• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should schools have the authority to dictate student's hair styles?

Should schools have the authority to dictate student's hair styles?


  • Total voters
    59
If you gave no opinion on any of that, what on earth was the point of your post? That students cause or are impacted by disruption elsewhere? I already said that was granted, but utterly irrelevant.

It was immediately relevant to Superfly's comments on teachers controlling their students in the classroom. I dont really care if you were interested in that focus....you CHOSE to insert yourself, to your continued embarrassment.

I was very clear and you continue to prove you have your own agenda and are inventing stuff to try and justify the fact that I posted nothing about hair and it's impact in schools.I posted specifically about teachers and their control over students. You just proved it again in black and white.

Carry on!

Sadly, this appears to still be applicable: "Reading: it's fundamental." (It's right there, in red and white.)
 
Last edited:
No, he was replying to a thread about school authority (not specifically in the classroom) and chose to use it as a platform to criticize teachers by narrowing the issue to the classroom and their faults.

Again: context and meaning make a difference when reading. It's very important.

First of all, put down the margarita and take note that I have the same venus symbol by my gender that you do. I am certainly not a "he."

Secondly, when I am talking about a school situation, I am also talking about a classroom situation. The two usually are one and the same. 90% of the day, students are in -- wait for it -- a classroom situation.
 
The entire premise of this thread is about controlling kids in a classroom situation. Not "outside the classroom." My comment was based on your idea that people with ostentatious hairstyles are disruptive, inside the classroom and out.

Once you are an adult, no one has the authority to tell you how you can wear your hair. However - again - we are talking about inside a classroom setting, or inside a school setting.

And as I wrote, kids interact with each other all over the school...halls, library, sports, other extra-curricular activities, etc. At least in the classroom, the teachers can monitor any abuse. OUtside of the classroom, the kids lack alot more supervision. There was no indication that the disruption happened in the classroom at all, that seems to be your assumption...and you jumped right to blaming teachers.

However, as I also pointed out, the disruptions anywhere on a school campus can negatively affect the learning environment in the classroom. It just seems unfair to blame teachers without more evidence that issues inside the classroom as the problem.

And thank you for responding to the actual content in my post. You dont have to agree, but at least you understood it.
 
Pro:tip --

You know, it wasn't that funny the first time you said it.

It's not getting any funnier.

It's not supposed to be funny. It's supposed to be clear and I really cant reduce the syllables or make it any more concise.
 
It was immediately relevant to Superfly's comments on teachers controlling their students in the classroom. I dont really care if you were interested in that focus....you CHOSE to insert yourself, to your continued embarrassment.

Her comments on teachers controlling their students in the classroom was in regard to a belief that a student's unique choice of hairstyle caused or aided unrest within the classroom. It has been a faulty logic from school administration and instructors. I was interested in that focus, which was why I posted ad nauseum about it.
 
First of all, put down the margarita and take note that I have the same venus symbol by my gender that you do. I am certainly not a "he."

Secondly, when I am talking about a school situation, I am also talking about a classroom situation. The two usually are one and the same. 90% of the day, students are in -- wait for it -- a classroom situation.

And do 90% of disruptions happen in the classroom, where students are most closely supervised?

It's Friday afternoon...I will enjoy any libations I choose!
 
No. My son's hair is his business, and possibly mine. Not theirs.
I would assume that a student's hair might become an issue for the school only if it was ridiculously distracting for other students, and/or dangerous.

Not sure how you make hair dangerous, but there's probably a way.

I would guess that the proper chain of events would involve contacting the parent, first.


Edit: I spelled "hair" hare. Apparently we're talking about poodle bunnies suddenly, or some ****.
 
And do 90% of disruptions happen in the classroom, where students are most closely supervised?

It's Friday afternoon...I will enjoy any libations I choose!

BTW, I am not one to to generally defend public school teachers however the original comment I responded to seemed unfairly critical. Hence my attempt to open up a conversation on it.

No, they shouldn't be allowed to dictate students' hair styles. I've heard that certain hairstyles are banned because they cause a disruption in the classroom. My response to that is to be a better teacher. Get a better handle on your students. If something as simple as a hairstyle disrupts your classroom, then the problem is you, not the students.
 
Last edited:
I would assume that a student's hair might become an issue for the school only if it was ridiculously distracting for other students, and/or dangerous.

Not sure how you make hair dangerous, but there's probably a way.

I would guess that the proper chain of events would involve contacting the parent, first.


