consumerism and school uniforms

Journal of Consumer Srudies and Home Economics (1993) 17,117-136.

Consumerism and school uniforms

R I C H A R D B A R N E T T , COLIN KNOX A N D PENNY MCKEO WN University of Ulster, Jordanstown, Northern Ireland, U.K.

Department of Public Administration and Legal Studies,

Consumer concerns about school uniforms are a recurring protilem particularly in areas such as Northern Ireland characterized by low income and social deprivation. The General Consumer Council for Northern Ireland carried out a systematic in-depth investigation into the problem to assess current policy, practice and consumer concerns in the purchase of school uniforms. The research highlighted how school principals, who influence uniform policy, underestimate the cost of its provision and the significant relationship between the cost of uniforms and the type of school attended. Problems associated with the quality of uniforms emerge, as do parental and student concerns about the limited range of suppliers and support for ‘nearly new’ facilities in schools.

The views of consumers

The issue of school uniforms is a perennial consumer concern as pupils move to new schools or require regular replacement items at the start of each school year. The depth of concern is particularly noticeable in Northern Ireland where the average gross weekly household income (f232.69) lags behind the rest of the United Kingdom (f329.06) by over f96.l The General Consumer ,Council for Northern Ireland has, for some time, received a steady flow of complaints from parents about school uniforms. The nature of the complaints has primarily centred on the increasing cost of uniforms, their quality and the limited choice of suppliers, particularly for children in post-primary schools. To assess the extent of consumer concern with this issue a much more systematic study was considered necessary. This paper describes the policy context for school uniforms, the research carried out and the main findings of the study.

The objectives of this study were: (i) To identify and assess current policy, practice and consumer concerns with regard to the purchase of school uniforms in Northern Ireland and (ii) To make recommendations where necessary.

In order to achieve these objectives a number of key groups were identified as having an important contribution to make to the issue of school uniforms. From a policy perspective, the views of the Education and Library Boards* and the Department of Education in Northern Ireland were sought. Within a broad policy

Correspondence: Dr Colin Knox, Department of Public Administration and Legal Studies, University of Ulster, Jordanstown, Northern Ireland, BT37 OQB U.K.

*In Northern Ireland education is administered via five unelected boards rather than local authorities as in the rest of the United Kingdom.

117


framework set by the Boards and the Department of Education, school principals were recognized as having a key role in putting school uniform policy into practice. Their views were also gathered on the subject. Finally, in terms of policy and practice, a number of outfitters, supplying a range of schools, provided information on costs and links with both manufacturers and schools in selling uniforms.

An important consideration for the Consumer Council was a comprehensive assessment of the views of consumers. Two key groups were identified - parents and pupils. Although the policy makers and suppliers referred to above were seen as having a valuable contribution, they did, however, represent the context for recipients or consumers of school uniform policy. In short, those who had to buy and wear school uniforms formed the key area of investigation for this study and reporting in this paper is confined to the views of principals, parents and pupils. *

Methodology: school uniform survey The methodology for the study involved a three-stage process. Firstly, the views of the Department of Education and the Education and Library Boards were sought by letter. Secondly, a representative sample of principals, parents and pupils across primary and post primary schools was selected and information gathered on school uniforms by means of postal questionnaire. Finally, a number of uniform suppliers were interviewed about the cost and quality of uniforms and their relationships with schools and parents. The first stage of the methodology is self explanatory, the second is described in more detail and the third unreported in this article due to the concentration here on consumer issues.

Three separate questionnaires were designed and administered to school principals, parents and pupils. Although each of the three questionnaires were different there were a number of common themes included for the purposes of comparison, particularly in relation to price and quality. The first questionnaire was sent to school principals. All grammar and secondary school headteachers in Northern Ireland, (69 and 168 respectively), and a simple random sample of 100 primary school principals received postal questionnaires.

Based upon the information gathered from school principals, and taking account of specific consumer interests such as price, quality, choice, access and redress, two further questionnaires were designed for parents and pupils respectively. A number of factors were deemed important in the final survey approach.

