Indiana Sets Standards for Students. It Is Time to Set a Professional Dress Standard for Teachers, Too.

Hoosier Enquirer Editorial: Teachers are professionals entrusted with Indiana's children. Asking them to dress like professionals shouldn't depend entirely on which side of a school-district boundary they work. It is time to debate Muslim schools and what is worn, even at religious schools.

INDIANAPOLIS — Indiana regulates an extraordinary amount of what happens inside a public school. The state establishes academic standards, teacher licensing requirements, graduation requirements and numerous expectations for student conduct. Local schools routinely tell students what they may and may not wear.

Yet Indiana has no comparable statewide professional dress standard governing the adults standing in front of those students. Instead, teacher attire is largely left to individual school corporations, producing a patchwork in which one district may have meaningful professional expectations while another relies upon vague language or the judgment of individual administrators.

The Hoosier Enquirer believes the General Assembly should establish a reasonable statewide minimum.

Indiana should enact a Professional Educator Appearance Act requiring teachers and other instructional employees to maintain professional or business-casual attire during the ordinary school day, while allowing local districts to adopt reasonable additional requirements and recognizing legitimate occupational, medical and religious accommodations.

This isn't a call for every male teacher to wear a suit and tie or every female teacher to wear a dress. Professional clothing doesn't have to be expensive, uncomfortable or old-fashioned. Khakis and a polo shirt can be professional. So can slacks, sweaters, blouses, dresses and countless other affordable choices.

The issue is establishing reasonable boundaries.

Some Clothing Simply Isn't Appropriate for the Classroom

A professional standard should be willing to say what nearly every other workplace already understands: some clothing is appropriate for leisure and some is appropriate for work.

Teachers shouldn't ordinarily be wearing extremely low-cut tops, excessively short skirts or shorts, transparent clothing or garments exposing substantial portions of the chest, buttocks or midriff while teaching children. The same standards should apply fairly to men and women rather than imposing substantially different expectations based upon sex.

This isn't prudishness. It is workplace professionalism.

Schools already ask students to distinguish between clothing appropriate for the beach, gym, bedroom, social events and classroom. Adults entrusted with enforcing those expectations should demonstrate the distinction themselves.

The legislation shouldn't require principals to walk around schools carrying rulers. It should establish an objective general standard and allow administrators to address obvious violations reasonably.

Faces in the Classroom Present a Different Question

Indiana should also confront the increasingly complicated question of face coverings, but it should do so constitutionally and without targeting a particular religion.

Teachers perform an intensely interpersonal job. Students need to identify their teachers, hear them clearly and observe facial expressions that are an important part of human communication. Schools also have legitimate interests in identification and security.

A statewide policy could therefore establish a general presumption that an instructional employee's face remains visible while directly teaching students when facial visibility is reasonably necessary for identification, communication, safety or instruction.

That rule should apply to all face coverings, rather than singling out Islamic clothing such as the burqa or niqab. A ski mask, balaclava, costume mask or other garment covering the face would be evaluated under the same standard.

Religious freedom nevertheless matters. Federal and constitutional protections can require reasonable accommodation of sincerely held religious practices, and Indiana shouldn't enact a statute pretending those protections don't exist. Any legislation should expressly require school corporations to provide accommodations when required by state or federal law.

That is both fairer and legally stronger than writing one religion's clothing into a list of prohibited garments.

Students Notice Double Standards

There is an obvious contradiction when a school tells a teenager that an extremely short skirt, plunging neckline or exposed midriff is inappropriate for class while allowing an adult employee to appear before students dressed substantially the same way.

Students notice inconsistency remarkably well. If schools believe clothing can affect the educational environment sufficiently to regulate student attire, they can hardly maintain that adult appearance is completely irrelevant.

A statewide teacher standard would establish a better principle: professional expectations begin with the adults.

Teachers don't surrender their personalities because they dress appropriately for work. Lawyers, bankers, nurses, police officers, judges, restaurant employees and millions of private-sector workers operate under workplace appearance standards every day.

Education shouldn't be uniquely afraid of the word “professional.”

Common Sense Requires Exceptions

The legislature shouldn't attempt to write a fashion catalog into the Indiana Code. A statute should establish broad standards and leave sensible implementation to schools.

Physical-education teachers obviously need athletic clothing. Agriculture, automotive, welding and vocational instructors may require work clothes and protective equipment. Elementary teachers sometimes participate in messy classroom activities. Coaches, field trips, outdoor programs, school-spirit days and special events may justify more casual clothing.

Medical needs and disabilities may also require accommodation. So can pregnancy and sincerely held religious practices protected by law.

Those exceptions don't undermine the rule. They make it workable.

Nor should an occasional minor violation become a disciplinary crisis. Except for serious circumstances, a first problem should ordinarily result in a private conversation and an opportunity to correct the clothing rather than formal punishment.

Indiana needs professional standards, not fashion police.

Professionalism Goes Both Ways

Indiana spends considerable time debating teacher salaries, shortages, classroom discipline and declining respect for educators. A dress code isn't going to solve those problems, and nobody should pretend otherwise.

But if Indiana wants teaching regarded as a profession, professionalism carries responsibilities in both directions. Teachers deserve appropriate compensation, safe workplaces, administrative support and respect for their expertise. Parents and taxpayers can reasonably expect professional conduct and presentation in return.

Appearance doesn't determine competence. A brilliant teacher doesn't become smarter by putting on a collared shirt, and an ineffective teacher doesn't become excellent by wearing a jacket.

Professional appearance nevertheless communicates something important: I understand where I am, whom I represent and the seriousness of the job I am performing.

Give Indiana One Reasonable Standard

The General Assembly doesn't need to dictate colors, brands, hairstyles or hem lengths down to the inch. It should establish a statewide floor requiring clean, appropriate professional or business-casual attire during ordinary classroom instruction.

That standard can reasonably prohibit extremely revealing clothing, including excessively low-cut tops, extremely short skirts and shorts, transparent garments and substantial exposure of the torso. It can establish religion-neutral rules governing face coverings when visibility is genuinely necessary for teaching, identification, communication or safety, while preserving accommodations required by law.

Local districts could then adopt additional reasonable standards reflecting their particular schools and educational programs.

Indiana asks students to arrive prepared to learn. We ask them to respect their teachers, follow school rules and develop habits that will eventually prepare them for employment and adulthood.

The adults standing in front of those students should model those expectations.

Indiana teachers deserve to be treated like professionals. Indiana can reasonably expect them to dress like professionals, too.

The General Assembly should establish that principle statewide for all schools getting tax money or tax breaks, period.