An early morning Hamilton Southeastern (HSE) School Board work about student handbook language for grades kindergarten through 8th grade morphed into a school board discussion about dress codes and when a girl’s shirt is too short.
Board member Janet Pritchett began the conversation saying some students are missing class time due to being pulled away after to concerns about possible dress code violations for wearing shirts cut off above the waist.
Board President Julie Chambers indicated the slight cutoff of a shirt should not prevent a student from being in class. She would like more information on who is being disciplined for dress code violations.
Superintendent Yvonne Stokes said safety is important in relation to any dress code, particularly in this era of COVID.
Board Member Suzanne Thomas asked why the district couldn’t have a policy of no midriff showing for anyone while in school. Chambers responded that definitions of “midriff’ may not be the same for everyone.
One building administrator told the board most male teachers in his school wouldn’t touch the dress code issue. Another administrator said dress code issues are only about 1% of what he handles in his building.
“How people are dressed has little to no effect on how they’re learning in a classroom,” Board Member Brad Boyer said.
Board member Sarah Donsbach argued that girls are being “disproportionately impacted” by the dress code rules.
CFO Katie Dowling cautioned board members to be aware of liability issues tied to all this. She pointed to the board discussion as to how different people define midriff different ways.
The dictionary definition of midriff is, “the region of the front of the body between the chest and the waist.”
An administrator also suggested the board consider what specific people and families are comfortable with any dress code, and factor-in the issue of diversity into the mix.
Before the dress code discussion, administrators explained proposed handbook changes for grades K-8, dealing with attendance, academics and adding language about disciplinary actions for micro-aggressions and hate speech.
It is now up to administrators to take the many board comments and propose handbook language for board approval.
This is a very touchy subject for many. Thankfully my daughter has graduated so this is now behind me. I’ve never heard of any focus/rule being made on “boys who might distract girls due to their attire” so I’m not worried for my sons still at HSE. That being said, this policy needs changed – as girls are indeed the only ones targeted. Especially attractive girls. My daughter was targeted often. She was humiliated by being sent to the office to put on baggy, mismatched clothes from lost & found (even though what she was wearing was fine, bought and approved by me as her Mother). The supposed dress code violations were questionable at best. Meanwhile, heavy-set or unattractive girls wouldn’t be sent to the office to change despite the same/similar clothing. I’ve heard that we have kids who identify as furries being allowed to attend in whatever makes them comfortable, yet my attractive daughter’s width of her tank top straps is scrutinized?