Firstly, a key consideration was the generalisability of any results arising from the study. In other words, it was considered important to be able to infer from the views expressed by principals, parents and pupils to the population as a whole. As

'A detailed report is available from the General Consumer Council for Northern Ireland, 116 Holywood Road, Belfast.

118

R. Barnett, C. Knox and P. McKeown

a consequence, a probability survey (where each member of the population has an equal or known chance of selection) was adopted for the study. Since the parent and pupil questionnaires followed-on from the survey of school principals, the view was taken that the schools most likely to participate in further data gathering would be those whose headteachers had responded first time round.

Having decided which schools constituted the sampling frame, the next step was to draw a representative sample. Schools from the first survey round were stratified into three sectors - grammar, secondary and primary. Replies from headteachers within the sectors were 52, 115 and 64 respectively. From these three groups a random sample was chosen, based upon a sample fraction of 1/10 or one in 10 schools. This resulted in six grammar, 12 secondary and seven primary schools (rounded upwards) being used for survey purposes. *

Although the general target groups were parents and pupils, specific interest focused on those parents and pupils most likely to have current views on school uniforms. The obvious choice in the post-primary sector was parents of first-form pupils who had recently been involved in the purchase of school uniforms. In terms of pupils, fifth formers seemed a logical target group since they had a long experience of wearing uniforms and could articulate their views in a questionnaire. In the primary sector the decision was taken not to survey the opinion of pupils, since only very limited information could have been gathered, but to survey parents of final year primary pupils.

The size of the sample in any survey is a decision which must be taken based upon balanced considerations of the level of precision required and the cost of administering the study. A sample sue of 400 will produce a sampling error of 5% (at 95% confidence level in statistical terms). This level of accuracy, taking into account the expensive nature of survey work, was deemed acceptable and a target return rate of 400 questionnaires from both parents and pupils was established for the study. It was, of course, recognized that there would be non-respondents and the number of questionnaires sent to parents and pupils was exceeded, by an appropriate margin, in the expectation of a reasonable return.

In summary, therefore, the survey methodology was as follows: (i) Principals of all 69 grammar, 168 secondary and a random selection of 100 primary schools received a questionnaire for completion; (ii) Returns for school principals were stratified by school type (52 grammar, 115 secondary and 64 primary) and a random selection made of schools, proportionate to the size of returns, from each stratum; (iii) This resulted in questionnaires being administered to parents and pupils as follows: six grammar schools - fifth form pupils and parents of first formers; 12 secondary schools - fifth form pupils and parents of first formers;

*This technique is known as proportionate stratified sampling in which a uniform sampling fraction is applied. It is, in fact, an improvement upon simple random sampling since the different strata-grammar, secondary and primary are more correctly represented in the sample. This results in a reduced standard error and improved design effects (deff less than 1) which contributes to greater precision when inferring to the general population.

119


seven primary schools - parents only questionnaire; (iv) The breakdown of questionnaires was as follows: 625 questionnaires were sent to parents (25 schools x 25 parents); 540 questionnaires were sent to pupils (18 schools X 30 pupils), this excluded primary school pupils. The target return to achieve an acceptable margin of error was approximately 400 in each group.

The policy context

The role of the Department of Education for Northern Ireland (DENI) is quite clear in relation to school uniforms. Wearing school uniforms is not governed by legislation but it falls to schools to determine a policy on the matter, in line with their internal organisation and management. The Department therefore adopts a ‘hands-off’ approach consistent with delegated authority exercised through local management of schools. DENI did, however, point out ‘it is generally the case that secondary schools expect (authors’ emphasis) their pupils to wear uniforms’. In the primary sector the Board of Governors ‘may prefer (authors’ emphasis) the pupils to wear a particular colour or form of attire but there is no requirement on them to do so’.

School uniform policy is therefore part of the routine management of schools. School principals have a key influence in the matter. As DENI pointed out: ‘The day-to-day management of schools, including any rules regarding dress of pupils, is normally a matter for school principals subject to any directions that might be given by school authorities.’

Such an unequivocal view provides the rationale for eliciting the views of school principals on school uniforms.

