Cd'A school trustee pushes for student uniforms - Coeur d'Alene Press: Local News

Cd'A school trustee pushes for student uniforms

Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Friday, July 13, 2012 5:00 am

COEUR d’ALENE — One of the newest trustees on the Coeur d’Alene school board would like to see a mandatory student uniform policy instituted at every school in the district.

Jim Purtee, who was appointed to serve as a trustee in April, pitched the idea at Monday’s school board meeting. He was elected to serve as the board’s vice-chair at the same meeting.

Purtee said he’s promoting uniforms because he feels it’s his duty as a trustee to bring forward ideas and programs that will improve students’ academic results.

“As has been proven, across the country, allowing casual dress is allowing a distraction to the learning environment, so why allow that?” Purtee told The Press on Thursday.

At least one of Purtee’s fellow board members, Tom Hamilton, disagrees. Hamilton, who was elected as board chairman at Monday’s meeting, told The Press he thinks mandatory student uniforms are unnecessary, and said he thinks the process of considering them is “a distraction to the board’s work.”

The board has other priorities right now, Hamilton said. They are working on implementing common core standards as well as procedures required by Idaho’s “Students Come First” education reform laws such as pay-for-performance for teachers and the 1:1 ratio of laptops to students and teachers. There is also a $32.7 million school construction bond election coming up on August 28. Successful passage of the bond will allow the school district to upgrade facilities at several of its aging schools.

Purtee told The Press it’s his opinion that the school district’s new dress code hasn’t been successfully enforced.

Again, Hamilton disagrees.

“I believe the dress code policy work that we did last year is more than adequate, and we need to continue working on uniformly applying and enforcing the dress code,” Hamilton said. “I think it’s a much better use of our time to continue to work on what we already have in place.”

The comprehensive dress policy, enacted during the last school year, bans revealing clothing of any kind, including pants that ride below the waistline and low-cut blouses. Pajamas and sleep wear are also against the rules. Hoods, bandanas, bandana headbands and sunglasses are no longer allowed to be worn in school buildings, and principals can outlaw any type of hat they deem unacceptable.

Purtee said that taking it a step further would be as simple as requiring students to wear a collared polo shirt and khaki pants. The school district has three magnet schools — Lakes, Ramsey and Sorensen — that already require the type of uniform Purtee described.

He points to large, urban school districts in Philadelphia and the Long Beach Unified School District in California, where school uniforms have been required for more than a decade.

Requiring public school students to wear uniforms is definitely a growing trend throughout the nation. Strict dress codes are even more popular.

The U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics reports that between 1999 and 2009, the number of public school principals reporting that their students are required to wear uniforms rose by 12 percent. In 2009, 19 percent of principals said their schools had a uniform requirement.

The same year, 57 percent of public school principals reported that their schools enforced a strict dress code, reflecting a 47 percent increase over a 10-year period.

Purtee said he knows there will be parents who object to the idea.

“Why? Because of the word ‘uniform,’” Purtee said. “They will ignore the facts that have been shown at school districts from coast to coast.”

In May, parents at one of the Coeur d’Alene School District’s middle schools rejected a mandatory student uniform proposal made by the school administration. Parents were surveyed to see if they would support a uniform policy, and of 683 parents and guardians who responded, 392 (57 percent) opposed the idea. A policy was favored by 263 parents (39 percent).

Woodland Principal Chris Hammons told The Press in May that most parents said they were against mandatory uniforms because they want their children to be able to express themselves freely, and that they felt confident in the school district’s new dress code policy.

In a PowerPoint presentation Purtee presented Monday to the board, he asked: “Is the choice mathematics, English, history, literature, geography, reading...or self expression. What is school supposed to be about?”

Ultimately, it will be the decision of the community whether to require all students to wear uniforms, Purtee said.

“It’s the community’s school district. They can do what they want,” Purtee said. “It’s their children. They can provide lip service to providing better education or they can take a stand.”

To be approved, a policy requiring mandatory student uniforms will have to go through the district’s policy review process which includes committee reviews and a public comment period.

It’s unlikely any changes would be made until the 2013-14 school year, if the board chooses to move forward with a student uniform requirement.

