Dear Mrs X and Mrs Y We are writing in response to your letter about the changes in sixth form dress

code. Your stance that attire "exemplifies" the high expectations of Tring School students and that the imposed increases in formality will "improve" the school dress code is clearly rooted in your shared belief that appearances, in this case of a "professional nature," affect the sixth formers' ability to learn in the classroom. This claim is completely unfounded and left unsubstantiated; lacking support from any robust objective studies on the subject. The pursuit of 'professionalism' through the school dress code is also a very dubious endeavour with regards to how it affects "work at high levels." We find the claim that "coloured jeans and chinos" are unacceptable in a learning environment highly contentious. It is frightening that a school trusted with the education of children places such preposterous focus on unproven and highly damaging beliefs about the importance of appearance. It could be just as easily claimed that suits are still devices of the higher classes, who through exploitation of their greater wealth, use suits to create a visual divide between those who can afford unnecessary and environmentally costly materialism, and those who just have clothes for all purposes. You both express the desire for the sixth form dress code to be different from students' "leisurewear," however this irrational want is not explained. This policy is flawed environmentally, financially and practically. You are advocating for over 300 students in the sixth form to purchase a number of outfits, for example several shirts, bottoms, dresses and more, all purely for school purposes when they already own perfectly adequate clothes. This would mean a great waste of precious and scarce resources. You also suggest Primark as a source for cheaper suits. However many of its goods are not domestically produced, leading to countless air miles, and it is also notorious for unethical exploitation of its workforce. Our generation faces an uphill struggle to limit greenhouse gas emissions, largely caused by the behaviour, and underlying selfish and irresponsible values held by many in the more economically 'developed' countries. As an institution of learning for young people, Tring School should be actively challenging these outdated and selfish values, rather than acting to maintain such unsustainable classist traditions. The cost to parents of the new dress code is a serious concern at any time, but especially in a period of austerity; even in a relatively affluent area like Tring many families are under severe economic pressure, suffering stagnant or falling incomes, and rising prices. The purchase of a week's clothing could easily come to over 150. With the government unwilling to cover costs for some necessary textbooks and transport into the town for those sixth formers who require it, the school itself should be doing all it can to keep obligatory costs to an absolute minimum. This dress code policy confirms the illusion of free and inclusive further education. Should you desire the reactionary policy of parity of attire amongst sixth form students as a means to help eradicate bullying through a "dress code which represents our Sixth Form ethos", then you should champion a cheap, practical and pragmatic option. Suits fail this on all counts. They are very expensive and far less durable compared to alternatives such as jumpers, which are not permitted despite being essential in keeping students warm in winter and hence less susceptible to illness. Despite your criticism of chinos as being "not acceptable", the material suits are made of is very thin compared to chinos and therefore much more prone to ripping or getting holes. This also makes suits highly inadequate for cycling, an activity the school claims to encourage, however clearly discourages in practice. For students studying Art, Resistant Materials or Drama, suits are also inappropriate. Students working with messy materials do not want to have to be worrying about the condition of their expensive suits and Drama students need far more resilient clothes that will not be ripped during an active lesson. Moreover, the "smart business style shoes" you instruct us to purchase are often incredibly impractical. They give far less support to the feet than trainers and are rarely waterproof and thus less durable than

other options. For many, this impractical dress code is only for 10 months of remaining school education and will become redundant upon entering university, where academics understand the logic of allowing students to wear what is most suitable to their studies. Surely students should be able to choose the clothing that is most appropriate to the day's weather in order to ensure comfort when learning. You state that one of your overriding aims is to ensure that students leave Tring School as "well rounded individuals," however this regressive decision blatantly undermines both this objective and the student voice system. Neither the School Council nor the Head Boy and Girl Team were consulted in your decision. Despite failing to prove that attire drives behaviour or academic performance, you demand that we adopt society's harmful exaggeration of the importance of appearance, rather than taking the academic responsibility of challenging these flaws by promoting citizenship education. Educating young people on this matter can explain, with justification, the insignificance of image in life and the irrationality and dangers of pursuing 'professionalism' to all people. We respectfully ask you instead to follow democratic tradition. Please carry out the will of the potential majority of next year's sixth form by calling off these changes and maintaining the status quo. Signed (181) Current Sixth Form Students (95) Prospective Sixth Form Students (86)

Students names have been withdrawn from this public version