Background
One of the early annoyances I had to tolerate when I began commuting 10-miles a day to and from campus by bike was the faculty dress code of a dress shirt, slacks, dress shoes, and a necktie. Trying to stay presentable, without mud or grease from the bike chain getting on me, has remained a challenge and an annoyance, but I didn’t apply too much thought to the broader issue until I read an article on historically black colleges and universities and their emphasis on dress and appearance:
As classes began this year, male students at Dillard University, a historically black institution, were asked to don suits and ties. Students leading the effort believe that through this custom, students will better represent the school and themselves upon graduation.
It is important to place this in the context of “respectability politics” – attempts by marginalized groups to demonstrate their acceptance of mainstream values rather than to challenge the mainstream for failing to accept difference.
Are teachers a “marginalized group”? Yes, based on pay relative to education, but not the same as black college and university students. Then why our emphasis on dress and appearance, I wondered? And are we the only school that requires such professional attire? So, I asked around, and of 26 responding schools, only 12% had a similar policy.
Interestingly, our female faculty have a significantly less burdensome dress code. The only requirement for them is that they “wear either an appropriately modest (i.e., not low cut) dress or blouse and skirt or loose-fitting pants.” I say “interestingly” because the difference in required dress stands in stark contrast to an example in Archdiocesan-required training materials:
Apparently dress codes should not unfairly burden one gender, and yet the dress shirts that I wear must either be laundered or ironed — which constitutes either an undue financial or time burden.
Research
Naturally, I turned to the research on the topic and found two studies of particular note. The first research paper, looking at 102 school employee handbooks, examined “What dress norms and related rationales are found in teacher dress policies?” It found:
Eighty-two handbooks (80.4%) provided one or more rationales for their guidelines; 20 handbooks (19.6%) provided no rationales. From the 82 handbooks, researchers identified six general rationales for teacher dress codes. In order of frequency, they were to project a positive image in the community (n = 56); because teachers are role models for students (n = 41); to create an environment conducive to learning (n = 25); to instill respect for authority, traditional values, and discipline (n = 15); safety (n = 13); and to create a distinction between teachers and students (n = 4).
Our employee handbook, in fact, offers the most common justification, that faculty “and staff serve as role models for students in many ways, including appropriate dress. Faculty should dress in a manner consistent with their role as professional educators.” But that’s not actually a reason; I can serve as a role model regardless of my physical appearance. Does it, for example, matter if I’m tall or short? Thin or not? Pale-skinned or not? I contend that physical appearance does not actually matter, and this demand for a necktie and professional attire is a proxy for something else.
Another study looked at the factors affecting student perceptions of instructors’ credibility and whether teacher dress influenced those perceptions. In that study, the authors found after the first level of regression that “the three traits that have the most impact on instructor credibility are their level of preparation, knowledge of the subject matter, and ability to prepare students for a career.” The authors found that “four of the six traits have a significant impact on the credibility of a professor dressed in casual attire. The differentiating trait for casual versus professional attire is the instructor’s ability to answer questions and listen to student opinions, which may suggest that students expect casually dressed instructors to conduct class using more discussion or knowledge discovery, while professionally dressed instructors are expected to ‘impart’ more knowledge on the students.” The following table shows how all of the attributes tracked across three conditions of dress:
Conclusion
Faculty dress just doesn’t matter to anything that involves students, student behavior, or student learning. I shouldn’t have to buy and maintain dress shirts, slacks, dress shoes and neckties for daily use as a classroom teacher. (Of course, I would expect to dress up for special occasions, such as school-wide liturgies, the first day of class, and parent-teacher conferences.) I should also add that this is no way precludes someone from choosing to dress-up on their own; I simply object to “professional attire” (a) being defined as consisting of a dress shirt, slacks, dress shoes, and a necktie, and (b) those being required on a daily basis.