The Greater Victoria School Board was poised to eliminate all but a shred of its schools鈥� dress codes this week, but instead will give the issue some more debate. It鈥檚 a wise move, especially as it gives parents a chance to be heard.
At Monday鈥檚 meeting, trustees were to vote on a motion that would essentially have removed clothing restrictions except for things such as racist or discriminatory slogans. The new wording, to be added to schools鈥� codes of conduct, would have reinforced adherence to the sa国际传媒 Human Rights Code.
Trustees were responding to concerns that dress codes unfairly single out girls, putting more emphasis on what they wear than on what boys wear. No rules should discriminate on the basis of gender or violate the rights code.
It鈥檚 a complex issue, and the board shouldn鈥檛 act without hearing from lots of voices. Parents and teachers are divided, even if kids are eager to remove restrictions on what they wear.
Chairwoman Edith Loring-Kuhanga said the discussion started last year when trustees were talking about gender equity and gender neutrality.
鈥淭hat鈥檚 where it all started because then people started talking about the dress code and whether kids have to conform to a certain dress code.鈥�
The motion to the board would have prevented schools from saying anything about dress in the codes of conduct except for the following:
鈥淥ur school is committed to creating a learning community that values diversity and is free of all forms of discrimination. In line with the sa国际传媒 Human Rights Code which prohibits discrimination on the basis of an individual鈥檚 race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, religion, marital status, physical or mental disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression and age, (insert school name) promotes a climate of understanding and mutual respect where all are equal in dignity and rights. Actions through verbal and non-verbal communication (including clothing) must demonstrate support for the sa国际传媒 Human Rights Code.鈥�
That wording would remove all the parsing of length of shorts, width of straps, quantities of visible flesh and other almost geometric examinations of children鈥檚 clothing. For some, including a lot of parents, it opens the door too wide.
So far, no official parent representative has been involved in the discussions, said Audrey Smith, president of the Victoria Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils.
鈥淥verall, the general sense that I鈥檓 getting from parents is that yes, a dress code of a sort is important.鈥�
It is important, and it is appropriate.
The vast majority of professions and occupations insist on appropriate workplace attire and grooming. To raise a generation thinking otherwise would do our young people a huge disfavour.
Generally, the kids who do best in life are those raised with rules, boundaries and expectations, not to make them conform to some adult need for control, but to give them focus and direction. It is not restricting to help them develop self-discipline and restraint, it鈥檚 liberating. There鈥檚 a strong element of self-respect in dressing appropriately.
Anyone who has raised kids knows that dress affects behaviour. A kid dressed for play will want to play. Some years ago, a school in rural Alberta had a sign that said: 鈥淭hank you for removing your hats when you enter our school.鈥� The teachers said it was a rule arrived at after consultation with the students. They said it immediately had a noticeable, positive effect on behaviour.
The board should not decide on its own to do away with dress codes. Parents, students and teachers should be consulted. The trustees are elected as voices of the people, not to tell the people what to do.
