Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I just saw this story on the news and I was surprised that they felt that way. The uniforms gave the impression of class when I went to catholic school. I had no idea that uniforms are seen as low class.
It doesn't work at making everyone equal. Richer people just use other ways to show you how much they have. At my school, it was purses and shoes. It was LV freshman and sophomore year but when the poorer people finally got one junior year they switched to fendi. Lol
In Greater Cleveland, the only school districts that require uniforms are minority-majority and low-income.
I think its true in many parts of the country that uniforms (as opposed to dress codes) are something that kids in typical middle-class and upper-middle-class public schools don't have to worry about. (Though they might in some Catholic or private schools). But they've become mainstays in many public and charter schools where kids are poorer/blacker/browner. The thinking behind that (mistakenly IMO) is that with uniforms kids won't compete in clothing (they'll find ways to do it) and that it helps build a sense of community at these schools (which is what the educators and parents are supposed to do, not the kids' wardrobes.) It's the sartorial twist on the stereotypical idea that white kids need freedom but black kids need structure. (Yeeeeccch!).
Be that as it may, I've never heard of school kids in uniforms directly affecting property values either here or in the 'burbs. I think this is more a fear of a parent who just associates kids in uniforms with schools full of misbehaving and underachieving black kids. And that may be especially true if the city is seeing an influx of black or Hispanic Kids and an exodus of white ones. But that's speculation. I don't anything in particular about this Jersey 'burb.
Last edited by citylove101; 05-16-2017 at 06:48 PM..
I've known sought-after charter schools to require uniforms, and I've known inner-city schools that required uniforms to do away with gang colors and even the playing field for low income kids. It isn't the uniforms that lower the value. It's what's behind them.
I think it just depends on the area and whether uniforms are popular or not. Where I grew up, uniforms were pretty much the norm at the elementary school level. At middle school, it seemed like half and half and it didn't seem to be related to whether the school was "good" or not.
When I read the thread title I thought it was a crazy idea.
But if the general idea is that "only poor towns" have uniform policies then there might be something to it.
However, knowing what I know about the little "postage stamp" boroughs in Bergen County, NJ I think they are all pretty rich in comparison to large cities and rural areas. So in the end there's probably nothing to the claim about uniforms having a negative impact on property values, at least in Cliffside Park.
I just saw this story on the news and I was surprised that they felt that way. The uniforms gave the impression of class when I went to catholic school. I had no idea that uniforms are seen as low class.
They are seen as different things to different people. I would really like to know what expertise Tanja Grandov has to base her speculation.
"Cliffside Park parent Tanja Grandov feels a uniform policy may affect property values in town."
They are seen as different things to different people. I would really like to know what expertise Tanja Grandov has to base her speculation.
"Cliffside Park parent Tanja Grandov feels a uniform policy may affect property values in town."
W.A. speculation?
Uniforms are normally required in schools where the way kids dress becomes a problem or a distraction. If the problem does not arise, the school does not normally require uniforms. It is not about rich/poor or race, it is about whether the school has problems due to the way kids dress. Some charter schools leave it up to a vote by parents at the beginning of the school, some allow a vote each year. Many or maybe all public schools that ask kids to wear uniforms, it is optional. However parents like the idea and put their kids in uniforms. It avoids problem or distractions due to: offensive clothing either offensive content on shirts etc or too revealing; fashion competitions that set rich students apart from less wealthy ones (most uniform policies we have encountered also include shoes); gang related "colors" that can touch off fighting, bullying or exclusion.
I do not see how it has anything to do with real estate values, except if it actually prevents some of the distractions, fighting, bullying etc, then conceptually the kids will perform a little better on tests and the school will get ranked higher and real estate values will go up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