Edit: I spelled "hair" hare. Apparently we're talking about poodle bunnies suddenly, or some ****.

Not sure what "shop" classes are called these days, but long hair can get caught in machines.
 
And as I wrote, kids interact with each other all over the school...halls, library, sports, other extra-curricular activities, etc. At least in the classroom, the teachers can monitor any abuse. OUtside of the classroom, the kids lack alot more supervision. There was no indication that the disruption happened in the classroom at all, that seems to be your assumption...and you jumped right to blaming teachers.

However, as I also pointed out, the disruptions anywhere on a school campus can negatively affect the learning environment in the classroom. It just seems unfair to blame teachers without more evidence that issues inside the classroom as the problem.

And thank you for responding to the actual content in my post. You dont have to agree, but at least you understood it.

Now this is why I had been convinced you are confusing your own arguments. If you made no commentary at all on hair in the schools (as you seem intent on telling me), either in the classroom or not, you seem to do so in this post and perhaps a couple others.

There was no indication that the disruption happened in the classroom at all, that seems to be your assumption...and you jumped right to blaming teachers.

R's thread was stated in general. Now, in many other instances, there have been, for instance, young women, who had been removed from class on the basis that their hair was distracting for other students. If you are referring to what I picked up on for the start of the thread, then no, the incident in question was part of the registration process at the school.
 
BTW, I am not one to to generally defend public school teachers however the original comment I responded to seemed unfairly critical. Hence my attempt to open up a conversation on it.

It's not unfairly critical. It's basic classroom management skills. It is a statement that many administrators would tell any teaching candidate. If your student body is unruly, that is often a reflection of your classroom management skills. They would also further elaborate by saying, "we will work on it, or we will find you another place of employment."
 
I would assume that a student's hair might become an issue for the school only if it was ridiculously distracting for other students, and/or dangerous.

Not sure how you make hair dangerous, but there's probably a way.

I would guess that the proper chain of events would involve contacting the parent, first.


Edit: I spelled "hair" hare. Apparently we're talking about poodle bunnies suddenly, or some ****.




Sure, if we're talking about something dangerous like dreadlocks braided with barbed wire, or something ludicrous like a 6' wide Afro.


But not in the general sense of hair, no.
 
Now this is why I had been convinced you are confusing your own arguments. If you made no commentary at all on hair in the schools (as you seem intent on telling me), either in the classroom or not, you seem to do so in this post and perhaps a couple others.

@_@ I made no reference to 'hair' because 'hair' does not = 'disruption'. 'Hair' is just one type of disruption.

I cant explain this anymore clearly or with fewer syllables, please give me a break. I have started drinking.

My comments were regarding teachers and their control of behavior (disruptions) in the classroom and the fact that I found her criticism unfair...and thus looked for further discussion.

Jeebus. Are you going to on again how I was supposed to be talking about 'hair' because the thread is about 'hair?' :doh Again, I can ask and respond anyway I like. Dont like it? Dont get involved.
 
Not sure what "shop" classes are called these days, but long hair can get caught in machines.
Some schools no longer have shop classes at all.
 
Sure, if we're talking about something dangerous like dreadlocks braided with barbed wire, or something ludicrous like a 6' wide Afro.


But not in the general sense of hair, no.
At worst, a tamer hair (like a 4' afro? :lol:) style would just be a distraction at worst.

And frankly that might be a teachable moment - ignore the distraction and move on, mfers.
 
@_@ I made no reference to 'hair' because 'hair' does not = 'disruption'. 'Hair' is just one type of disruption.

Unless there is an extreme example involved, hair is not a disruption.

My comments were regarding teachers and their control of behavior (disruptions) in the classroom and the fact that I found her criticism unfair...and thus looked for further discussion.

Her criticism was not unfair. It was spot on. Unless that's one hell of an exceptional haircut, it's absolutely a fair critique. If an instructor has that much difficulty controlling their students with the presence of a unique haircut in the room, there is a problem with the instructor. I had been told to step it up with far more than one student with a hair cut. When you have 25 students with emotional disorders, chatty friendships, and an afternoon buzz--Yet you come out the other side just fine, removing or barring a student on the basis of a hairstyle being"disruptive" is remarkably bankrupt. It's training and good management skills.
 
Her criticism was not unfair. It was spot on. Unless that's one hell of an exceptional haircut, it's absolutely a fair critique. If an instructor has that much difficulty controlling their students with the presence of a unique haircut in the room, there is a problem with the instructor. I had been told to step it up with far more than one student with a hair cut. When you have 25 students with emotional disorders, chatty friendships, and an afternoon buzz--Yet you come out the other side just fine, removing or barring a student on the basis of a hairstyle being"disruptive" is remarkably bankrupt. It's training and good management skills.