The role of the education and library boards is also an ‘arm’s length’ approach to school uniforms. Again they point to principal teachers as having primary responsibility and influence on the issue. As one of the Board’s officers explained: ‘The Board permits (authors’ emphasis) secondary schools to make the wearing of school uniform compulsory and permits primary schools to introduce a uniform but not to make it compulsory. I am aware that almost all secondary schools do have a uniform but arrangements which they make with drapers to stock their school uniforms are entirely the responsibility of principal teachers.’

The most tangible example of the Board‘s limited involvement in school uniforms is through the clothing allowance schemes. Boards may provide or contribute towards the cost of school clothing for certain pupils. Each of the five boards is required to draw up and administer schemes which provide assistance to parents, in receipt of income support, towards the cost of school uniform and clothing suitable for physical education. The scheme does not extend to parents of primary school pupils. The amount of support varies from year to year and curremly stands (1991/92) at: f43 under 15 years of age; f48 over 15 years of age; &12 physical education.

Support is given in the form of a cash payment which replaced a voucher system

120


previously operated by the Boards. The voucher was issued to the parent and when returned by the shop to the Boards, payment was then made to the supplier. Boards acknowledge that the grant is no more than a contribution to the cost of providing the uniform. As one Board official pointed out: ‘The Boards are fully aware that the grant payable is much lower (authors’ emphasis) than the cost of a uniform and the payment made is solely to assist with the purchase of the uniform. ’

Figures obtained from DEN1 estimate, in 1991/92, the total expenditure on clothing allowances in Northern Ireland to be fl.6m. This would suggest payments to over 27,000 children out of a current secondary school population of over 146,000 in Northern Ireland. Many parents, however, would not be aware of uniform grants and evidence gathered from charities highlights the problem. Save the Children Fund Northern Ireland pointed out that ‘staff frequently (authors’ emphasis) receive requests for assistance in purchasing school uniforms’. Barnardos’ shops stock donated school uniforms, particularly in the summer months. An official from the charity commented ‘these sell very quickly, no doubt an indication of need’. A more worrying comment related to the lack of financial assistance for primary school children. An official from Save the Children claimed: ‘Parents of primary school children have to buy the same items of clothing (as secondary‘school children) and have told us that their children may be sent home or fined if they do not have a certain item of uniform.’

The Society of Saint Vincent de Paul also reported providing financial assistance and, in some cases, purchase of complete uniforms for a number of parents. Such comments represent consumer/parental concerns. What follows is an investigation of the nature and extent of these concerns.

The schools - attitudes to school uniforms

The background or context described above points to principals having a key influence on school uniform policy. Views of parents and pupils are also seen to be crucial to any examination of the subject. These three groups form the basis of the empirical study and a summary of the number and types of school involved and the opinions of principals, parents and pupils are now discussed.

Responses. In each of the three surveys carried out, grammar school principals, parents and pupils achieved the highest response rates (75%, 70.7% and a very high 98.3% respectively, Tables 1, 2 and 3).

Secondary schools also responded well - 68.5% of secondary school principals, 68% of parents and 72.7% of pupils. The lowest response was obtained from the primary sector with a disappointing 32% rate of return from parents of primary school pupils. The levels of response appear to be indicative of interest in school uniforms, from grammar schools who display a keen concern in the issue to primary schools who see the topic as less important. Low response

121


Table 1. Principals' responses

Principals (n) Response (n) 'YO Response

Primary 100 64 64 YO Secondary 168 115 68.5% Grammar 69 52 75 Yo

Total 337 23 1 68.5%

Table 2. Parents' responses

Parents (n) Response (n) YO Response

Primary 175 56 32% Secondary 300 204 68% Grammar 150 106 70.7%

Total 625 366 58.6%

Table 3. Pupils' responses

Pupils (n) Response (n) YO Response

- - - Primary Secondary 360 262 72.7% Grammar 180 177 98.3%

Total 540 439 81.3%

Table 4. Pupils' views of compulsory school uniform by school type'

Secondary Grammar Other All schools Compulsory ("/.I ("/I ("/.I ("/.I

In favour 52.2 77.3 70.4 63.5 Not in favour 47.8 22.1 29.6 36.5

Total n = 205 n = 154 n = 27 n = 386

'Summary statistics: X2 = 24.4 P = O~oooO.

