Short trousers for male students - yes or no?

[littleblondie]

My there sure is some comical reading here .....loved the great descriptions of vests and balaclavas etc-great mental images going on there. Am so glad you enjoyed wearing that kind of gear....I bet the shorts long socks and wellies (sorry wellingtons) really finished off the look...and it never did you any harm did it? So that makes it ok.
Just as a point of interest-I am far from a "bolshy parent" (your choice of phrase not mine) I am actually a very educated person,who decided to do an awful lot of research when this issue reared its head again. During the course of that research it transpired that the school never actually had a uniform policy despite what it led an awful lot of people to believe for a very long time(it should have done). It had never consulted with the parents on the uniform issue for at least 13 years (it should have done- at least once every 3 years) In fact the school was in breach of a number of acts and laws passed by parliament. It unlawfully threatened parents with the exclusion of their children from school for not adhering to the correct uniform "policy"- even though there was not a uniform policy to breach, and and primary school age children cannot be excluded for breaches of uniform.
When the school was finally made to consult with parents (only after intervention from Ofsted), the uniform issue was very cynically hidden within the questionnaire. Nevertheless,the parents spoke and a majority voted for change. I know this is hard to grasp for some of you shorts fans out there so I will say it again - THE MAJORITY OF PARENTS VOTED FOR CHANGE.

So now we have the best of both worlds-those who want to send their children in wearing trousers can do (both boys and girls),while those that want to send their boys in shorts also can do that. But looking round the playground the last few days it is blatantly obvious that the vast majority prefer the long trousers. In a school with approximately 400 children, I counted 7 boys wearing shorts. Says it all really-I rest my case.

[littleblondie]

Oh and incidentally my son is constantly attaining high grades both academically and with his merits for good behaviour,positive attitude and impeccable manners (Mr Naylors words on his last report-reiterated by his current class teacher).
One of the reasons the Headteacher had given as not wanting boys to wear trousers was that he thought it promoted discipline and kept the boys young (no evidence was EVER provided for this), and anyway why should it just have been the boys kept young and not girls? (direct discrimination).
Funny ,how from what my son and other children have told me-the naughtiest boys just happen to be some of the ones who are still wearing shorts (not all-but some) - rather flies in the face of what we as parents were told for years doesn't it?

[tink1]

Thank you Little Blondie for your educated informative post. Thank you also for your appreciation in a former post where you indicate your appreciation for those Governors who, at great personal cost, chose to stand up for the rights of the children at Forefield Junior School.
You have most definitely have done your research and your assertions are correct on all counts - including the fact that the school had no uniform policy at all. I have a letter from Mr Naylor stating that he cannot provide an inception date for the uniform policy- if there is no inception date there is no policy.
You are correct that letters were sent threatening exclusion for breaches of uniform - I have one of those letters - incidentally hand delivered to my, and others homes by no less than the school caretaker! When I questioned the Child Protection Officer and the Head teacher under what policy the school gives out sensitive and Data Protected information to non-teaching staff she stated, "You seem to think we need a policy for everything and we don't"!
Parents are unaware that the caretaker has been given children's addresses and the Head Teacher and Child Protection Officer think this is acceptable.

Some of the other posts, ( yes, Merseyjames), clearly are written by people with no knowledge of current pedagogy, and are neither well researched nor written with any knowledge of what the real issues at the school are.
Wellingtons indeed.

I and others will continue to stand up for what is right - the children - they are who really matter.
No doubt there will still be those who will pour scorn on people who have the guts and determination to get out there and make a difference - we do not act for their benefit - our advice is write a book about your nostalgia of the fifties, and please do not quote the 'war' - In my jewellery box I have a German bullet from the war - it went through my father's friend and killed him, it then lodged in my Dad's thigh and remained there until he died of cancer in 1995 when the hospital removed it .He carried that bullet in his body all those years as a reminder of the freedom he fought for and the friends he lost- freedom we enjoy today - he earned me and you that freedom, the freedom of speech and democracy - the parents voted for change ..get over it... and instead of whingeing about the past - do something for the future...just like we have.

[tink1]

...and incidentally my son too has outstanding school reports and is commended in his school reports for his manners and hard work, as have all my children - two of whom are hardworking law abiding citizens who finished school, went to Sixth Form and then college, they fundraise and support charities and have done voluntary work in the community.

I am not a 'bolshy parent' either - I am a university educated professional and I teach my children respect -respect for authority, adults and their peers. It is a shame to name call people who you do not know.
I teach my children that when one resorts to name calling it means they show they are not able to sustain a valid argument with proof and intellectual capacity.
I am proud that they are all mature enough to act on my advice - even my primary aged child.

