Two Jackson County middle schools that were set to implement a uniform dress code policy next school year have changed their minds.
“After further reflection and discussion, it has been decided that the mandatory uniform dress code requirement for the (2012-2013) school year has been delayed indefinitely,” a message posted on East Jackson Middle School’s website stated. A similar message was posted on West Jackson Middle School’s website.
Both schools had approved a new policy for the next school year that would have required students to wear polo shirts in selected colors. Boys would have also been required to wear pants or shorts that are khaki, black or navy; girls would have been required to wear pants, shorts, capris or skirts that are also khaki, black or navy.
Schools drop uniform dress code policy for next school year
EJMS started looking at a uniform dress code policy in September 2011, followed by a community poll in November and an open community meeting in January 2012.
WJMS also started to look at the proposal sometime last school year and both schools posted a draft uniform dress code policy on their websites. Kings Bridge Middle School wasn’t considering the proposal for the 2012-2013 school year.
The uniform dress code policy was set to go into effect at EJMS and WJMS for the 2012-2013 school year, which starts on Aug. 6. School leaders at EJMS had even mailed letters to parents this summer mentioning the change when the decision was made to drop the uniform dress code policy.
EJMS principal Heidi Hill was pushing for the uniform dress code policy in hopes of improving student behavior. Hill had said that while academics have been improving at the school, a uniform dress code policy would address behavioral issues among students. She also said the change may reduce the number of students being bullied because of their clothing.
When asked on Friday about the reversal and the reason for the change, Hill said: “After further discussion, it was decided that we would not amend the dress code.”
Just a couple of weeks ago, the Jackson County Board of Education heard from a Nicholson man who asked the school board to reverse a decision on the uniform dress code policy at EJMS. The man said the new policy would be too expensive for families, as students would have to have a wardrobe for school and another wardrobe for after-school times.
The BOE didn’t take a vote to implement the uniform dress policy, as that decision was in the hands of administrators at the schools.
BOE chairperson Lynne Massey-Wheeler said Friday that to her knowledge, the decision to drop the uniform dress code policy didn’t come from the central office.
Superintendent Shannon Adams, who is retiring at the end of June, said he didn’t know about the dress code policy change.
If it had been carried through, the uniform dress code policy at EJMS and WJMS would have been the first in the Jackson County School System. Elementary schools in the Jefferson City School System have a similar policy.
WJMS also started to look at the proposal sometime last school year and both schools posted a draft uniform dress code policy on their websites. Kings Bridge Middle School wasn’t considering the proposal for the 2012-2013 school year.
The uniform dress code policy was set to go into effect at EJMS and WJMS for the 2012-2013 school year, which starts on Aug. 6. School leaders at EJMS had even mailed letters to parents this summer mentioning the change when the decision was made to drop the uniform dress code policy.
EJMS principal Heidi Hill was pushing for the uniform dress code policy in hopes of improving student behavior. Hill had said that while academics have been improving at the school, a uniform dress code policy would address behavioral issues among students. She also said the change may reduce the number of students being bullied because of their clothing.
When asked on Friday about the reversal and the reason for the change, Hill said: “After further discussion, it was decided that we would not amend the dress code.”
Just a couple of weeks ago, the Jackson County Board of Education heard from a Nicholson man who asked the school board to reverse a decision on the uniform dress code policy at EJMS. The man said the new policy would be too expensive for families, as students would have to have a wardrobe for school and another wardrobe for after-school times.
The BOE didn’t take a vote to implement the uniform dress policy, as that decision was in the hands of administrators at the schools.
BOE chairperson Lynne Massey-Wheeler said Friday that to her knowledge, the decision to drop the uniform dress code policy didn’t come from the central office.
Superintendent Shannon Adams, who is retiring at the end of June, said he didn’t know about the dress code policy change.
If it had been carried through, the uniform dress code policy at EJMS and WJMS would have been the first in the Jackson County School System. Elementary schools in the Jefferson City School System have a similar policy.
Defined tags for this entry: JC BOE
"BOE chairperson Lynne Massey-Wheeler said Friday that to her knowledge, the decision to drop the uniform dress code policy didn’t come from the central office.
Superintendent Shannon Adams, who is retiring at the end of June, said he didn’t know about the dress code policy change."
No one wants to take the responsibility for the decision. There is nothing new here. It looks like maybe decision-makers, whoever that may be, were "bullied" into not going with uniforms. Someone make a decision and stick with it. The rumor is that the new super had something to do with this. I wonder what other decisions (positions) he will reverse? Should be interesting...
This statement (issued in exactly the same words from both schools) makes them look rather silly:
“After further reflection and discussion, it has been decided that the mandatory uniform dress code requirement for the (2012-2013) school year has been delayed indefinitely,”
That makes it sound like they did no research and had no discussions before the decision was made initially. I know this to be false. There has been lots of research done to show how uniforms can improve behavioral issues and, in turn, boost test scores. I answered no less than 3 different surveys on this subject during the last school year. I know parents on the PTO board at the schools who told me that there was a lot of discussion before the decision was made.
So, just tell us the truth! Did the new superintendent just wave a wand and dictate it change? Did someone hire a lawyer and threaten to sue? I'd just like to know the whole story.
I'm disappointed in the change and even more disappointed in the way it has been handled.
One thing that always amazes me is that the teachers/administration/BOE want the kids in uniforms but they do not want to have to wear the same uniform themselves.
Moral of the story is "How they are allowed to act at home is how they will act in public"
The real situation and decision was made at a higher pay grade than principal. Don't for a second think these two principals made that call. They have been put in an unfair situation by the real decision makers. That's not very respectful.
It's really sad to see all of that time and expense the principals the faculty and parents went through to do the legwork and research this program. From what I hear, uniforms were widely popular in the surveys and it was a no brainer. BAM - the plug was pulled. I think they, and everyone, knows the truth is evident and transparent. Kind of like a bikini or speedos. ...yeah I know...
We may not ever know most of the details, but my guess as to how it was decided to pull the plug: Someone mentioned the word "lawsuit," and JCSS attorney's said 'pull the uniforms - that's not working for us."
I admire the Nicholson man who spoke to the school board at its June meeting. I'm glad to see him come down and express his opinion in general.
Also, where it comes to the ability/non-ability of someone to pay for two wardrobes, I understand that. I'm sure underpriviledged and below the poverty line families, would have been hard pressed to buy uniforms and street clothes in this almost 'depression' age. Heck, that even strains alot of middle class families too!
Whether I am right or wrong, so this too will soon fade.
But,the principals should be left alone on this one. They don't own it. They can't own it. The attorney own this.
Thank you principals for your professionalism efforts - they owe you one.