122


rates from parents of primary school children reflect this, although it must be acknowledged that access to this group, via final year primary pupils, may have contributed to the situation. The number of responses (231 principals, 366 parents and 439 students) in each category leads to sampling errors, when inferring to all of Northern Ireland, of 6.5% in the case of school principals, 5.5% for parents and 5% for students (at 95% confidence level).

Within the three categories surveyed 99.6% of principals, 98.4% of parents and 95.4% of pupils listed wearing an official school uniform as either compulsory or strongly recommended in their schools. Respondents had, therefore, an informed view on the topic. Attitudes to a compulsory school uniform were mixed. Headteachers were not asked whether they were in favour of a compulsory uniform because it was assumed (from the 99.6% response above) that if they wanted to change the policy they could and since few had, there was a commitment on the part of principals to school uniforms. Parents too, when questioned, indicated a very high 97% in favour of compulsory school uniforms. This contrasted with pupils, two-thirds (approximately) of whom were in favour of compulsory uniforms and one-third against. Grammar school pupils were much more in favour of uniforms than their secondary counterparts where opinion was fairly evenly divided (Table 4).

Principals, parents and pupils were then asked to rank on a scale from most important(l), to least important(5), reasons why they were in favour of compulsory school uniform. The results are given in Table 5. The table is interesting when considered in detail.

The most convergent reasons expressed by all three groups were that the uniform is useful in achieving some kind of equality amongst pupils (most or 2nd most important) and that it presents a neat image to outsiders (3rd or 4th most important). Divergence of opinions was evident on whether the uniform was important in establishing discipline within schools. Parents and principals considered this the least important reason for wearing uniforms whilst pupils perceived it as an important part of establishing discipline (ranked 2nd), perhaps because of the way in which uniform policy is enforced in schools. The uniform's role in maintaining school character and identity was considered as much less important by parents and pupils (ranked 4th) than by school headteachers who

Table 5. Ranked reasons in favour of compulsory uniform

Principals Parents Pupils

Discipline within the school 5 5 2 Maintains school character and identity 1 4 4 Presents a neat image to outsiders 4 3 3 Acts as a leveller/equalizer among pupils 2 1 1 Is economical for parents 3 2 5

123


attached most importance to the uniform in this regard. From the perspective of the principal, uniforms are therefore seen as part of the corporate image of the school whose identity is distinctive and is cultivated, inter alia, by pupils wearing a uniform. Finally, there was no agreement on the economical nature of school uniforms for parents. Pupils considered this aspect least important, principals opted for a middle ranking (3rd most important) and parents themselves regarded this as second most important. This may reflect concern about the cost of uniforms, which is discussed in some detail below.

What follows is a discussion of the salient consumer issues in relation to school uniforms. In the parents’ questionnaire an opportunity was available for respondents to elaborate, in an open-ended question on a variety of consumer concerns. Parents commented upon the following issues in order of importance: (i) Price; (ii) Quality; (iii) Information and choice; (iv) Sorting out problems with suppliershedress. The analysis of the data gathered by questionnaires and the discussions which follow are therefore structured in such a way as to reflect this hierarchy of consumer concerns.

The estimated cost of school uniform

Data gathered on the cost of school uniforms were confined to principals and parents. Students were not asked to provide estimates of the price of their uniforms since these may have proved unreliable. Parents and principals supplied costs of a new uniform for a first year pupil, excluding footwear. A comparison of costs provided by respondents is given in Table 6 and illustrated graphically in Figures 1 and 2. The figures illustrate the under-estimation of the price of school uniforms by school principals compared with the more accurate parental estimates. This is particularly notable in the price range less than f50. Almost half the headteachers priced boys’ uniforms in this category compared with just over 30% of parents. The differential between principals’ and parents’ estimates was much larger when they were asked to cost girls’ uniforms. Over 40% of principals estimated girls’ uniforms at less than f50 compared with a low 21.3% of parents.

