Contributed by Brittany McDermott, MPH, for RAINN Consulting Group
For over a decade, I had the same morning routine: I’d roll out of bed (after one too many snoozes) and frantically search my closet for a wrinkle-free polo, plaid skirt, white crew socks, and plain dress shoes. Every morning, I’d sigh with relief that I could prepare for my day while still half-asleep because my hardest choice had already been made for me.
Although attending schools with a strict dress code came with its fair share of annoyances (would I get a demerit for my sock length today?), I loved the simplicity of wearing a uniform and having one less thing to stress about.
After years of working with schools to help them address sexual violence, I now recognize the deeper implications of dress code expectations and how harmful these policies can be when they aren’t implemented thoughtfully.
The U.S. Dress Code Debate
Dress codes have been a contentious topic in K-12 schools for over 50 years. In 1969, Tinker v. Des Moines laid the groundwork for the school uniform movement of the 1990s and the prevalent dress code policies of today.
Schools claimed these policies would enhance safety, reduce disciplinary issues, improve academic standards, and promote equality and unity. Unfortunately, in practice, dress codes often have the opposite effect.
Journalists have highlighted how schools weaponize dress code policies to discipline and target specific groups. Disturbing reports of public shaming, victim blaming, inconsistent enforcement, and missed class time have captured the attention of student advocates, parents, and even the federal government.
These ongoing debates often overlook how school dress codes impact young people’s social-emotional development.
How Dress Codes Impact Youth Development
Dress codes don’t simply dictate what children can or cannot wear; they influence students’ understanding of bodily autonomy, personal boundaries, and sexuality, shaping how they see themselves and interact with others.
Poorly implemented dress codes tell young people that their comfort is not a priority, and their bodies are not fully their own.
When Dress Codes Have Unintended Consequences
Dress codes commonly lead to adults scrutinizing, objectifying, or policing students’ bodies and behaviors. These actions can reinforce the harmful belief that the needs and desires of children are secondary to those of adults.
When students feel stripped of their autonomy and agency, they may:
- Internalize objectifying behaviors as acceptable
- Prioritize others’ judgments over their personal choices
- Mirror objectifying and judgmental attitudes with other students
- Face an increased risk of exploitation
When schools prioritize compliance over agency, they may:
- Fail to equip students to advocate for themselves and their boundaries
- Foster environments where sexual violence is normalized, tolerated, or even expected
- Leave youth more vulnerable to the exploitation of power imbalances both inside and outside the classroom
Reimagining Your School’s Dress Code
Although dress codes are likely to remain a fixture of K-12 education, they do not have to perpetuate harmful norms and adversely impact students’ sense of self. With intentional design and thoughtful implementation, it is possible to develop policies that balance professionalism with respect for student autonomy.
In our work helping clients address these issues, RAINN recommends an individualized approach to policy development. However, the following recommendations reflect practical steps that any school can take to foster a safer, more inclusive dress code policy.
Recommendation #1: Trust the Research
- Develop and refine dress code policies using an evidence-based approach.
Schools should ensure that dress code guidelines are grounded in research and focused on creating a safe and supportive learning environment rather than upholding arbitrary standards. For example, while there is no evidence that the length of a student’s socks or the fit of their clothing affects academic performance, studies consistently show that exposure to harassment and discrimination at school can have lifelong impacts on achievement and overall well-being.
Prioritizing evidence-based policies that promote safety and respect—such as prohibiting clothing that displays hate speech—ensures schools’ intentions are clear and more easily justifiable.
Recommendation #2: Assess the Impact
- Assess how your dress code policy uniquely impacts students of specific groups.
Schools should consider their dress code as an integral part of their approach to student wellbeing, tracking specific data points at regular intervals to assess its impact.
Rather than aiming to treat all students the same, dress code policies should prioritize each student’s uniqueness and individual needs. Specifically, schools should implement these simple language substitutions:
AVOID: Rules that target specific groups (e.g., restricting items typically worn by girls, such as leggings; only allowing certain students to wear a suit or painted nails)
INCLUDE: Language that indicates what clothing and accessories are appropriate for all students, regardless of social identity or body type
AVOID: Prohibiting specific hair colors, hairstyles, or head coverings
INCLUDE: A description of standard expectations for personal grooming, recognizing both religious and cultural nuances
AVOID: Euphemisms or subjective terms referring to clothing, particularly those that may have different social/cultural meanings (e.g., “provocative”; “revealing”, or “distracting”)
INCLUDE: Objective language that focuses on clothing functionality and has a universal meaning (e.g., “clothing must be opaque/not see-through, free of rips or tears, and cover all private parts at all times”)
Recommendation #3: Enforce with Care
- Prohibit enforcement practices that involve adults touching students’ bodies, coercive tactics, public humiliation/shaming, or exclusionary discipline.
According to a Government Accountability Office report, 60% of public school districts use physical measurements to determine if a student’s clothing is appropriate for school, often requiring adults to touch students’ bodies without consent. Oftentimes, this unofficial test is done in front of other students, which can be both humiliating and disruptive to student learning.
Students who violate dress code policies should not be used as an example for their peers or deprived of the opportunity to learn as a result of suspensions, expulsions, or informal removals.
We encourage schools to:
- Address policy violations privately
- Avoid corrections that involve physical touch
- Use standard language that is solution-oriented, shame-free, and body-neutral
Recommendation #4: Conduct Regular Reviews
- Convene a working group of administrators, teachers, parents, students, and experts like RAINN to review and update school policies annually.
Dress codes, like all policies, should be evaluated regularly. While it is not always necessary to rewrite school policies every year, ongoing review allows schools to consider whether existing guidelines are relevant, aligned with best practices, and responsive to evolving community needs/emerging trends.
Perhaps most importantly, schools must welcome student input. Engaging young people in the review process not only ensures that policies reflect students’ lived experiences but also empowers them to advocate for what is important to them and their peers. In my experience working with schools, a collaborative approach helps build trust and generate buy-in so that policies are designed to serve every member of your school’s community.
Thoughtful Dress Codes Strengthen Schools
By reimagining dress codes, schools can foster a culture where all students feel valued and empowered to reject harmful attitudes and beliefs.
Now is the time to align school policies with the values upheld in Tinker v. Des Moines and consider whether disciplining students for dress code violations is less disruptive than encouraging them to show up as their authentic selves.
Sexual abuse, assault, and misconduct are sensitive, challenging issues, but every organization should be prepared to support survivors.
Last updated: August 11, 2025