At Monday’s meeting, Purtee made a motion that the board direct Hazel Bauman, the school superintendent, to schedule a board workshop to discuss the dress code policy. The motion carried 3-1 with Hamilton casting the opposing vote. The workshop will likely be scheduled sometime in September or October.

 Purtee's PowerPoint presentation to the board can be viewed below.



  • Discuss

Welcome to the discussion.


  • Kirsty posted at 2:05 am on Sun, Sep 9, 2012.

    Kirsty Posts: 21

    I don't know what to say about this. I have been working as a healthcare administrator in a school for 5 years now. Having an uniform is something that I support, but at the same time I don't want to force students and parents to accept my own personal opinions.

  • bratny822 posted at 4:26 am on Tue, Sep 4, 2012.

    bratny822 Posts: 11

    “I accept the dress cipher action assignment that we did aftermost year is added than adequate, and we charge to abide alive on analogously applying and administration the dress code,” Hamilton said. “I anticipate it’s a abundant bigger use of our time to abide to assignment on what we already accept in place. killtest 642-437 The absolute dress policy, allowable during the aftermost academy year, bans absolute accouterment of any kind, including pants that ride beneath the waistline and low-cut blouses. Pajamas and beddy-bye abrasion are additionally adjoin the rules. 642-437 pratice tests Hoods, bandanas, bandana headbands and sunglasses are no best accustomed to be beat in academy buildings, and rincipals can outlaw any blazon of hat they account unacceptable. Purtee said that demography it a footfall added would be as simple as acute acceptance to abrasion a collared polo shirt and biscuit pants. The academy commune has three allurement schools — Lakes, Ramsey and Sorensen — that already crave the blazon of compatible Purtee described. He credibility to large, burghal academy districts in Philadelphia and the Long Beach Unified Academy Commune in California, area academy uniforms accept been appropriate for added than a decade. 642-437 exam

  • GilesF posted at 5:17 am on Sun, Jul 22, 2012.

    GilesF Posts: 34

    Maybe teachers should be more worried about preparing their students for masters of education rather than waste time with trying to push a rule that is somehow against the freedom of choice. Hope you understand my point of view.

  • the floorist posted at 9:45 am on Tue, Jul 17, 2012.

    the floorist Posts: 331 this new debate considered "divisive"? LoL!

  • 1inIdaho posted at 3:57 pm on Mon, Jul 16, 2012.

    1inIdaho Posts: 240

    Purtee did a nice job of running Sid off the board. Don't be surprised if his next move is to have Koler fill the vacancy.
    THAT is the direction our school board is going in.
    THAT should scare the bejezus out of anyone with a kid in SD271.

  • 1inIdaho posted at 3:15 pm on Mon, Jul 16, 2012.

    1inIdaho Posts: 240

    What a bunch of drivel.
    The correlation between uniforms and improved standardized test scores IS NOT a validation of the notion that: students who are forced to wear uniforms get smarter...
    The correlation is this: In schools where uniform policies are strictly enforced, the students who do not follow the policy are either expelled, transfer, or drop-out.
    These same students also tend to be the ones who drag average test scores down.
    You haven't made the remaining students smarter... you have only upped-their average scores by eliminating more of the low scores.
    That's brilliant, if you are being incented (teacher pay, federal matching-dollars...) on standardized test scores. But it doesn't mean that you are doing anything to improve education amongst the population of your district.
    Graduation rates go up... if you only measure the number of kids who enter 9th grade, and finish 12th. If you track this population from Kindergarten... you will see the number of kids leaving the system pre-high school RISE, and overall graduation rates DROP.
    Look at the methodology of those studies... I'm not making this stuff up.

    As far as uniforms getting rid of cliques and hiding the socio-economic disparities in a school population: That's plain garbage. I can tell you from personal experience. I had children attend a local private school... with one of the most rigorous uniform policies in the city. The uniform might look the same from a distance... as their sweaters, skirts, and ties all come from the same manufacturer. But you don't have to get close to see the rich kids are wearing Nordstrom dress shirts vs. the poor kids' Walmart threads. Or name-brand shoes vs. Payless. Or designer navy blue pants vs. thin cotton ones. Those kids ALL still knew which side of the tracks they each came from. At the upper grades, the cliques formed accordingly... and at the lower grades, car-pools & play dates were all arranged accordingly by the parents. The combination of pity, resentment, and jealousy that flowed between the "have-parents" and those on "fair-share" programs was palpable as well. That garbage doesn't go away just because everybody looks the same on the surface. The kid who gets dropped off in the Hyundai knows the difference from the kid who gets dropped off in the Range Rover. Uniforms do NOTHING to change that.

