inch and they'll take a mile!

pam1970 wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:

pam1970 wrote:
i have a 14 yr old boy goes to cantell and hes gone back to school this week wearing black trainers with a grey stripe and cos ive refused to buy him another pair they are saying they will kick him out this situation is mad hes not the only child with no just black trainers so now i am having to buy a new pair and bein a single parent i think is disgusting as long as they clean and tidy wat is the problem???

Did you read the uniform rules or just go along with what your son wanted?

YOU are the parent YOU are responsible for ensuring he has the correct uniform.

Single parent or not, you need to educate your children that they have to abide by rules and not make up their own rules. Give them an inch and they'll take a mile!

the uniform is black trainers very hard to get and thank u my kids no rite from wrong and it was my decision thank you

Wehaveanopiniontoo! wrote:
I am a student at crestwood college and a few of my friends were sent home because of their uniform. I think it's unfair how not everyone that wore 'skinny trousers' got sent home, if they were going to send people home they should have sent everyone Breaking the rules home, it's unfair. I am not a fan of the new school uniform, I think it is too much and my friends who are wearing it have complained its too hot, and heavy. I irritated how mrs Dawkins is sending people wearing skinny trousers home and letting girls in my year wearing knee high socks and skirts way above the knee, they look terrible. Why are they not sent home? Instead she sends home people wearing trousers because they're too skinny. We didn't get a say in changing the school uniform and many of us didn't want it changed.

Mr Price wrote:
Hamble Community Sports College have taken this a step to far......They have already sent 25 pupils (girls) home as they have the wrong trousers..Hamble state the trousers must be black... NOT Cotton, NOT Combat, NOT Flares, NOT Skinny Cut,NOT Boot Cut...well we are really struggling to buy any that are NOT in the NOT list !!!!!

Mr Price wrote:
Hamble Community Sports College have taken this a step to far......They have already sent 25 pupils (girls) home as they have the wrong trousers..Hamble state the trousers must be black... NOT Cotton, NOT Combat, NOT Flares, NOT Skinny Cut,NOT Boot Cut...well we are really struggling to buy any that are NOT in the NOT list !!!!!

Mr Price wrote:
Iron Lady whats normal Trousers if not made from cotton.

IronLady2010 wrote:

Mr Price wrote:
Iron Lady whats normal Trousers if not made from cotton.

Chinos are made from cotton? Trousers are a Poly/Cotton mix?

Mr Price wrote:
Iron Lady Don't you be so rude and assuming about my daughter....Your comments are more a concern as you have a total lack of respect for other people. Mind you its easy to be such a **** when you can hide on here

Georgem wrote:

BillyTheKid wrote:

DBTM wrote:

BillyTheKid wrote:

DBTM wrote:
"Look at the good schools in Southampton and Hampshire and ask yourselves this : why are they NOT having problems"

My son goes to a good school in Hampshire that doesn't have any problems. Perhaps it is because they enfore the unifrom rules?

"Has anyone seen the school prospectus ? Are the rules for uniform as clear as this Dawkins woman maintains ?"

20 pupils sent home and the rest of them kept on. That would suggest to me that: yes, the rules are clear enough

"Enfore the unifrom rules". What is that exactly ? Bet your son doesn't ask for help with his homework !

The question was why do ALL the good schools....etc, and you quote ONE as an example.

I repeat : Have you read the Crestwood prospectus ?

If you are just going to go on what you read in the Echo, and what things "suggest" to you, we're not going to get anywhere, are we ?

Blimey! I hope you were more patient with your pupils whilst teaching them, especially if they were dyslexic.
I am using what I read in the Daily Echo because that is what we are commenting on. Is it not what you are basing your assumptions upon?
I don't need to read the prospectus, the parents do. If some of them did not understand it, all they had to do was seek clarification. If they had any interest, that is!
I was taking my son's school as an example. I didn't think it was that difficult to understand.
And, lastly: I am not an expert in diplomacy, but making patronising, obtuse and demeaning comments surely doesn't come into it.
I am glad you've retired from teaching, sir, because I would hate the idea of my children being taught by someone as arrogant and suffering from a superiority complex as you seem to be.
Wishing you a good day.