Table 6. Cost comparisons - school uniforms

Boys’ uniform Girls’ uniform

Principals’ Parents’ Principals’ Parents’ estimates estimates estimates estimates

124


Fig. 1. Estimated cost comparison - a boy’s uniform.

Girls’ uniforms were more expensive than boys’, according to parents. Just over two-thirds of parents (68.8%) paid more than f50 for a boy’s uniform whereas more than three-quarters of parents (78.7%) paid similar amounts for a girl’s uniform. A high one-third (33.8%) of girls’ parents paid more than f l00 for a school uniform.

Looking at parents’ estimates of the costs of school uniform between the various types of school is also instructive. For boys (Table 7), 73.1% of primary school uniforms cost less than f50. This compared with 79.5% of boys’ grammar school uniforms costing more than f100. For secondary schools the majority of boys’ uniforms (58.1%) cost between f51-100 (Fig. 3). There is therefore a significant relationship between cost of the uniform and the type of school attended by boys.

This relationship is even more apparent in the case of girls’ uniform - refer to Table 8. The cost of girls’ primary school uniforms is relatively inexpensive: 69.6% of these cost less than f50. The more expensive girls’ uniforms are within the post-primary school sector. 83.3% of girls’ grammar school uniforms cost more than f100, compared with 79.5% of grammar school boys, and 86.3% of secondary school girls pay more than f50 for their uniforms. This compares with a much lower 68.6% of secondary school boys paying a similar amount. There is also a significant relationship between the cost of the uniform and the type of school attended by girls (Fig. 4).

Fig. 2. Estimated cost comparison - a girl’s uniform.

125


Fig. 3. Estimated cost of a boy's uniform by school type.

Quality

Questions on the quality of school uniforms were aimed at parents and pupils. In the case of parents, the focus was on maintenance of the garments in relationship to issues such as washing, the cost of dry-cleaning and their long-term durability and appearance. For pupils, the emphasis was on collecting information about how comfortable the uniform was to wear, its durability and appearance. Only the main items of uniform were selected for detailed comment - school blazer, jumper, skirt and trousers. Parental views on the quality of major items of uniform are considered first and are summarized in Table 9.

Fig. 4. Estimated cost of a girl's uniform by school type.

126


Table 7. Estimated cost of a boy’s uniform by school type*

Primary (YO) Secondary (YO) Grammar Yo

Sf50 73.1 31.4 2.6 f51-fI00 19.2 58.1 17.9 a 1 0 1 7.7 10.5 79.5

Total n = 26 n = 105 n = 39

Table 8. Estimated cost of a girl’s uniform by school type?

Primary (YO) Secondary (YO) Grammar YO

Sf50 69.6 13.7 - fi l-f 100 26.1 70.6 16.7 2 f 101 4.3 15.7 83.3

Total n = 46 n = 102 n = 6 6 ~

Table 9. Problems with quality of the school uniform - parents’ views

Problems Blazer Jumper Skirt Trousers (Yo) (%) (Yo) (Yo)

Requires dry-cleaning 39.4 0.3 1.9 1.2 Doesn’t wash well 5.3 15.1 5.2 4.7 Lost its appearance quickly 19.7 26.1 17.5 21.9 Wore out quickly 9.6 12.8 9.9 30.2 Not warm enough in winter 39.9 12.8 16.0 10.7

Table 10. Problems with quality of the school uniform - pupils’ views

Problems Blazer Jumper Skirt Trousers (Yo) (Yo) (Yo) (Yo)

Uncomfortable to wear 35.9 9.3 14.9 13.1 Lost its appearance quickly 33.5 36-2 24.7 32.5 Wore out quickly 37.6 32.4 19.1 38.8 Not warm enough in winter 54.5 48-5 54.5 34.9

*Summary statistics: X2 = 95.8 P = O~oooO. tSummary statistics: X’ = 166.1 P = O.oOO0.