    Parents at Woodland Middle School could care less about being allowed send their kids to school in designer labels. That has NOTHING to do with why they voted-down uniforms. Those that voted against Uniforms did so because it isn't fair for their kids... Kids who FOLLOW THE DRESS CODE, kids who DON'T create distractions, kids who already get GOOD GRADES... to be denied the ability to be treated as an individual; ALL BECAUSE A FEW LAZY PARENTS aren't willing to enforce simple rules with their own children. Woodland Parents voted-down school Uniforms because the majority of them can do their job... and aren't willling to cede all of their parental responsibilities to school officials. Woodland Parents voted down uniforms because we expect school administrators to enforce the existing dress code... we expect them to notify us if our kids aren't in compliance... and we expect them to force the parents of non-compliant kids to make a choice about whether their kid is going to comply; or get their education somewhere else.

    I can't remember which idiot on this thread insinuated that parents who objected to uniforms were doing so because they were lacking the discipline to tell their kids that Uniforms are what the kid should wear. You've got it Bass-Ackwards, lady. Parents with no discipline... whose kids treat them like excrement... and who lack parenting-skills & common-sense: THOSE are the parents who support school uniforms. THOSE parents are unwilling or incapable of getting their kids to follow the dress code, and they just want it to be somebody else's problem. Step-up to the plate! Be a real parent! Do your job, and teach your kids how to behave in a society that has rules. You let them dress like gangsters & sluts; then wonder why they end up in Juvie, or pregnant. Guess what??? If you're not doing your job... school uniform or no school uniform; they're going to end up in Juvie or pregnant.

    And don't even get me started on cost. It doesn't cost any more or less to outfit a student in Dress-Code-Appropriate attire vs. a School Uniform. It all just depends on where you shop. When my kids were in a school that required uniforms; we could find ways to get those uniforms cheaply (Walmart, Target, used-uniform exchanges, 2nd-hand stores, etc.), but parents with means spent hundreds of dollars on new brand-name stuff. If you've got the money, and want to buy that stuff... great. But it's no different in public schools with a Dress Code. You can buy good-looking, even BRAND NAME clothes that comply with the code, at places like Plato's Closet, Garage Sales, or other other 2nd-hand venues. You can buy off-brand stuff at stores like Walmart, Costco, Target... Or you can buy the expensive stuff if you have the means. There is no financial advantage or disadvantage, either way.

    School uniforms are nothing more than a cop-out for the ignorant, the mis-informed, or the lazy.

    Jim Purtee needs to focus on what's REALLY important in this district... like making sure that certain school buildings don't cave-in on our students. Like making sure kids at certain schools don't have to walk 20 yards from the portables to the main building in sub-zero weather. Like paying the best teachers in the district (as identified by their principals and the parents of students), to stay here instead of transferring to better-paying locales. Like protecting the people who look after our children 35 hours per-week, from ignorant politicians with irrational biases. Like helping our children get the education they need to compete in a Global Economy (part of which is UNDERSTANDING that we are all PART of a global economy). The last thing Jim Purtee needs to be focusing on, is boys' rears being out of their pants, or girls' bossoms flowering out of their tops.

  • inclined posted at 3:06 am on Mon, Jul 16, 2012.

    inclined Posts: 682

    The Journal of Education Research (Volume 92, Number 1, Sept./Oct. 1998, pp. 53-62) by David L. Brunsma from the University of Alabama and Kerry A. Rockquemore of Notre Dame:

    I read portions from this study. It is interesting that the study showed that uniforms did not lead to an improvement in such things as attendance, behavioral issues such as teacher disrespect, fights, cheating, stealing, truancy, suspension, etc., substance abuse including cigarettes, alcohol use, racial tensions, gang activity, peer pressure, bullying, sexual harassment, and other things.

    The only positive result for uniforms that the study showed was a very slight relationship between uniforms and standardized achievement scores.