What a load of rubbish ! You are just upset because I countered your arrogant, pompous reply.

I'm so glad I'm retired, too ! I can be as arrogant, patronising, obtuse, demeaning, and superior as I like, and dress like a tramp, without having to apologise to anyone !

The truth is, I am very selective. I won't be rude to just anybody. People have to earn my disrespect and rudeness. Saying something daft with no evidence to support it usually does it.

Sending pupils home en masse is confrontational. The proper way to deal with this sort of situation is to call all the pupils in non-uniform clothes into the hall, and sit them down calmly. Tell them, yet again, why you have a uniform policy (school identity, equallity, etc.) "I want you to look smart, as it reflects our achievements. I want you to feel proud when people compliment us. You know that all the good schools wear uniforms, and I'm sure you would not want us to look shabby next to them. You've had many months notification of our policy, so you know I'm going to insist on the uniform rule. But you will have a choice. Each day you turn up in non-regulation clothes, you will forfeit a priviledge. This must happen, as I do not wish to discriminate against the pupils who do respect our policy."

Surely that is a better approach ?

Ignore this confirmed, self-confessed troll.

Shoong wrote:

Irate Wintonian wrote:
Appreciate that the colour should be correct for the uniform, but to specify the cut of the trousers to that degree is a step too far.

No, it's not.

Fashion concious teenagers will even make a fashion statement out of the cut of the trousers.If you haven't got the 'in' cut, you could be the subject of ridicule.

The point of school uniforms is that every pupil wears the same.

Scrutinizer wrote:
IronLady2010 says...

"You MOM, are a great example, if only all were like you! Well said. x"

Only, if "all" were actually like "you", using the American "MOM" instead of "mum", no one would need to worry too much about school uniforms anymore, anyway. Why? Because, hey, guess what? We'd all be Americans! ;-)

Oh come on, for god's sakes take this seriously, will you?! ;-)

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
In the 1930's lots of kids went to school in smart black shirts with a funny spidery logo on them, they were very disciplined. Ah! Godwins law what would we do without you.

chapellady wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
"The school had changed its uniform for the start of term", meaning that the parents had to replace the old ones? How much did that cost each parent? “The school has a hardship fund and have helped lots of families to buy uniform". How many people are humiliated at having to grovel for funds to but their kids their Uniform? I agree the pupils should take pride in their appearance but limitting the choice is a bit OTT, perhaps the School has shares in Uniform Manufactures or the shops that exclusively sell them?

The old school uniform could only be obtained from Skoolkit. Sweatshirts cost aprrox £14 each and polo shirts £12. I had to buy at least 2 of each. Now the blazer cost £20 and shirts can be bought from any supermarket or Matalan for £7 for a pack of 2. This is much cheaper, much smarter and much improved! Uniform is always mentioned in weekly assemblies and girls know which trousers are acceptable as they are always being told. They knew that the uniform policy was going to be strictly monitored and had been given more than enough notice of this. Perhaps the Echo should have focused on the fact that parents were not prepared to show their kids that there are rules that they might not like but have to adhere to rather than making the school out to be the one at fault! Not really a front page issue or indeed a story that needs to be printed at all.

IronLady2010 wrote:

truelysaints wrote:
Well done, no ifs or buts. Discipline begins with the small things. A pride in appearance enhances ones self worth and confidence

Such a small statement and yet so true!!!!

Mr Price wrote:
Hamble Community Sports College have taken this a step to far......They have already sent 25 pupils (girls) home as they have the wrong trousers..Hamble state the trousers must be black... NOT Cotton, NOT Combat, NOT Flares, NOT Skinny Cut,NOT Boot Cut...well we are really struggling to buy any that are NOT in the NOT list !!!!!

IronLady2010 wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
In the 1930's lots of kids went to school in smart black shirts with a funny spidery logo on them, they were very disciplined. Ah! Godwins law what would we do without you.

I never thought you were that old ;-)

punterman wrote:
Hi I ordered a taxi for Krista yesteday but its not here yet.

jcwwork wrote:
Smart uniform does not necessarily mean smart or well behaved pupils. The pupils at Crestwood have always been well behaved and happy in the old uniform. The parents had no say in the matter, it was decided by the school and then we where all told it was happening.