[tink1]

I also thank Karen Omrod from Sefton Council for her objective and independent post.

[tink1]

I do however wonder if Karen Ormrod would like to see the documentation on how this matter was truly 'dealt with and embraced'?
Or should we just let the Secretary of State investigate the matter.

[HettyWainthrop]

I have followed this story and read all the posts on this site with great interest,and what seems to come across the most is that short trouser fans seem to resort to personal attacks at any opportunity-yes that means YOU Merseyjames.
What seems to have slipped your (narrow) mind here is that we are talking about primary school age children here. Just because you and your children wore shorts when you (and they) were young does NOT make it acceptable as we near the year 2010.
You and Jackoak seem to take great delight in harping back to the "good old days" and have both passed comments about girls wearing "short" skirts. What seems to easily slip your mind is that girls are able to wear tights to keep their legs warm when the weather is bitterly cold like it has been this week. Indeed,most primary school age girls I have seen walking to school this week have indeed been wearing tights,or trousers. As to older girls who may be in senior school, a lot of them have been wearing them too,and as a point of interest,skirt lengths are most certainly NOT short-in fact they come in standard lengths that usually sit on or just below the knee.
Whether you like it or not, a poll was taken by the school (most unwillingly I might add,because they knew what the result would be perhaps?) This overwhelmingly proved conclusively that the parents wanted a CHOICE in what to send their children to school in. The new uniform policy now takes into consideration equal opportunites,anti-race and anti-sex discrimination legislation,which can only be a good thing surely?
I have however noticed the hypocrisy of some parents in the school recently. Certain parents who were quite vociferous in their support for short trousers,now sending in their boys in long pants? Surely not!
And then we also had the sight of the diehard shorts fans walking their children to school-boys resplendent in coats ,hats and shorts with legs that were practically purple from the cold,while Mum or Dad were well wrapped up in coats hats and jeans or trousers. Surely if these parents like the look of short trousers so much,the least they could do is support their child and go out with bare legs themselves?
Or is that going a step too far?

[graham31]

I was a Forefield pupil (from 1949 on) and naturally in those far off days, a shorts wearer but I have no strong feelings on whether boys wear shorts or longs now. However I don't recall ever having legs blue with cold but perhaps that was because we lived in fairly cold houses and had built up a higher resistance to chilly weather. What I do think today's boys do miss out on though, is that rite of passage when shorts were exchanged for long trousers at age about 13 or 14. I can still remember how proud I felt at "becoming a grown-up".

Anyway, won't Global Warning mean everyone wants shorts again soon.

[HettyWainthrop]

Just thought I would add another comment regarding this issue......it has obviously been the Christmas Holidays, but while I have been out and about I must admit I have not seen anybody wearing short trousers-this just proves they are not a normal mode of clothing for this time of year. Even the diehards who still insist on sending their boys to school wearing shorts must surely admit this?
If they are such fans of shorts why are they not dressing their boys in them all the time-ie weekends and holidays?
Graham31 made some valid points in his post-namely that times have changed which indeed they have. We should celebrate that fact and move with the times and the fact that we live in a free society where we are able to express our opinions.

[HildaTownsend]

I quite think it is an excellent idea, for young boys to wear trousers in winter weather. Does Mr Naylor honestly think that short trousers are appropriate attire when it is about -3 degrees and everywhere is covered in snow and ice? He obviously has no idea about suitable clothing in different temperatures, and probably dresses his poor children in t-shirts and shorts in winter, and possibly makes them wear jumpers in summer! I remember my brother John coming home after school every day , absoulutely freezing, because he had to wear ridicoulous short trousers. But that was about 50 years ago! The fact that a headteacher wanted to carry on something so inhumane and cruel is ludicrous. If he likes them so much, why not wear them himself, then he could be a role model for the children, keep young, AND promote discipline all at the same time. I for one am glad he FINALLY saw sense, well done to the Parent Governors for being so determined!

[HildaTownsend]

Oh,and the only ones who are " really making themselves sound ridiculous" are Jack Oak and Mersey James, who clearly do NOT realise quite how ludicrous a policy the short trouser one was - so ludicrous in fact , it did not have an inception date, so it obviously did not exist. And, what, might I ask, is there to be so pleased about? Was freezing to death fun? Did you find having frostbite exciting? Is hypothermia like a game to you? Do keep me posted. I must say, it is a trifle amusing that you praise the wearing of shorts so much. Do you still wear them now? I shouldn't think so, because its COLD in winter. Therfore, you didnt like them that much! And, as for a well-run school, I must say I disagree. While my friend's daughter was there, there was never so much as a bar of soap in the toilets, the canteen was separate from the school - how absurd , and she was constantly being picked on by a particularly horrible child, but not much of the bullying was dealt with untill july in year 6 when he left the school anyway and was not a certain headteachers problem anymore. Anyway, at least a few users of this site have put valid points!