    Well, there you have it. It used to be, and this is, I believe, part of the dumbing down in our culture(and given the concern by so great a number of people like Yarply, with uniforms tilting toward religious instruction, or an expression of a tendency toward Socialist/Communist regimentation), that all the issues mentioned above were part of training at home and not school. That, if with uniforms, the school is being asked to take over rather completely the moral, intellectual, duties and responsibility of the home, the parents, I do agree, is a farce.

    The scientific study mentioned above had no sense of what is involved.

    However. Suppose, parents, reading this study, did understand the indictment against them. Suppose the parents, giving up the idea of doing whatever else happens in these houses, all they think is living, all that seems so highly prioritized to eliminate instruction, training, giving, praying, teaching, demonstrating, loving over against the creation of need so great as to be like the need for water, for food, living in some desert, some horrendous place of filth and squalor, human degradation, abuse, infanticide, rape and war, to produce every possible reason for why uniforms don’t help. That, if all else were dealt with, and we saw a very slight relationship between uniforms and standardized achievement scores improve, hey, maybe the students themselves would be at such a healthy and intellectually safe place to say, let’s do it. And why? Because there are reasons why a country like Great Britain, for a couple hundred years, have done uniforms.

  • yarply posted at 6:59 pm on Sat, Jul 14, 2012.

    yarply Posts: 485

    Uniforms today, Koran study tomorrow. One important strength of American society WAS individualism. We WERE the innovative engine of the world and this is just the final little step to KILL our future leadership.

  • yarply posted at 6:51 pm on Sat, Jul 14, 2012.

    yarply Posts: 485

    Nothing stamps out individuality and promotes conformity better than school uniforms. I thought everyone knew that. The communist do

  • inclined posted at 5:20 pm on Sat, Jul 14, 2012.

    inclined Posts: 682

    Only in an age that rejects honest intelligence could most people believe that clothing is unimportant.

    Only in an age of the largest union in the US, the NEA, Teacher’s Union, where for five years recently, the matter of who stole more than $227,000 from America’s public school teachers is left unturned. “Teachers Union’s Missing Funds: A Pattern of Stonewalling? by RiShawn Biddle, RealClearPolitics —to mention honest intelligence. “Few of the NEA’s 3.2 million rank-and-file members have heard about this bit of news because the union buried it in a hard-to-find addendum to its Department of Labor-mandated 2009-2010 LM-2 filing.”

    But when it comes down to it, what is $227,000 with this group, anyway? I’ll get to a point, but “when it comes to collecting rank-and-file cash, the NEA has few rivals. The union collected $397 million during its 2009-2010 fiscal year, more than the American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees, Service Employees International Union, or the International Brotherhood of Teamsters.” And here is what I’m saying. “A lot of what comes in gets spent quickly. Besides the $29 million it spends annually on political activity — that on top of the $64 million it ladled out to political campaigns during the 2009-2010 election cycle …

    Other financial management scandals have been percolating, including revelations that the NEA Member Benefits Corp. had been collecting fees from financial services firms to peddle those firms’ insurance plans and annuities to members. Two NEA dues-payers, Jerre Daniels-Hall and David Hamblen, filed suit when they learned the NEAMBC may have “improperly received” as much as $2 million from two firms to push an annuity plan on members. The federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals tossed out the case on a technicality. But the union suffered an avoidable PR black eye by coming clean about the fees only grudgingly, when its hand was forced. As with annuities, so too with the missing funds.” But, in this mess, in the information of the millions given to, essentially the Democratic party, and far heavier to Democratic campaign funds, as an example of sheep mentality, just sheer loosing it for the party, all just dressed in their little fur coats standing in line to donate to the cause, doing their part “for the children”, political drones. All this an example of honest intelligence by the teachers of our kids. And while this seems to speak against the suit, read on.