127


The problems listed are expressed as a percentage of those parents who had purchased a new item of uniform in each of the categories. A number of points emerge from this in the table which should be of interest to clothing manufacturers and suppliers. The quality of the school blazer presented most problems for parents. The fact that it was not warm enough in winter and required dry-cleaning were key concerns. Parents were also unhappy that it lost its appearance quickly. In fact, loss of appearance proved to be a recurring problem for the school jumper, skirt and trousers. Other quality aspects referred to by parents were the fact that school trousers wore out quickly and the school skirt was not warm enough in winter. Apart from the above items which were considered in detail by parents, the school shirt was the most frequently mentioned ‘other item’ with problems. From the wearers or pupils’ perspective the blazer, skirt, jumper and school trousers came in for criticism with the school blazer faring worse (Table 10).

For all the items examined, with the exception of school trousers, most criticism centered on the fact that the uniform was not warm enough in winter months. This is clearly an important message for uniform manufacturers. High levels of concern were expressed about the uniform losing its appearance and wearing out quickly, with the exception of the school skirt. The school blazer was the only item which pupils found uncomfortable to wear, in the main. This was confirmed when students were asked if, in general, they found the uniform comfortable to wear - almost two-thirds did so. ‘Other items’ mentioned by pupils as problematic, but not examined in detail, were the school shirt or blouse, socks or tights and school shoes in that order. General issues arising from pupils’ open- ended responses included,

- dissatisfaction with the requirement of some schools that girls should wear

- a concern with their visibility and safety in travelling to and from school in thick acrylic or wool tights all year round;

the dark when obliged to wear dark-coloured uniform coats.

Value for money The Consumer Council was keen to establish whether parents and pupils, taking into account price and quality, could provide a combined assessment of the school uniform. This composite measure of price and quality was termed ‘value for money’ (VFM). Both groups were therefore asked whether the uniform represented good value for money compared with other garments bought or worn. A high 75.6% of parents felt the uniform represented good value for money. This contrasted with pupils, 43.3% of whom felt the uniform was good value for money judged against other clothes they wore.

It is useful to look at these responses in more detail (Table 11). Perceptions of good value for money held by parents decrease from primary to secondary to grammar schools.

128


Table 11. Value for money (parents) by school type*

Primary (YO) Secondary (YO) Grammar (YO)

VFM - yes 90.0 85.6 73.1 VFM - no 10.0 14.4 26.9

Total n = 50 n = 188 n = 93

A high 90% of primary school parents considered the uniform good value for money. The figure decreased to 85.6% and 73.1% of secondary and grammar school parents respectively. The same trend applies for pupils - 51.3% of secondary school pupils saw the uniform as representing good value for money compared with 314% of grammar school pupils (Table 12). The overview is illustrated in Figure 5.

Information and choice

Information provided to parents about the school uniform before the child started school, in general, seemed acceptable. A high 67.3% of parents found the information ‘very good’ and almost 30% found it ‘average’. The information was disseminated to parents, in the main, when the child was awarded a place and to a lesser extent at open evenings.

The cost of the uniform was not a factor in the choice of school expressed by parents. A very large 96.3% of parents did not consider uniform cost as a factor influencing school selection.

Turning specifically to the choice of school uniform suppliers. Parents and school principals were asked about the number of official suppliers to schools. The results are presented in Table 13.

From the information provided, about one quarter of the schools have sole suppliers. Whilst there is some agreement between parents and principals on the number of exclusive suppliers there is a divergence on the number of schools with no official supplier. Like price, principals may well have a more optimistic view of the choice available to parents. Principals suggest that almost 40% of school uniforms can be bought from any clothing outlet, parents claim that just over 20% can. Principals were also asked whether their schools benefitted in any financial or commercial sense from the sale of school uniforms. Almost 12% of schools claimed some benefit.

The Consumer Council was also interested in whether the number of suppliers or choice available to parents had some impact upon the price of the school uniform. The price of girls’ uniforms (selected because they were the most

*Summary statistics: X2 = 8.99 P = 0.0111.

129


expensive) in relation to the number of official suppliers is therefore considered in more detail in Table 14. The figures confirm that uniforms bought from one official supplier tend to be more expensive. In schools with one official supplier only, 55.6% of uniforms cost more than $100. For schools with more than one supplier, 324% of uniforms cost more than flOO and the figure drops to a low 7.7% in schools with no official supplier. Such a situation provides support for consumer concerns about monopoly supply of goods. The details are presented graphically in Figure 6. Official suppliers do however have specific requirements imposed by schools related to stock levels, colours etc which are discussed in more detail below.