George4th wrote:

punterman wrote:
Hi I ordered a taxi for Krista yesteday but its not here yet.

Maybe you should order one for yourself............

....................

.....

George4th wrote:

schoolmum wrote:
I am a Crestwood year 11 mum and i have to say that the basic article is incorrect.My daughter was sent home for wearing the same trousers as last year.She has 6months left of school at school and i have been forced to buy complete new uniform when we were hold it would be flexible for year 11.Where is the flixibility in that.Would you be prepared to buy new uniform for 6months wear.Sending them home,gains nothing other than to denigh them important education before there exams.I should point out Ms Dawkins agreed my daughters trousers were exceptable last year.
I agree Crestwood pupils were given adequate time to get the uniform and given guidance as to what they needed.If i had any other year(7-10)I would say brilliant,but it is stupid and inappropriate for less than 6mths wear + if my daughters uniform was wrong,why were others allowed to break the rules and stay in school.This is starting to look like favouritism and bullying.When are Crestwood Governors going to admit
they should have stpped this happening.Year 11 pupils should be thinking about their exams not worrying about wearing the wrong trousers.My daughter was made to take out her earrings today because they didn't match.1 was gold 1 was acrylic.what difference does that make to whether she gets an "A" or an "E"? Perhaps she would like to comment on that.

You seem to be out of step with other Crestwood parents on here? And as someone pointed out, you cannot make exceptions. Plus, Crestwood is a much improved school and is liked by the children, staff and most parents.............
>
As an aside, would your daughter not have grown out of last year's clothes? (or had the wear anyway?)

punterman wrote:
I think Krista should now be known as Gromit Got the wrong trousers Gromit. So if any pupils at Creswood are reading this call her Gromit from now on.

punterman wrote:
I think Krista should now be known as Gromit Got the wrong trousers Gromit. So if any pupils at Creswood are reading this call her Gromit from now on.

S!monOn wrote:

punterman wrote:
I think Krista should now be known as Gromit Got the wrong trousers Gromit. So if any pupils at Creswood are reading this call her Gromit from now on.

I can see that you finished school a fine example of society........

nickiclaire wrote:
Maybe Crestwood should be more concerned about continuity of care at the school rather than wearing the wrong trousers. A head that only spends a couple of days a week at the school and is trying to run two seems to be much more of an issue than this topic.

schoolmum wrote:
If the school is to insist on pacific jumpers,blazers and shirts,why on earth did they not save a lot of people all the agro and mistakes and do as has just been done and issue parents
a list of suitable shops to purchase them from.Or as one teenage with there head screwed on suggested above,get the asda,tescos of this world
to come to school termly and sell uniform that way forcing the correct
uniform.Well done Mr sensible.

schoolmum wrote:
i am certainly not spoonfed.I am an ordinary working single mum with a
teenage girl who hasn't got the time
and who is trying to get the balance
right.The school wants one thing,the yougsters are unset by that and i am just trying to walk the tightrope.
All i want is to be able to without all
this hullabaloo be able to get it right.
If the school remained flexible as they said they would,none of this would have arisen.I must also add the 15/16 year olds don't necessarily fir into the school sizes.A lot of parents have had a lot of problems with this and as the school was closed could get no advice.

punterman wrote:
I think Krista should now be known as Gromit Got the wrong trousers Gromit.

So if any pupils at Creswood are reading this call her Gromit from now on.

solomum wrote:

punterman wrote:
I think Krista should now be known as Gromit Got the wrong trousers Gromit.

So if any pupils at Creswood are reading this call her Gromit from now on.

So as well as encouraging your children to disrespect the uniform rules, you are now also advising them to be rude to staff members. It sounds like you need to learn to be a respectable member of society yourself before you are capable of bringing up the next generation. Grow up! You are an adult so behave like one.

solomum wrote:

punterman wrote:
I think Krista should now be known as Gromit Got the wrong trousers Gromit.

So if any pupils at Creswood are reading this call her Gromit from now on.