    And back to our first premise, about why the drudges who award and receive doctorates in education almost universally reject school uniforms. They don't (or don't want to) realize how much the clothing that students and teachers wear affects the way students and teachers act and regard school. We all, are more a product of our dumbed down age. Relativism not only induces stupidity, where real intelligence, real education, begins with the fear of God, it also de-sanctifies almost everything. OK, you will argue against the moral imperative for our government, but, as regards education, it has to be seen that, at the very bottom of it, what our children wear, often encouraged and patterned by parents, the nothing is holy sentiment is on parade. That, that trumps the learning, the matter at hand. Clothes are a currency for children. Clothes advertise, impress, tell, beg. And, in the world of Darwinian evolution, it is the color and the flare and the dance that children began to practice and learn, early, and with animal force, driving the processes. A most dominant value in our culture today is egalitarianism. Therefore more and more people dress and act . . . classless, such as when they all wear T-shirts. That is also why so many teachers don't dress up to teach -- the egalitarians who run American education don't want students to regard teachers as being of a higher class than students. Who teaches whom? And how much of what is going on has anything to do with real learning, honest education?

  • arius1 posted at 12:53 pm on Sat, Jul 14, 2012.

    arius1 Posts: 656

    Kudos to TeachingMama and Adamsfly. My wife is also a teacher (at a Cda school requiring uniforms for a few years now). Uniforms cost less than name brand clothes, and are less of a distraction all the way around, which is important to both kids and teachers alike.

  • cda271 posted at 12:48 pm on Sat, Jul 14, 2012.

    cda271 Posts: 45

    I too have "in the classroom" time. But....Adamsfly your ridiculous rethoric is a big part of our problem in keeping qualified people from willing to "volunteer" to serve the communty by serving on the board. You don't like a policy say so...quite defaming those working at what you have refused to. It is infantile to assinate ones character especially when you do not even really know them. The trustees are NOT PAID government officials...the are volunteer school board members for Christ's sake.
    Mr. and Mrs. Purtee indicated they made another choice other than public school for the first 5 years for personal reasons...nothing wrong with that. By the way, this, the last and the prior Presidents all sent their children to private schools...they are not committed to public education? Your statement is ignorant.
    Not elected?! Nor was his predicessor...or hers..or half of all prior serving trustees!!
    I await anxiously to see you run at the next opportunity. In the mean time, don't think all teachers are clones and think alike. Some of us WANT improvements in our system!!!

  • Adamsfly posted at 9:40 am on Sat, Jul 14, 2012.

    Adamsfly Posts: 46

    TeachingMama is the poster I give the most creditabily to. She is in the classroom and knows what's going on. She make valid points, the new dress code is new and we need to give it a chance. How would Purtee know? He hasn't spent anytime in or classrooms. He doesn't even think enough of our schools to send his child to one. And most importantly HE IS NOT AN ELECTED OFFICIAL. He was appointed by political cronies.

    Purtee quit your grandstanding and leave the schools to the educators.

  • objective posted at 9:33 am on Sat, Jul 14, 2012.

    objective Posts: 70

    26 comments by only 13 people.
    1. Pink Floyd is a standard for suggesting improved education. Flash Gordon
    2. Lets see the board actually do something other than fighting. (but I'll be against anything they propose) Samual Standing
    3. Allow me to belittle the seriousness of the proposal. Mr. D
    4. I can throw any false number out there and some of you will believe it. Big Moose
    5. Uniforms today, bible study tomorrow. OH. MY. GOD!!! Voxpop
    6. Not schools business what my kid wears...but I'll hold them responsible if he/she fails to graduate! CHSdad
    7. Uniforms shouldn't be a high priority because smaller steps toward improving education should be left when ever single other step has already been taken. Randy Myers

    The "hooded", nameless minority's minority has spoken.

  • CHSdad posted at 10:42 pm on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    CHSdad Posts: 364

    Oh, Timeless, tell you what? I started by saying that clothing is none of the state's business. I then went on to wonder what the 'pay teachers less and see education thrive' crowd might try on next. Do I believe they should? Absolutely not. I obviously need more practice at parody.

  • Timeless posted at 9:12 pm on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    Timeless Posts: 476

    * geesh. Believe.

  • Timeless posted at 9:11 pm on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    Timeless Posts: 476

    Chs dad: Oh for crying out loud. Please tell me that you really don't beleive that.

  • CHSdad posted at 9:02 pm on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    CHSdad Posts: 364

    Timeless, if having laptops makes sense and teachers pay for it I really don't see why, if uniforms make sense, teachers shouldn't pay for them as well. Or maybe none of it makes sense, only dollars for politicians.

