adam j.

sontag
Sociology
Mr. Jacobsen
period three
06.01.04

participation in government: dress code in herricks high

school
 Over the past several months, discussion of a dress code has returned to a

place of pertinence on the mantle of issues in the Herricks Union Free School District.

At Herricks High School, the senior school for students in grades nine through twelve,

and Herricks Middle School, the lower school that serves grades six through eight,

“inappropriate” and “promiscuous” sartorial choices have been cited in calls for a

revision of the present dress code. 1 Regardless of where a group may stand on the

issue of the dress code, it can be agreed that most of the problems with the current

code stem from its vagueness.

The present dress code, which was adopted in the summer of 1997, puts the

onus for appropriate “student dress and general appearance [on] individual students

and parents.”2 Simultaneously, however, “the Board requires students to attend school

in appropriate dress that meets the health and safety standards and does not interfere

with the learning process.” 3 The present policy also bans attire “which is obscene or

libellous, which advocates racial or religious prejudice, or is disruptive.”4

The current code also explains “the Superintendent of Schools and other

designated administrative personnel shall have the authority to require a student to

change his/her attire should it be deemed inappropriate according to the above

guidelines.” 5 As the policy is presently enumerated, it is easy to see where there is

room for contention to arise: the entire policy is based on subjective judgment of

appropriateness. That which constitutes appropriate public school attire for one may

not in the eyes of another.

Hence, fragmentation occurs between different groups that fall toward the

different ends of a continuum of what is considered appropriate dress. At the present

juncture, the dress code is under attack from a more conservative element within the

district, the Herricks Parent Teacher Association, a chapter of the National Parent
Teacher Association. The PTA is “the largest child advocacy group in the United

States,” boasting over six million members. According to National PTA President

Linda Hodge, the “PTA is addressing challenges that include parents’ time

constraints, cultural differences, and school budget shortfalls.”6 The National PTA is

a powerful lobbyer for national decision making bodies, and local PTA chapters

possess an analogous lobbying power over local decision making bodies, often Boards

of Education.

At a meeting of the Herricks Board of Education on Thursday, 11 September

2003, a number of district mothers, also Herricks PTA leaders, got up to point out

their concern at “promiscuous” dress, lamenting that “tank tops, shirts that don't reach

the waist, hip-hugger shorts, and navel exposing jeans, [and] huge high heels” 7 have

all become acceptable articles of clothing for students in the halls of the district’s

schools. The parents also complained about student dress at school concerts,

evidently expressing a desire that attire be “more conservative and not so revealing

while students are performing.” 8

Hearing a complaint in such a manner is often the first step the Herricks Board

of Education (“the Board”) takes in its decision-making process. The Board is a

mostly legislative body elected by the voting-age citizens that live within the

prescribed boundaries of the Herricks UFSD. It is a five-person body to which each

member is elected to a three-year term, but either one or two seats on the Board are up

for re-election each year, so the Board can never turn over completely after one

election.9

The Board is a local body: the power to legislate is vested in it by the New

York State Board of Regents and the New York State Education Office and it has no

control of policies beyond the Herricks UFSD.10 The Board only possesses power as
a body: no individual board trustee has any executive, legislative, or judicial power by

virtue of his position as a trustee. 11

A Board of Education is “responsible for local school policies, including

curriculum and textbooks…[it] is also responsible for discipline, school buildings,

equipment, budget transportation, and educating the physically or mentally impaired.”

The Board’s role is mostly to develop policy, and thus it is a legislative body. It has

executive power in the sense that it “hires a superintendent to carry out these

policies.” It also has judicial authority in the sense that it hires and fires those who

make the judgments and assess the punishments. According to the High School Rules,

however, the “Right of Appeal” after disciplinary action has been taken against a

student only extends as high as the Superintendent of Schools.” 12

The Board’s decision-making process begins at weekly Board of Education

meetings. In New York State, “School boards are required to have open meetings,”13

and though public participation is not required, the Herricks Board of Education

invites comments from those persons who are subject in some way to its decisions.

Community members of all ages often voice their own individual concerns, but

individuals also speak on behalf of larger special interest groups. Many of the high

school students who attend board meetings are there on behalf of the Herricks High

School Student Government, the primary special interest group on the other side of

the dress code issue.