Exactly. That's all I was trying to say. I know a few teachers, and most of them have no problem at all handling unruly students. It's part of the job. Ask the teacher which she'd rather have - a bad kid with a normal haircut, or a good kid with DayGlo orange hair, and I'd bet you a nickel, the teacher will pick the student with the weird hair, every day and twice on Sunday. And again - if a teacher can't handle her students, she needs to get another job. :shrug: Not trying to slam teachers at all. But teaching ain't for sissies. ;)
 
Exactly. That's all I was trying to say. I know a few teachers, and most of them have no problem at all handling unruly students. It's part of the job. Ask the teacher which she'd rather have - a bad kid with a normal haircut, or a good kid with DayGlo orange hair, and I'd bet you a nickel, the teacher will pick the student with the weird hair, every day and twice on Sunday. And again - if a teacher can't handle her students, she needs to get another job. :shrug: Not trying to slam teachers at all. But teaching ain't for sissies. ;)
There's that quote I recall...I looked it up: Those who can't do, teach. And those who can't teach, teach gym.”

― Woody Allen

See, that's the BS part - we actually think this in some cases.

What it should be is, "those who can't teach, do.

Because frankly, teaching is harder than doing, or at the least has a separate yet related skill requirement, and until we acknowledge that and pay/require results accordingly, we will continue to have too many mediocre/bad teachers in the system.

Too many IMO = any.
 
Exactly. That's all I was trying to say. I know a few teachers, and most of them have no problem at all handling unruly students. It's part of the job. Ask the teacher which she'd rather have - a bad kid with a normal haircut, or a good kid with DayGlo orange hair, and I'd bet you a nickel, the teacher will pick the student with the weird hair, every day and twice on Sunday. And again - if a teacher can't handle her students, she needs to get another job. :shrug: Not trying to slam teachers at all. But teaching ain't for sissies. ;)

When it comes to alot of classroom behavior issues, and kids are difficult to control, I think it goes back to parents. Not that the teachers shouldnt be responsible for classroom behavior but a teacher is there to teach. Of course basic discipline is important but even that comes back to parents...when teachers do try to discipline them....parents often complain.

My comment was more along the lines that while yes, teachers are responsible for maintaining a decent teaching environment in the classroom, if there are real disruptions...which I question whether or not hair would ever be one...those things affect kids' ability to learn. Not all kids even act out when they are teased or abused or are bullies...but that disruption still occurs on school grounds and affects their ability to learn 'in the classroom.'

So I didnt feel it was fair to place the burden of the effects on disruptions solely on teachers...since they dont control what happens outside the classroom.
 
I think they should be able to, but only if the student is involved in sports or activities that for performance or safety reasons certain hairstyles are a problem. For example, if a boy was on the swim team you probably would not want him having really long hair.
 
Natural hair color should be required for school.

Why?

All kids rebel to a certain extent, and hair styles are not permanent. Beats the crap out of tattoos.
 
I think the Military is still voluntary service. Childhood education is not an option.

Welfare schools are still optional in most of the country. The difference here isn't that school is mandatory, but that the military isn't required to accept any and all applicants.

Kid's a US citizen, he has the right to attend public school unless and until he presents a danger to the other students' safety or their own right to an education.

The school officials here overstepped, and they ought to get a taste of the lash until they remember what their ****ing job is.

edit: That said, if the school says your hair has to be clean, has to be tied back, can't be all gummed up with product-- anything the kid can go right ahead and fix when the bell rings-- that's fine. That's no different than a dress code or a uniform. But the way the hair's cut or colored? That's trying to exert authority over how they look and act when they're not in school, and for that... refer to my previous comment about the lash.
 
Last edited:
Kid's a US citizen, he has the right to attend public school unless and until he presents a danger to the other students' safety or their own right to an education.

Hair styles are a form or self expression. The courts have ruled time and time again that public schools are not necessarily free speech zones and that students do not have unlimited freedom of self expression.

In short, if the self expression is disruptive, it can and should be regulated. It does not matter if it is hair styles, speech, T-shirts, distributing leaflets etc.
 
Last edited:
I keep seeing people say it's ok to disallow "disruptive" hair styles, but no one seems to be able to give an example of what "disruptive" is.
 
Back
Top Bottom