Hilda Townsend

[Merseyjames]

I have never read so much nonsense as in the majority of posts on this thread! The only personal attacks I can see are coming thick and fast from the rebels complaining about alleged but non existent personal attacks from the one or two posters who'd argued for the status quo. They seem to have demonstrated very clearly that the term 'Bolshy' was quite apt.

In their wild and exaggerated descriptions of the supposed torture of wearing shorts they seem to forget that until recent years, most of the boys in Britain wore shorts virtually all the time until into their teens and there are still quite a number of schools, albeit a minority, where shorts remain the norm.

The only thing that has changed is that shorts are no longer fashionable. Full stop. They might be practical, sensible and healthier, but they're not fashionable. End of story.

As for the sarcasm about the clothing I wore at school, and someone saying they'd have been beaten up if they dressed like that, er, that's unlikely, because it was widespread and normal throughout Britain, it wasn't posh, I went to a state primary and duffel coats were what everyone wore, later they gave way to Parkers (I had a Parker by the time I was in juniors.) This was the 60s and 70s. My own boys wore shorts throughout primary school in the late 80s as did all the boys in the school.

And Wellingtons are sensible whatever trousers you're wearing if you're walking to school in the snow. Oh but yes, I forgot, they're not hip either are they. And of course, so many kids don't even walk to school anymore, let alone in the snow. Some parents would actually drive their car right into the classroom if they could, even if they lived two doors from the school.

Face it: you're rebels, you don't like rules and you've taught your kids that Bolshy rebellion can break down rules you don't go along with.

[seanbeanisfit]

Merseyjames-you claim that other people making personal attacks are so called rebels,and then you launch into another personal attack yourself again by calling people whose views differ from yours bolshy! It if wasn't so pathetic,it would be funny! You seem to have a problem with parents who want to do their best for their children. Get over yourself,please!

Maybe shorts are out of fashion, maybe they will come back into fashion again;who knows?
The facts of this affair are:
Whether you like it or not, times have changed-we now live in a society where everybody is considered equal and we are not allowed to discriminate on the grounds of gender,sex, race or religion.

The school in question did NOT have an official uniform policy-it claimed that it did,but proof was obtained that it did not have one,and again,like it not,in the 21st century,we have to have policies for most things in order for them to be legal. Yes things were different when you and I were children,but you need to move with the times,something Forefield had never done.

Government guidelines state (as a fact) that Governing Bodies HAVE to listen to the views of parents and children,and that school uniform, apart from not being discriminatory in anyway, has to be widely available and reasonably priced. The Governing Body and Headteacher were guilty of ignoring parental requests and indeed those of the children-the school council was banned from discussing school uniform at meetings. Hardly good practice in anybody's book.

There had been no uniform review of any kind since 1996 when Mr Naylor took over-and indeed his insistence for keeping boys in short trousers was that it "kept the boys young and promoted discipline".No evidence was ever produced to support this statement,despite numerous requests being made over 13 years (most of which were ignored). In these days of equality for all,this was a very dangerous statement to make as it was direct discrimination against boys-why should boys be kept young and not girls? Why should boys need more discipline than girls? Why should children who are not of the Christian faith and whose parents want them to attend Forefield Junior School not be allowed to dress modestly as their faith requires by covering their knees? Perhaps that is why there is a very low minority of people who are not white in the school? But then we cannot expect somebody who is still in a time warp to answer these questions can we Merseyjames?

Another fact for you-after a lot of pressure from the local MP and also councillors(yes how sad it had to go that high after the abject refusal of Mr Naylor and the Governing body to listen to reason) the school then chose to waste over £1500 on a survey by an outside firm to ascertain what the parents and children actually wanted from their school uniform-when it could simply have asked the question on the weekly newsletter at no cost whatsover-the results proved that everybody wanted choice. The choice for boys and girls to wear long trousers or shorts or skirts. What you would call a win win solution. Those who want to can wear shorts in the middle of winter when it is -5 if they want to,likewise,those who want to wear long trousers in 30 dgrees can do so.

Perhaps, Merseyjames you can explain how this can be so wrong, and also what rules exactly were broken? After all-if a policy does not exist,how can it either be enforced or broken?
Without making yourself sound racist or sexist,I really don't see how you can.

[humpty]

Merseyjames, You have never read so much nonsense?

You obviously don’t read what you write; drivel must copiously flow from your mind and miraculously end up as the written word.