The Herricks High School Student Government (“the Student Government”) is

an organisation with a manifold purpose. Its forty-four members represent, at least in

theory, the student body at large and bring the concerns of their constituents to the

school administration.14 Therefore, the student government is a private interest: it

represents the interests of a specific group. The Student Government also are in
charge of many social activities for the students, earning money that is mostly use to

fund other activities. Finally, the Student Government is set up as an educational

exercise to teach those interested in participating in a governmental-style bureaucracy

how one is run.

The Student Government does not have a lot of power. Much of their money

comes from the school budget allotment for clubs. In a peculiar twist of irony, this

budget is created by the Board of Education and voted on and paid for by the

taxpayers, many of whom are actually members of the Herricks chapter of the PTA.

The Student Government also suffers from a degree of apathy from their constituents.

A great number of the students that they represent do not care one iota about the

Student Government’s actions, and many remain wildly ignorant. The name Student

Government is a misnomer. Despite the name, they do not have any actual executive,

legislative, or judicial power within the school. They merely have the power to

suggest to the administration. At the same time, the Student Government benefits

from a vague understanding that at least at the high school level, the students in a

school district should have some say in the policymaking process. Thus, an otherwise

reasonably powerless, under-funded group of students are given a boost in status by

perception.

The stance of the Student Government is that the current code, despite its

vagueness, is acceptable because students tend to stay within the bounds of what they

consider appropriate attire. Though a bare shoulder or exposed midriff may have

been scandalous decades ago, students have been desensitised to tube tops and low-

cut jeans. They don’t distract as they once may have and they do not interfere with

the learning process. The current dress code is acceptable also because “most kids

don’t dress outrageously.”15 Student Government Executive Board President Eric

Schwartz puts forward a view popular with many Herricks students. “There just

aren’t that you see dressing ‘promiscuously’ when you look around the halls.”

Other students worry about their constitutionally protected right to freedom of

expression. As Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas famously wrote in the majority

opinion in Tinker v. Des Moines School District in 1969, “It can hardly be argued that

either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or

expression at the schoolhouse gate.”16 In an editorial in the Herricks High School

newspaper, the Highlander, co-authors Akhilesh Pillalamarri and Tina Wilson express

a fear that the implementation of “a dress code would suppress individualism.”17

Though the authors bombastically fear that “a strict dress code would force everyone

to accept one way of thinking,” they are reflective of students that have heard dress

code horror stories from schools across the United States, where within the last

several years, public school students have got into serious trouble for everything from

having blue hair18 to, in a eerie reminder of Tinker, wearing anti-war t-shirts.19

Another reservation some students have with the current dress code issue is

that it seems to solely target the dress of females. “It just bothers me because there’s

nothing in it about guys,” says Herricks junior Emma Cohen.20 Faced with the

response that there is nothing particularly “promiscuous” about a male’s boxer shorts

popping up in the back or a large white t-shirt, she said that the dress code could “at

least be neat.”

The Student Government representatives lobby the Board the same way that

the PTA does. They attend board meetings and offer their opinions when the floor is

open. Often board meetings become hotbeds of discussion between community

members, and board meetings have been known to deteriorate into shouting matches.

Once the Board becomes cognisant of an issue within the district, its members
decide a course of action. One approach the Board often takes is outsourcing an

investigation to a committee, as was done with the dress code. A Dress Code

Committee, consisting of administrators, teachers, Student Government

representatives, and headed by Mr. Joe Leccese, principal of Herricks Middle School,

was established.21 The committee then does work on its own and comes back to the

Board with a proposed course of action or some suggestions for a new policy. After a

committee comes back to the Board, board members draft a new policy. Then the

Board as a whole votes on the new policy. If the vote is unsuccessful, the previous

policy remains in effect until if and when an alternate version is drafted and voted

upon. Should the vote be successful, the policy becomes official, and it is inserted

into the Herricks Public Schools Code and Policy Book, which is exactly what its title

indicates: a comprehensive and authoritative compilation of all operating policies of

the school district. 22

When the Board is faced with a matter of operating policy like a dress code, it

generally follows the procedure outlined above. With matters that require public

approval like a budget vote, the board will draft a budget that the public then vote on.

