Dress Code Blues: An Exploration of Urban Students' Reactions to a Public High School Uniform Policy

Journal of Negro Education, The, Winter 2006 by DaCosta, Kneia

This qualitative investigation explores the responses of 22 U.S. urban public high school students when confronted with their newly imposed school uniform policy. Specifically, the study assessed students' appraisals of the policy along with compliance and academic performance. Guided by ecological human development perspectives and grounded in theory-based qualitative analysis, the study elucidated the themes that emerged in relevant student narratives. Findings indicated that the overwhelming majority of students were opposed to and non-compliant with the school uniform policy, and that these responses were unrelated to school performance. Students developed oppositional strategies designed to undermine the policy and to retain some semblance of freedom and dignity. Suggestions for further research and policy are provided.

THE NATIONAL CONTEXT

The re-emergence of school uniforms as a policy in many U.S. public school districts has seemed timely. In the wake of media saturated with teenage horror stories such as news coverage and commentary of the 1999 Columbine tragedy and what these tragedies might represent in terms of adolescent individualism and alienation run amok, school uniforms appear to represent an ideal solution for creating homogeneity and, possibly, harmony in student populations. Such a unified body of youth would presumably be free to emerge without the otherwise obvious divisive markers of wealth, status, or gang affiliation. One might expect that the homogeneity provided by a uniform would especially ameliorate the urgent sense of needing to fit in with one's peers-particularly during the transition to high school, when so many developmental tasks need balancing by these youth (Rubinstein, 1995). But how might one reconcile this attempt to enforce such uniformity in the paramount American institution of socialization, when the American ideal elsewhere espouses a creed of individuality and freedom at all costs? For teenagers, the astute readers of fashion as social texts (Brumberg, 1997), what might a standardized dress policy come to represent, and what are their experiences in confronting such policy?

Perhaps these questions are especially salient in urban contexts, which have served as epicenters for these public policy practices and debates, due to the need for innovative, pervasive reforms in these school districts. Many urban, minority youth are particularly in need of creative interventions for helping them negotiate their unique developmental challenges. Policies that are focused solely on the macro-structural problems in urban schools fail to take into account how such developmental needs will interact with such strategies. There are consequences to neglecting urban youth at a stage in their lives when they are searching for autonomy and responsibility. They have a need to exert power, but they are powerless. In the absence of such means, one can understand how appearance and clothing choices become the ultimate tools for meeting these needs. Hence, autocratically mandated uniform policies could understandably be met with resistance among "disenfranchised" urban youth. Less formal "dress codes," which are officially distinguished by an emphasis on what not to wear (Anderson, 2002), seem on the less stringent end of the continuum, and, thus, possibly fare better in these public school contexts.

Nevertheless, some public schools have claimed uniform implementation "successes" (Holloman, LaPoint, Alleyne, Palmer, & Sanders-Phillips, 1996; U.S. Department of Education, 1996). Such cases are generally part of larger school missions to improve the educational climate. This juxtaposition in agendas might suggest that successful implementation of a public school uniform policy is based in the subtext of the strategy, that is, in the messages conveyed through the development and enforcement of the uniform policy. Is it a policy that is based on pride, membership, and inspiration, or on punishment, exclusion, and restriction? Are there clearly positive identities or high expectations that wearers and spectators alike associate with the uniform, or is it rather a marker for who can "pass," or who can proceed through the school day without threat of harassment or disciplinary "profiling"? It is clear that some uniforms, such as the Reserve Officers Training Corps (ROTC), cheerleading, athletic, and other uniforms worn by many urban students for decades have been associated with prestige, pride, and collective identity, and perhaps a broader positive behavioral characteristic (McLaughlin, & Heath, 1993). But selection factors easily account for much of this, in addition to the positive social associations of such uniforms in many school contexts. The fact that uniform policies often coincide with other school reform efforts makes it difficult to disentangle cause and effect (Brunsma, 1998). When such traditions in dress become a policy mandated to all students, the dynamics are understandably different.