關(guān)于學(xué)生是否要穿校服的辯論是從1983年開始的，為了回應(yīng)“一個(gè)危險(xiǎn)的民族，，對(duì)美國正在被平庸的崛起毀壞的教育基礎(chǔ)的警告”的報(bào)道。1987年，在美國動(dòng)亂的教育系統(tǒng)狀態(tài)被詳述以后，馬里蘭州巴爾櫻桃樹小學(xué)最先實(shí)施，緊接著跟隨的是加利福尼亞州長灘區(qū)的長灘聯(lián)合學(xué)校。在長灘區(qū)，校服政策的實(shí)施出現(xiàn)了積極地成果，比如校園暴力的減少和出勤率的增加。這促使前總統(tǒng)比爾克林頓在1996年的國情咨文中鼓勵(lì)公立學(xué)校為了減少暴力和增加紀(jì)律性執(zhí)行這一政策。這項(xiàng)運(yùn)動(dòng)的支持者主張這一政策有減少學(xué)生犯罪率的潛力 (Scherer, 1991)，能降低幫派暴力(Kennedy, 1995; Loesch, 1995)，并在學(xué)校里區(qū)分學(xué)生和陌生人 (Gursky, 1996)。從學(xué)術(shù)上說，校服提高了學(xué)生的學(xué)習(xí)，促進(jìn)了學(xué)生對(duì)學(xué)校的積極態(tài)度(Stover, 1990)，提高了對(duì)學(xué)校的驕傲感 (Jarchow, 1992)。

Debate over outfitting school children into their uniforms started in 1983 in response to the report A Nation at Risk warning America of its eroding educational foundation marred by the "rising tide of mediocrity". Then in 1987, four years after the disturbing status of the American educational system was detailed, Cherry Hill Elementary School in Baltimore, Maryland became the first to implement followed by the Long Beach Unified District in Long Beach, California. In the case of the Long Beach District, the uniform policy yielded positive outcomes such as decreased school violence and increased attendance which prompted former president Bill Clinton in his State of the Union address in 1996 to endorse this policy in public schools for the curtailment of violence and promotion of discipline. Supporters of the movement argued that the policy has the potential of decreasing rate of student victimization (Scherer, 1991), lowering gang violence (Kennedy, 1995; Loesch, 1995), and distinguishing strangers from students within the school premises (Gursky, 1996). Academically, school uniforms enhanced student learning and promoted positive attitudes toward school (Stover, 1990), heightened sense of pride for the school (Jarchow, 1992), high level of student achievement (Thomas, 1994), enhanced school preparedness (Thomas, 1994), and compliance to school ideals (La Pointe, Holloman, & Alleyne, 1992; Workman & Johnson, 1994). On the behavioral aspect, mandatory school uniform policies reduce discipline problems such as suspension, substance abuse, and absenteeism (Gursky, 1996). Moreover, it was supported by various schools because self-esteem of students was increased (Thomas, 1994) and feelings of unity among students were reinforced (La Pointe, Holoman, & Alleyne, 1992).

Though the number of advocates to the school uniform movement continues to grow, opponents argued there is mounting evidence that the policy does not deliver the effects as stipulated by those in favor of the school uniform policy. Key findings of longitudinal analyses from kindergarten to tenth grade found empirical evidence to disprove the claims of the supporters. From the paper of Brusma (2006), it would be gleaned that school uniforms had no impact on school's climate expect among eighth grade principals' perceptions that wearing uniforms compromises school safety. Another close inspection of Brusma's synthesis revealed that the policy had no effect on academic performance of elementary, middle, or high school students save for its negative impact on reading performance. Moreover, evidence points to the policy's inefficiency in creating a positive learning milieu. In terms of its impact on school attendance, no significant effects were detected among the eighth and tenth graders. Another argument critics have against the policy is its violation of the students' First Amendment rightsa

本文編號(hào)：40860