Since every school district must pass a budget, the board must draft and redraft until

one finally passes.23

On the matter of the dress code, the Student Government and the student body

they represent have a simple goal: maintain the status quo. Most students won’t have

a single day in their high school careers when they come close to the bounds of

“inappropriate” or “promiscuous” dress. Most students will not ever be affected by

the vague dress code that is in place, and due to the apathy cited before, most students

do not care or do not even know how much trouble that vague policy can cause.
 The students do not want any change, even one to a more specifically worded

policy that could ultimately protect them. In the final analysis, the students do not

want the complicated bureaucracy of district policies to affect them, and their Student

Government representatives know this. They would thus accept a change on a minor

policy like concert attire, because, once again, most students already dress

appropriately for concerts. The Student Government does not have a hidden agenda

because they do not have anything to hide: their aim is simple.

Though the PTA lobby on behalf of a specific group, it is initially difficult to

say that any group whose prime goal is to improve the lot for “the children of

America” is a private interest. Considering that there are over 60 million school-age

children in the United States as of the year 2000 Census, 24 anyone who is attempting

to aid them would theoretically be aiding society as a whole. When the parallel

between the national and local levels of the PTA is drawn again, the same proportional

truth is bared. There are hundreds of parents in the Herricks PTA, lobbying the

Herricks Board of Education on behalf of the approximately three thousand students

in the district. The true nature of the PTA as a private interest is apparent in its hidden

agenda, which is made manifest through activities like supporting a stricter dress

code.

As enumerated in its bylaws, the purposes of the Herricks PTA are

a. To promote the welfare of children and youth in home, school, community, and place of
worship.
b. To raise the standards of home life.
c. To secure adequate laws for the care and protection of children and youth.
d. To bring into closer relation the home and the school, that parents and teachers may
cooperate intelligently in the education of children and youth.
e. To develop between educators and the general public such united efforts as will secure for
all children and youth the highest advantages in physical, mental, social, and spiritual
education. 25

It is hard to find therein a rationale for a stricter dress code. The PTA has a

conservative agenda and an attachment to the morals of yesteryear. The present dress
code stipulates that clothing not interfere with the learning process. In the present

day, some of the attire the PTA members claimed was “inappropriate” doesn’t get a

second glance. And in a district where test scores are considerably higher than New

York State and national averages 26 and the median grade in the graduating senior class

of 2004 is an 82, it is hard to find many things in the Herricks system that are

interfering with the educational process, especially clothing. Many PTA members

seem to have an objection to certain types of clothes on girls, and regardless of

whether it is a goal of their particular organisation or not, they want to be rid of the

clothes they abhor.

What do the PTA members want? Some have gone so far as to suggest

uniforms. Most seem to want a stricter, more specific policy that would ban certain

types of risqué clothes on girls. But the PTA, much more so than the Student

Government, seem to be more likely to settle far short of their demands, especially

after a simple visual examination of the students in the hallways reveals that the

copious “promiscuous and inappropriate” dress that was lamented at the 11th

September board meeting is neither copious nor all that inappropriate.

Ultimately, the vagueness in all of the Herricks dress codes is the root

problem. Interestingly, most people in authority positions err on the side of individual

liberty and free expression, but a t-shirt that may be hilarious to one teacher walking

down the hallway may be grotesque to another. There is simply too much room for

subjective judgment in Herricks dress code policy. How much is too much skin?

What words really are offensive? Though the Dress Code Committee seemed to be

loath to over-legislate,27 perhaps the time to eliminate the grey area in the dress code

has come. More specific is not necessarily stricter; it simply means that dress is

judged by the same set of codified, understood rules. Eliminating subjective

judgment from the dress code empowers every student to follow or break the rules as

he sees fit, instead of wondering each morning when he gets dressed exactly what the

rules really are.

 Notes

1 - Whitely, Margaret. "Herricks Mothers Complain About Promiscuous Dress." The

Illustrated News 12 Sept. 2003.

<http://www.antonnews.com/illustratednews/2003/09/12/news/>.

2 - Herricks Union Free School District. Board of Education. Herricks Public Schools

Code and Policy Book. 2003. 5311.5

3 – HUFSD – Code and Policy Book. 5311.5

4 – HUFSD – Code and Policy Book. 5311.5

5 – HUFSD – Code and Policy Book. 5311.5

6 - Hodge, Linda. About National PTA - Presidents Message. National PTA.

<http://www.pta.org/aboutpta/presidentsmessage.asp>.

7 – Whitely

8 – Whitely

9 - HUFSD – Code and Policy Book. 2050

10 - "Sharing the Power." Comp. Peter Jacobsen. Nassau County: Education -

Herricks P.I.G..