Your response is pitiful as it offers no reasoned argument for the wearing of short trousers as opposed to long trousers. End of Story! Full Stop!

“...they seem to forget that until recent years, most of the boys in Britain wore shorts virtually all the time until into their teens...” NO, they remember. That’s why they don’t want their children wearing shorts!

“The only thing that has changed is that shorts are no longer fashionable?”

Listen to yourself; shorts are shorts, generally worn in warmer weather or sunnier climes. This is nothing to do with fashion but with practicality and the wearing of shorts in sub zero temperatures is not practical. The only thing that hasn’t changed here is your old fashioned views.

In what way are shorts healthier? Have you been watching the Simpsons? “EAT MY SHORTS!” not sure how this would make you healthier though, unless shorts were part of your calorie controlled diet!

“Let me see now, Mars bar, Twix, custard donut, no I’ll have a pair of shorts please”

Sarcasm! Oh yes, sarcasm, a very effective tool in dealing with nincompoops, and as expect you didn’t get it, though most of the sensible readers did!

Just to reinforce the hypocrisy of your argument let’s check out your list of clothing –

Balaclava or hood up on my duffel coat
Duffel coat or Mac
Vest
Shirt (heated in front of the electric fire before putting on)
Tie
Jumper
Shorts
Long socks
Wellingtons (with shoes in carrier bag)
Gloves.

Omitting tie all the items of clothing above except one are worn to keep one warm, can you guess which one is the odd one out? YES SHORTS!

What is the point in wearing all these items of clothing (especially the reference to the heated shirt) if you’re then going to prance about in a pair of shorts? It’s like getting your home double glazed, insulating the cavity walls, insulating the loft and then opening the windows when the central heating comes on!

I bring my children up to have a healthy respect for authority but, also to challenge that authority if it enforces nonsensical and indefensible rules and regulations. If you see this as rebellion then so be it “come the revolution”

Face it: you’re an old fashioned, stick in the mud, head in the sand traditionalist with a fetish for short pants and no conceptual awareness of progress with the passage of time. This is the modern world!

Ever thought of changing your username to Merseyshorts

[chiruscuro]

Merseyjames
First paragraph, line 2 ,word 12 of your post – the word ‘rebel’
First paragraph, line 4, word 10 of your post – the word ‘bolshie’
Definition:
‘Bolshie’ – stroppy, difficult, belligerent, quarrelsome, argumentative, tetchy, crabby, grouchy
‘rebel’ – insurgent, mutineer, revolutionary, radical, dissenter.
I would like to ask why you seem not to consider these statements in your own post as a ‘personal attack?’
‘belligerent’ – aggressive, argumentative, quarrelsome, loud-mouthed, stroppy, confrontational, spoiling for a fight, cantankerous,
This is how you have described those parents with differing opinions to your own on a public site. Are your comments merely, ’alleged non-existent personal attacks?’
Where have you researched your argument that ‘shorts are no longer fashionable’ as a basis to your point of view? Where have you researched that shorts are ‘practical, sensible and healthier?’
Can you explain how shorts in sub-zero temperatures in the Winter - are a healthy mode of dress?
Do Inuit cultures wear them? Are they recommended by Governmental Departments in Countries such as Alaska, Canada, Sweden, Switzerland, or Scotland even?
How about children who are of a faith that requires modest dress? Should these children be precluded from State Schools - just because of an outdated uniform that was the norm before this country became a multicultural society?
Is that lawful?
What is the Government legislation on uniform?
A strong statement that states as fact that I amongst others have, and I quote- ‘taught your kids that bolshie rebellion can break down rules you don’t go along with’
Merseyjames, I have three children, two whom are hard working adults who have helped raise money for charity, helped run youth clubs, obey the law, had excellent school reports which always commented on their impeccable manners, did well in higher education and well as further education, contribute to the community in many positive ways, - they are most certainly NOT deserving of your ill-researched, and quite frankly personally insulting comments.
Forefield Juniors had no uniform policy. If you wish I will scan and post the letter from the Head confirming this on this site.
I do not believe that your post - a year on, is productive in any way shape or form, the uniform questionnaire gave an overwhelming majority response from parents for change. That change was announced on the 6 March last year 2009.
It is clear that you are very misinformed about the facts – you may gain more knowledge about current legislation on uniform from the ‘Teacher-net’ website.
If you also take a trip into Liverpool City Centre you will see that the majority of trendy shops stock wellington boots, in various colours and patterns. I personally want a purple pair. I love them.
Your sentiment that the shorts issue is a fashion issue is nonsensical, conjured, and certainly does not hold up to scrutiny.