Question 16183 — teaching

Summary

Mr. Thomas Portes draws the attention of the Minister of National Education to the continued experimentation with wearing common uniform at school in certain municipalities, notably in Neuilly-sur-Marne, in Seine-Saint-Denis. While the State has chosen to put an end to its support for this experiment and the finance law for 2026 has recorded the abandonment of national financing of this system, the municipality of Neuilly-sur-Marne nevertheless obtained authorization to continue the experiment in three schools in the city. This decision raises many questions. Indeed, while the State no longer participates in the financing of this measure and the municipality has also stopped its contribution, the cost of the outfit, set at 49.90 euros, will now be entirely borne by the families. In a context of high inflation and deterioration of purchasing power, this additional charge appears particularly difficult to justify. This experiment is all the more questionable as the feedback from the families concerned highlights the absence of concrete or notable results on the school climate, the reduction in violence or the improvement in student results. Several representatives of parents of students underline, on the contrary, the difficulties organization and management generated by this system. Even more worrying, it appears that the municipality did not even request the national education services in order to obtain objective data relating to the evolution of acts of violence or school harassment in the establishments concerned. The conclusions of the “Evaluation of experiments with wearing common uniform at school”, published in May 2026 by the Directorate of Evaluation, Foresight and Performance (DEPP), are nevertheless particularly enlightening. This evaluation indicates that no significant positive effect on the school climate could be demonstrated and reveals majority opposition or significant reservations among the public concerned. Thus, after a year of experimentation, 54% of teachers declared themselves unfavorable or divided regarding the continuation of the device, compared to only 36% in favor. Among primary school students, 53% say they are unfavorable or divided. Middle school students express even more marked distrust: 63% of them do not agree at all or rather disagree with the statement that they feel good in the common outfit, including 39% “disagree at all”. Furthermore, 49% consider that this measure constitutes an unnecessary constraint. Finally, 30% of primary school pupils say they hate wearing the uniform and 27% do not particularly like it. Feedback from families also confirms this lack of support. Many parents who participated in the experiment underline its very limited effect and recall their attachment to the freedom to choose the way their children dress to go to school. Some testimonies also report perverse effects particularly worrying. A mother of a student reports that her overweight child was unable to find clothing adapted to his body shape for two consecutive years. Furthermore, the DEPP report highlights a major weakness of the experiment: the virtual absence of taking into account the words of the students themselves. He emphasizes that “their opinion was rarely sought and even more rarely taken into account, except at the margins (vote on the logo or the colors of the common outfit). The experiment was thus built more “for them” than “with them”. This low level of association of the public directly concerned limits the potential educational scope of the measure and influences its reception.” As Julien Garric, lecturer at INSPÉ in Aix-Marseille, and Christine Mussard, university professor, also point out, “if we take into account the students' words, the experience does not improve the school experience. Finally, the argument according to which the uniform would reduce social inequalities appears widely contested. In reality, this measure only attempts to hide these inequalities behind a clothing symbol, without acting on their root causes. Social distinctions continue to be expressed through other markers visible such as shoes, coats, school bags or even school supplies. He asks him, in view of these elements, even though the experiment was abandoned by the State, its national funding was removed, no tangible improvement in the school climate has been demonstrated and staff, students and many families express their reservations, for what reasons the ministry granted his approval for the continuation of this experiment in certain municipalities, and if he intends to intervene as soon as possible so that this experiment, the failure of which now appears to be largely established, is definitively interrupted.

Machine translation from French. The official text remains authoritative.

Timeline

1. 23 June 2026

   Question

   Source: DateQuestion

Votes

No vote records are attached yet.

Versions

No version snapshots stored. Document URLs remain at the source.

Documents

No documents linked.

Sponsors

• Thomas Portes · auteur

Related records

No cross-record relationships stored yet.