11 - HUFSD – Code and Policy Book. 2050

12 - Herricks High School Agenda Book - Rules. Herricks UFSD, 2003. 20.

13 – “Sharing the Power”

14 - Herricks High School Agenda Book - Rules. 23.

15 - Schwartz, Eric. Personal interview. 20 Nov. 2003.

16 - Tinker et al. v. Des Moines. 24 Feb. 1969. Boston College.

<http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/tinker.html>.

17 - Pillalamarri, Akhilesh and Tina Wilson. "Say No to Dress Code." Editorial.

Herricks Highlander Dec. 2003: 4.

18 - ACLU: VA Middle School Student with Blue Hair Allowed to Return to Class

After ACLU Intervention . 29 Apr. 2002. American Civil Liberties Union.

<http://www.aclu.org/StudentsRights/StudentsRights.cfm?ID=10323&c=156>

19 - ACLU: Judge Rules in Favor of Michigan Student’s Right to Wear Anti-War T-

Shirt to School . 1 Oct. 2003. American Civil Liberties Union.

<http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=13913&c=87>.

20 - Cohen, Emma. Personal interview. 29 Dec. 2003.

21 - Dua, Karan, and Prachi Dua. "Herricks Council of PTAs Discusses Dress Code,

Halloween Incidents, and Other Issues." Herricks Highlander Dec. 2003: 6-7.

22 - HUFSD – Code and Policy Book.

23 – “Sharing the Power”

24 - Quick Tables - American Fact Finder. 2000. U.S. Census Bureau.

<http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/QTTable?geo_id=01000US&ds_name=D

EC_2000_SF1_U&qr_name=DEC_2000_SF1_U_QTP1&_lang=en&_sse=on

>.

25 - Herricks Council of PTAs. 1 Jan. 2002.

<http://www.myschoolonline.com/folder/0,1872,7182-201932-4-

66764,00.html>.

26 - New York State School Report Card For Herricks High School. Mar. 2002. New

York State Board of Regents.

<http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/repcrd2002/overview/280409030008.pdf>.

27 - Dua, Karan, and Prachi Dua.

 Works Cited

ACLU: Judge Rules in Favor of Michigan Student’s Right to Wear Anti-War T-Shirt

to School . 1 Oct. 2003. American Civil Liberties Union.

<http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=13913&c=87>.

ACLU: VA Middle School Student with Blue Hair Allowed to Return to Class After

ACLU Intervention . 29 Apr. 2002. American Civil Liberties Union.

<http://www.aclu.org/StudentsRights/StudentsRights.cfm?ID=10323&c=156>

Cohen, Emma. Personal interview. 29 Dec. 2003.

Dua, Karan, and Prachi Dua. "Herricks Council of PTAs Discusses Dress Code,

Halloween Incidents, and Other Issues." Herricks Highlander Dec. 2003: 6-7.

Herricks Council of PTAs. 1 Jan. 2002.

<http://www.myschoolonline.com/folder/0,1872,7182-201932-4-

66764,00.html>.

Herricks High School Agenda Book - Rules. Herricks UFSD, 2003. 1-23.

Herricks Union Free School District. Board of Education. Herricks Public Schools

Code and Policy Book. 2003.

Hodge, Linda. About National PTA - Presidents Message. National PTA.

<http://www.pta.org/aboutpta/presidentsmessage.asp>.

New York State School Report Card For Herricks High School. Mar. 2002. New York

State Board of Regents.

<http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/repcrd2002/overview/280409030008.pdf>.

Pillalamarri, Akhilesh and Tina Wilson. "Say No to Dress Code." Editorial. Herricks

Highlander Dec. 2003: 4.

Quick Tables - American Fact Finder. 2000. U.S. Census Bureau.

<http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/QTTable?geo_id=01000US&ds_name=D
 EC_2000_SF1_U&qr_name=DEC_2000_SF1_U_QTP1&_lang=en&_sse=on

>.

Schwartz, Eric. Personal interview. 20 Nov. 2003.

"Sharing the Power." Comp. Peter Jacobsen. Nassau County: Education - Herricks

P.I.G..

Tinker et al. v. Des Moines. 24 Feb. 1969. Boston College.

<http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/tinker.html>.

Whitely, Margaret. "Herricks Mothers Complain About Promiscuous Dress." The

Illustrated News 12 Sept. 2003.

<http://www.antonnews.com/illustratednews/2003/09/12/news/>.