Table 12. Value for money (students) by school type*

Secondary (YO) Grammar (YO)

VFM - yes 51.3 31.4 VFM - no 48.7 68.6

Total n = 230 n = 175

Table 13. Choice of suppliers

Principals (Yo) Parents (Yo)

One official supplier 23.0 25.4 More than one official supplier 38.9 53.2 No official supplier 38.1 21.4

Table 14. Cost of uniform by choice of suppliers?

One official More than one No official supplier (YO) official supplier (YO) supplier (YO)

Sf50 12.7 14.8 48.7 f51-f 100 31.7 52.8 43.6 s f 101 55.6 32.4 7.7

Total n = 63 n = 108 n = 39

'Summary statistics: X2 = 15.24 P = O~OOO1. tSummary statistics: X2 = 38.9 P = O~oooO.

130


Fig. 5. Parents: value for money by school type (top). Pupils: value for money by school type (bottom).

An overview

The final section of the questionnaires to parents and students involved generic statements encompassing aspects of price, quality, information and choice about which they were asked to express an opinion, ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree. The results are presented graphically in Figure 7 and in Table 15. Examining each statement in sequence, it is clear that parents and pupils are in broad agreement that the school uniform should be distinctive in terms of design and colour. It is, however, evident from data gathered previously on

131


Fig. 6. Cost of uniform by choice of suppliers.

Table 15. Generic statements

Strongly Strongly agree/agree (YO) disagreeldisagree (YO)

Parents Pupils Parents Pupils

It is important that each school’s uniform should have very distinctive designs and colours

School uniforms include too many expensive trimmings or details

Parents should be able to buy major items of school uniform from the clothes shop or department store of their choice

It is important that pupils who are prefects or have gained awards at sport should have special items of uniform to wear

All schools with recommended uniform shoufd provide facilities for parents to obtain ‘nearly new’ items of uniform

The cost of the school uniform is a worrying expense

81.9 76.7 18.1 23.3

33.1 49.2 66.3 50.8

87.6 85.8 12.4 14.2

35.1 52.8 64.9 47.2

77.9 65.7 22.1 34.3

68.0 524 32.0 47.2

132


Fig. 7. Generic statements. 1, uniform should have a distinctive design; 2, uniforms include too many trimmings; 3, should be able to purchase from any store; 4, special items for prefects/ sports; 5 , schools should provide nearly new facilities; 6, uniform is a worrying expense.

reasons why parents/pupils were in favour of the uniform (Table 5) that ‘maintaining a school character and identity’ ranked 4th (out of 5 ) in both cases. Presumably the position is that having accepted the principle of a school uniform, parents and pupils felt it should be distinctive.

Approximately two-thirds of parents disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement that school uniforms included too many expensive details. This compared with just over half the pupils. Whilst there was, therefore, a divided attitude among students, most parents did not accept the trimmings assertion. This was somewhat difficult to interpret in view of parents’ attitudes to the expense involved in buying uniforms (Table 16).

Not surprisingly, there was consensus among parents and pupils that one should be able to purchase school uniforms from the clothes shop or department store of their choice. Over 85% in both groups welcomed the opportunity for greater choice in suppliers. When it came to special items of uniform for prefects or sports award-holders most parents (64.9%) disapproved. Students’ attitudes were divided on this issue. Parents, presumably, were conscious of the expense involved in purchasing special items whilst students may have been expressing an opinion based upon their own ability to attain these awards or posts.

A large number of parents (almost 80%) agree or strongly agreed that schools with recommended uniforms should provide facilities for ‘nearly new’ items of uniforms. Almost two-thirds of the pupils supported this suggestion. Although data gathered from school principals suggested that some such provision does

133


Fig. 8. Worrying expense by cost of a uniform.