  • Timeless posted at 8:56 pm on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    Timeless Posts: 476

    **chad ad = chs dad. Sorry, my computer likes to insert words that I did not type.

  • Timeless posted at 8:54 pm on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    Timeless Posts: 476

    Chad ad:
    It is less expensive to provide uniforms for kids. I know from first hand experience. Why would you expect teachers to subsidize your kids' clothes? That's just silly.

  • TeachingMama posted at 4:56 pm on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    TeachingMama Posts: 7

    This is not a decision that should be made lightly and is a much bigger can of worms. The priority at all schools should be education first and as adults we must make difficult decisions for students that are in their best interest (no cell phones for example), BUT this is not the right time to tackle this issue. We've only given the stricter dress code one semester. I've seen first hand that the dress code is not enforced equally in all school buildings, unfortunately. That needs to be addressed. Enforcing ANY dress code, including uniforms, takes a lot of effort on the part of parents and school personnel to be successful. When siblings walk out in identical outfits for different buildings and one gets in trouble promplty upon arrival and the other goes all day without a single word, there's a problem in enforcement. In my teaching experience, it's the girls who are the main issue. I'm tired of telling girls to go put on a shirt that doesn't show their cleavage and skirts that cover their rears.

    It's a much deeper issue, sadly, than just uniform vs. enforcing a strict dress code; it's about not buying slutty attire for your preteens and teenagers in the first place. The poor boys in my classes have a hard enough time concentrating without your daughter's chest pouring out the top of her shirt. I know it's hard to find modest attire, but you have to be willing to look harder for it and demand it from stores,so the companies understand we don't want that kind of clothing on our kids. Yes, they are still kids! Please monitor their attire before they leave, and check their backpacks. I'll do my best to impart on them why modesty is important before I teach them how to read and write, but I have lots of ground to cover, and I need your help too, parents. Teaching them needs to be a team effort. I think putting them all in uniforms right now is a distraction from some more pressing matters, and we should enforce our current policy consistently at home and at all schools before we consider uniforms. Without parent support, all time spent on these policies flops anyway.

  • Timeless posted at 11:13 am on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    Timeless Posts: 476

    Big moose:
    That, I beleive. Good luck.

  • CHSdad posted at 11:12 am on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    CHSdad Posts: 364

    Yet another thing that schools get involved in that distracts from their core role. I can accept that having a policy that avoids distractions makes sense, but other than than it is not school business what my kids wear. Then again, how about cutting teachers salaries to pay for subsidised clothing? You know it makes sense!

  • voxpop posted at 11:07 am on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    voxpop Posts: 738

    Uniforms today, bible study tomorrow. One important strength of American society is individualism. We are the innovative engine of the world and this is just another little step to erode our leadership.

  • Bigmoose posted at 11:01 am on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    Bigmoose Posts: 114

    To answer your questions:
    1. I am afraid of big government.
    2. My kids are in charge.

  • Jeffrey Wherley posted at 9:35 am on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    Jeffrey Wherley Posts: 3969

    "Requiring public school students to wear uniforms is definitely a growing trend throughout the nation. Strict dress codes are even more popular."

    Education Outcome levels are Decreasing and are definitely a growing trend throughout the nation. Since Uniforms have had NO Change in this trend, why keep bringing it up.

    It's nice that this new board is actually talking about things that aren't just rubber stamped issues coming from special interests, but try something that might have a chance at success not just things that show you to be sheep.

  • heatherfeather posted at 9:32 am on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    heatherfeather Posts: 297

    The reason I dropped out of the school system was the addiction to consumerism which trumped education. While uniforms wouldn't solve the problem, it would do away with the mindless brand-name dropping exhibited by fashion-obsessed future mediots.

  • Timeless posted at 9:23 am on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    Timeless Posts: 476

    Uniforms are just one small step to improving education.
    What are you afraid of?
    Who is in charge at your house, you or your kids?

    Initially our kids were not thrilled with the idea of school uniforms. So what? They were not in charge. We, the parents were in charge. We, the parents, were responsible for making sure our kids had the best education they could get.

    There was plenty of after school time to wear their regular clothes.

  • imanewt posted at 9:13 am on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    imanewt Posts: 12

    Add some stripes and it would complete the look and be appropriate for the "New" school environment.

