Why do some developing countries rife with poverty require children to wear school uniforms that are a burdensome expense for their parents, to the point where many children can’t go? This just doesn’t make sense to me. I asked a friend of mine and her take was that, besides being a cultural leftover of colonialism, that it is done to keep a lot of people out of the system. I thought it was generally accepted that the more of your population is educated, the better off your country was likely to be. Am I naive? Is there some reason besides stupidity and/or malice to keep poor children from getting an education?
Do you have some figures on the use of school uniforms worldwide?
Kids in quite a few non-developing countries wear them. Here in my own Houston Independent School District, uniforms are considered cheaper. Parents aren’t pressured to keep their kids in The Latest Fashions.
And kids have plenty of opportunity to Express Themselves–by what they do & say.
I agree with Bridget. I’d have thought that a uniform, worn 5-6 days a week, was cheaper for the parents than lots of casual clothes.
Wouldn’t it only be cheaper if they were wearing the exact same set of clothes every day? When I’ve had uniforms, I’ve had to purchase at least 5 sets of the tops and bottoms to get me through the week.
But changing to new clothes is a luxury far beyond the poverty of people in most developing countries. Heck, many of us here in the USA do not change clothes every day.
Uniforms can also be cheaper in that they are worn as hand-me-downs by the next child in the family.
They’re cheaper in developing countries because you needed 5 sets to get you through this week, but you could also wear those same 5 sets next week, and the week after that. In other words, you only had to buy 5 sets for the whole year, instead of, say, 10 sets.
I think the issue, however, is that they aren’t cheaper for these kids to have to buy *new *clothes, when they were getting by just fine on the old ones. I would venture to bet that kids going to school in developing countries don’t go to Target for BackToSchool sales.
I wore a uniform the whole time I was at school. In summer one pair of shorts and three shirts was pretty much the norm. In winter we wore a suit. It got dry-cleaned perhaps twice a term.
I also think it’s a colonial leftover. But it’s also the case that in countries where you don’t have mandatory universal schooling, uniforms set the students apart. The uniform is a badge of prestige, in a way.
I guess my confusion is compounded by the fact that I basically wear the same 5 sets of street clothes anyhow.
Something else: When I’ve had to wear uniforms, I’ve also had to buy street clothes, as uniforms were not to be worn after school.
Besides, one can make use of hand-me downs or rewearing the same 5 sets of clothes whether they are uniforms or not. In my experience, the uniform clothes are more expensive than street clothes from a discount store.
But, yeah, not everywhere has discount stores.
It’s also good because no student can look worse or better than another. Better all uniforms than rags on one and riches on another.
There have been a number of articles in both the local and English language press here about the high prices and low quality of the required uniforms.
And it works pretty well. I love having my kids in uniforms. The shorts last forever, the pants somewhat less because of the knees (I have boys). Ours are pretty high quality for a slightly higher price than, say, Target ($22.50 for long khaki or navy trousers).
Uniforms help to level the playing field somewhat (at least for appearances- don’t think for a minute that kids don’t know who lives where and has what).
The vast majority of middle and high schools here have the students in uniform. Some uniforms are raggedy, some aren’t. I bet you can guess who can afford more than the minimum required number of uniforms.
I have no idea what schools the OP is referring to, but if he’s talking about projects like Oprah’s school for girls in South Africa, the uniforms are provide to the students free of charge.
As the parent of three kids, I’ll second what others have said about costs of school uniforms being considerably cheaper than free-form clothing. But more than anything, it eliminates the teen peer pressure to wear “cool” clothes, as well as making laundry management so much easier.
I had to wear uniforms for middle/high school and let me tell you, class distinction is not erased at all by uniforms. Students know who’s wearing hand-me-downs and who has five sets hanging in their closet.
Uniforms are cheaper in the long run, I suppose, but they always seem to be made of crappy, hard-to-take-care-of fabric that broils in summer and freezes in winter. (In Korea, anyway.)
Another aspect of school uniforms is that if, during school hours, you are hanging out at the river/video arcade/mall, you will attract attention from adults who may report it to the school.
IOW, the same reason we make prisoners wear uniforms. 
Some of it is probably to get them to conform to group norms.
I saw a thing on TV once about education in some Asian country—Thailand, I think. The students lined up before class, then the teacher called them up one by one. They assumed the position, he whacked them on the ass (not super hard), they bowed and went to their seats. They hadn’t done anything wrong…they hadn’t done anything at all, yet. End of the day, same ritual.
In many countries, they don’t take any crap whatsoever from the kids and they nip it in the bud whenever possible.
I would suggest that in many cases it encourages them to express themselves in such ways - they can’t rely on superficial appearances and conformity or rejection of mainstream or cultish fashions, so if they want to be an individual and to be noticed, they’ve got to stand out another way.
In my town, kids got sent home 9for wearing shirts carrying obscene expressions). Time for uniforms?