Table 16. Worrying expense by cost of uniform'

Sf50 (Yo) f51-100 (Yo) BflOO (Yo)

Strongly agree 34.1 34.0 27.8 Agree 18.2 33.0 51.4 Disagree 36-4 20.2 16.7 Strongly disagree 11.4 1243 4.2

Table 17. Complaints and redress

Yo n

Felt they would like to complain about quality of new item 25 88 Actually complained 15.9 14 Matter resolved quickly and easily 42.8 6

'Summary statistics: X2 = 17.84 P = 04066

134


exist, it is restricted to a minority of schools (23%), mostly on an unofficial basis, which provide opportunities for parents to buy and sell ‘nearly new’ items of uniform. In addition, some 6% of schools claimed special prices for families in need. However it is clear from the figures above that there is strong evidence of the need for and future use of ‘nearly new’ facilities within schools to be offered on a formal and routine basis. In particular, those schools with a requirement for more distinctive and expensive uniforms which are not widely available should consider action in this area as a priority.

The final statement put to parents and pupils was that the school uniform ‘was a worrying expense’. Just over two-thirds (68%) of parents agreed with this statement as did slightly more than half (52.8%) of the pupils. Parents’ responses can be considered in more detail by looking at the relationship between the price of school uniforms and their levels of concern (Table 16).

From the data, 67% of those parents paying between f52-.f100 and 79.2% of those paying more than f l O O agreed or strongly agreed that the price of the uniform was a worrying expense (Fig. 8).

Redress

Complaints about the quality of the school uniform were quite high. One quarter (25%) of parents felt they would like to complain about a new item of uniform. Of those who felt like complaining, a low 15.9% actually did and of those who did complain, 42.8% had the matter resolved quickly and easily. The actual numbers of parents within the last two categories were relatively small (14 and 6) respectively so percentages may be rather misleading (Table 17). However, this low level of complaints reflects a pattern of consumer behaviour in Northern Ireland already identified in earlier reports by the Council.

Summary

Compulsory or strongly recommended school uniform is the norm for all schools in Northern Ireland and this situation is supported by a majority of schools, parents and students. Decisions about the extent and nature of uniform rest with the individual school.

Parents and students expressed considerable concerns about the cost, quality, availability and value for money of school uniform and a majority of parents find the expense of school uniform a worry and would welcome the opportunity to purchase ‘near new’ uniform through the schools. This view is supported by information from a number of voluntary agencies. There are two major problems with the current level of uniform grants: first that they are not available for primary school children although most primary schools now require some school uniform, and second, that they are extremely low in comparison with the average cost of a school uniform.

135


There is a clear distinction on some of these matters (cost and value for money) between parents of children in the different categories of schools: primary, secondary and grammar. Costs of school uniforms increase from primary to secondary to grammar for both boys and girls. Parents of primary children display the highest levels of satisfaction on these consumer issues, while parents of grammar school pupils are least satisfied.

In spite of fairly high levels of dissatisfaction in these matters, most parents do not complain to the retailers from whom they purchased the uniform. This is confirmed by suppliers of uniforms.

There are some divergences of views about uniform between parents and pupils, including the issue of value for money and the extent to which special items of uniform should recognize some pupils’ special status within the school. In addition, pupils identified as a particular concern, the lack of warmth of several uniform items. This may reflect a situation in which, in order to make price savings, garments may not have any wool content.

Some contradictions emerge within parental views: in spite of concerns about worrying expense, parents apparently wish that uniforms should be distinctive (therefore likely to be more expensive), through special colours and trimmings and do not consider the cost of uniform to be a factor in choice of school. Equally, the desire for more economical items, which will presumably mean that these will be of man-made fibres, seems to contradict the concern about lack of warmth.

The overall cost of a school uniform is correlated with the availability of supply and with the distinctiveness of the uniform. The least expensive uniforms are obtainable when a school has no official outfitter; the most expensive when there is only one official supplier, notwithstanding specific considerations such as levels of stock held by sole suppliers.

Acknowledgements

The researchers wish to thank Carol Edwards, Sam Miskelly and Nuala O’Loan of the General Consumer Council for Northern Ireland for financial support and helpful comments throughout the course of the research.

Reference

1. Government Statistical Services. (1992) Regional Trends No. 27, 7.

136

consumerism and school uniforms

Documents