  • objective posted at 9:11 am on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    objective Posts: 70

    Bigmoose...yea you're right on...Scre@#$ the 12 percent here that fail to graduate! Why improve on what we have!!
    You are aware, I'm sure of the inner city, black youth problem that Philly deals with..right?
    And Long Beach ...well you simply forward inaccurate info. the following from their assist. superintendent:

    According to Butera, 91.5 percent of the students who entered the high school in 2007 graduated last June or August. Eighty-five percent of them graduated in June.

  • Timeless posted at 8:46 am on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    Timeless Posts: 476

    Also, at second hand clothing stores, parents could sell their "gently used" uniforms, which added to the clothing savings opportunities for those needing to buy.
    Many times we found uniforms that still had the tags on them.

  • Bigmoose posted at 8:41 am on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    Bigmoose Posts: 114

    "Purtee said he’s promoting uniforms because he feels it’s his duty as a trustee to bring forward ideas and programs that will improve students’ academic results. He points to large, urban school districts in Philadelphia and the Long Beach Unified School District in California, where school uniforms have been required for more than a decade."

    A quick internet check showed Long Beach Unified School District has a %65.5 graduation rate and the Philadelphia School District has a %57.4 graduation rate. Isn't CDA's graduation rate somewhere around %88 percent?

    Lets hope the School Board can stay focused on the important concepts that will improve education for our children. Uniforms??? Really!!!!

  • mister d posted at 8:39 am on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    mister d Posts: 1531

    Heck, lets complete the picture and have the board wear uniforms to their meetings. The city council would also look cute in uniforms so there would be no vision of the haves and have nots. Then we can move to a system that all residents of CDA get to choose from one or two choices of clothing styles - uniforms for all - solves all of our problems.

  • Mark on the Park posted at 8:32 am on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    Mark on the Park Posts: 471

    Uniform clothing is less expensive than the latest stylish clothing. Uniforms help to minimize peer pressure by making the haves/have-nots difference less obvious.

    Uniforms work, Google it.

  • Timeless posted at 8:04 am on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    Timeless Posts: 476

    Our kids attended 3 different schools over the years that required uniforms. The uniforms consisted of a dark blue or white polo style shirt and khaki pants or shorts. It wasn't a big deal. In fact, not only did it save us a ton of money, it made school mornings stress free by removing the " what am I going to wear" issue from the daily drama that is often a part of adolesence.

    I don't see what all the fuss is about. All the parents loved it and the kids received an education without the distraction of having deal with "the haves vs the have nots", of the current fashion trend.

  • SamuelStanding posted at 7:21 am on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    SamuelStanding Posts: 467

    I happen to agree with Tom Hamilton. There are IMPORTANT items which need to be addressed by this school board. Not "Prettying-up" the surface. If this is the best this member has to offer, we are in for a bumpy ride.
    Children have lives outside of school and NEED clothing for everyday, the additional expense for many of the people struggling in CDA is just too much. The cost of school supplies is up and the amount of supplies which use to be placed in the classroom is DOWN. Placing the burden AGAIN on the parents.
    The percentages of schools using uniforms and the results (can they really be linked?) are miniscule. FOCUS Purtee! Let's see this board ACTUALLY accomplish something other than fighting.

  • Flash Gordon posted at 6:55 am on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    Flash Gordon Posts: 1219

    Purtee needs to listen to Pink Floyd's "Just another brick in the Wall" the video as well....there's a message there for you.

    Is the Coeur d' Alene school district now going the way of parochial education? What's next a teavangelical educational curriculum?

  • objective posted at 6:43 am on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    objective Posts: 70

    Common sense. Intelligent. Kids in mind. I applaud Mr. Purtee for bringing it to the table. Woodland parents are of a mind to sacrifice serious effort at improving their child's education so their kids can wear a stylish shirt/dress ... hence the lip service statement. To bad Mr. Hamilton objects. The biginning of a fractured board? We'll see.

  • cda271 posted at 6:35 am on Fri, Jul 13, 2012.

    cda271 Posts: 45

    Oh. My. God! A Trustee that actually wants to "do" something to help our schools! Whats the world coming to!?!
    And as a side note....What?! "lockstep" in the voting. Could we possibly be looking at a board of individual thought??

default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
Not you?||
Logout|My Dashboard