So as well as encouraging your children to disrespect the uniform rules, you are now also advising them to be rude to staff members. It sounds like you need to learn to be a respectable member of society yourself before you are capable of bringing up the next generation. Grow up! You are an adult so behave like one.

punterman wrote:
I think Krista should now be known as Gromit Got the wrong trousers Gromit.

So if any pupils at Creswood are reading this call her Gromit from now on.

Mulberrys wrote:

punterman wrote:
I think Krista should now be known as Gromit Got the wrong trousers Gromit.

So if any pupils at Creswood are reading this call her Gromit from now on.

How can you encourage young people to be so disrespectful? You are a parent, please try to set an example to the children. Why don't you try and do the job of a teacher or Headteacher? Getting the balance right must be exceptionally difficult. They need our support, not our mocking them.

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
Quote: - About 40 pupils were sent home from a Reading school for turning up in skinny jeans, canvas shoes and trainers.

The John Madjeski Academy paid for the majority of the uniform for all pupils, so all parents had to provide was tailored trousers, a shirt, and shoes.

The madness is everywhere, must be a Con Dem conspiracy to wreck the education system.

IronLady2010 wrote:

Mulberrys wrote:

punterman wrote:
I think Krista should now be known as Gromit Got the wrong trousers Gromit.

So if any pupils at Creswood are reading this call her Gromit from now on.

How can you encourage young people to be so disrespectful? You are a parent, please try to set an example to the children. Why don't you try and do the job of a teacher or Headteacher? Getting the balance right must be exceptionally difficult. They need our support, not our mocking them.

You seem surprised??? How many times do you walk through Southampton and hear mothers calling their 4 year old a little F***ker etc with a fag hanging out their mouths. Sadly this is now an everyday thing.

We can't really blame the kids when some parents are totally irresponsible themselves.

I've even heard a parent call a child the nasty C word and was gob-smacked.

IronLady2010 wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
Quote: - About 40 pupils were sent home from a Reading school for turning up in skinny jeans, canvas shoes and trainers.

The John Madjeski Academy paid for the majority of the uniform for all pupils, so all parents had to provide was tailored trousers, a shirt, and shoes.

The madness is everywhere, must be a Con Dem conspiracy to wreck the education system.

OR maybe they're trying to restore Law and Order ;-)

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
Quote: - About 40 pupils were sent home from a Reading school for turning up in skinny jeans, canvas shoes and trainers.

The John Madjeski Academy paid for the majority of the uniform for all pupils, so all parents had to provide was tailored trousers, a shirt, and shoes.

The madness is everywhere, must be a Con Dem conspiracy to wreck the education system.

OR maybe they're trying to restore Law and Order ;-)

There are no Civil laws to say you have to wear Uniform, only rules specific to particular schools. It is not a unique phenomenon, just trawling through recent News reports I came across several examples, almost identical, they happen every new Term and usually, just a storm in a teacup, not really headline news. Discipline in schools is more down to the quality of the teaching staff, rather than having the pupils maintaining their ties straight or laces tied. Same goes for the parents, most of the problems with the kids is down to mothers and fathers not instilling any respect into their offspring, any form of punishment is frowned upon so the kids who know this will always push their luck as far as they can and there is nothing to deter them from bad behaviour.

punterman wrote:
I think Krista should now be known as Gromit Got the wrong trousers Gromit.

So if any pupils at Creswood are reading this call her Gromit from now on.

andysaints007 wrote:

punterman wrote:
I think Krista should now be known as Gromit Got the wrong trousers Gromit.

So if any pupils at Creswood are reading this call her Gromit from now on.

Ar*ehole

Facewagon wrote:

schoolmum wrote: If the school is to insist on pacific jumpers,blazers and shirts,why on earth did they not save a lot of people all the agro and mistakes and do as has just been done and issue parents a list of suitable shops to purchase them from.Or as one teenage with there head screwed on suggested above,get the asda,tescos of this world to come to school termly and sell uniform that way forcing the correct uniform.Well done Mr sensible.

But why should the school have to do that? Why are some parents unable to figure this out for themselves? It's hardly a secret that Asda and Tesco etc. sell school clothes, is it? I find it unsettling that people want to be spoon-fed the simplest of things.