It stands as only a minor tweak to a well-delineated program, but the Pine Bluff School Board has moved back the line of acceptable school wear, yet again. As reported in the Commercial, a revised school uniform policy will take effect today. Specifically, the district’s dress code has been changed to forbid the wearing of tight fitting pants known as jeggings or leggins by girls or boys.
As reflected in the revised student handbook, the new policy reads, “The following items are not allowed as a part of Pine Bluff High School’s Uniform Policy: Jeggings, Black Denim, Leggins, Warm-Ups (fleece or any kind) and Spandex.” The Pine Bluff School Board approved the rule change at the request of high school principal Robert Handley during its Dec. 20 regular monthly meeting.
As Handley told the school board, “Some of them are wearing this real tight stuff that doesn’t leave anything to the imagination.”
While the district surely wants to spur students’ imagination as a general matter, one assumes a more central objective was the suppression of other less productive mental exercises. As has often been said by uniform proponents —- school shouldn’t devolve into a fashion show, nor should clothes be used as one more wedge between economic classes, races or other lines of division.
In 2009, the Dollarway School District adopted a uniform requirement. At that time, we voiced support for the move. As PBSD now refines the contours of its policy, it is fitting to recall a few of our previous observations on the general matter of school uniforms.
Independent reporting for Pine Bluff & Jefferson County since 1879.
First, school uniforms are a primary tool for campus safety. Imagine scenarios where outsiders enter the high school campus and cause trouble. Being able to tell at a glance who belongs and who doesn’t is critical to the quick and safe resolution of the situation. As our community faces a mounting wave of violent crime, any small thing we can to do to protect our kids is worth the effort. Of course, opponents of school uniform policies often argue that such regulations thwart individuality, or worse, transgress against First Amendment guarantees. We shouldn’t dismiss these concerns too quickly. Anytime a person’s freedom of speech (in whatever guise) is unduly limited, we all suffer. It is a cornerstone of a free society and not to be treated lightly. That said, the school district has a compelling interest in regulating those aspects of a student’s time on campus that are shown to pose hazards to safety and order.
Researchers writing for the Journal of Educational Research note that uniforms can function as catalysts for positive change. Certainly there are the safety issues outlined above. Perhaps more importantly, uniforms are a metaphor for common purpose. They subconsciously emphasize “we’re all in this together.” They have the potential for building a kind of espirit de corps among students. It should not be lost on us that gang members often wear “uniforms” of a sort. If even street thugs know the importance of team colors, then surely we can pay heed. All this said, one must return to the question of individuality. Do uniforms squelch expression of individuality? Perhaps in a way they do. They hinder the kind of individuality obtained by fashion labels and media-driven values. They impede the vain avarice that led to near riots when the latest Air Jordan sneakers went on sale. So, yes. They do hinder a type of individuality — the superficial, fleeting and unimportant kind.
What they don’t squelch is a person’s character, intellect, ethics, wit, wisdom, vision or creativity. Those things that a person would have regardless of wardrobe are neither curtailed nor sequestered by matching shirts and pants. If anything, the sameness of uniform dress should be used to inspire the kinds of difference that actually matter most. Perhaps the biggest teaching point uniforms promise is this: It is not so much that clothes make the man, as it is the cut of the man that may exceed his clothes.