I agree with those who say that school dress codes are inherently sexist. Enforcement is almost always targeted at making sure girls cover their bodies, no matter how much people try to shift the conversation to "professional" or "appropriate" dress.
I pitched a fit (not literally - I feel like I have to say that because this is the DIS, but really, I'm a polite, relatively soft-spoken person!) to the principal when older DD was in 4th grade because she had a teacher who would do this any time girls wore shorts or skirts. She would also ask the girls to raise both hands over their heads if she felt their shirts were too short, and then send them to the office for a dress code violation if any skin showed in that position. And the absurd part was that, in that school, the fingertip rule wasn't in the dress code - it states that shorts cannot be shorter than mid-thigh and that shirts that expose the midriff are not allowed. IMO, with which the principal ultimately agreed, both of those things should be able to be assessed in ordinary observation, without singling girls out for examination. Being a girl in our body-conscious society is hard enough without teachers calling undue attention to their physical appearance, especially in front of their peers and classmates.
I know this is a loaded statement and I'll get tons of grief for it but I really don't see why more schools don't go the uniform route. It doesn't have to be complicated - khaki bottoms and a specific color polo shirt would be fine. Give the kids a choice of a couple of different styles/lengths and be done with it. It would be so much easier to enforce and there would be less question of "appropriateness."
As a private school parent, let me tell you... this does NOT solve the problem, and uniform enforcement can get just as ridiculous, distracting and overzealous as dress code enforcement. The sock checks mentioned above are a great example of that. Our school requires a specific brand of black dress shoes that the kids pretty much universally hate, and there are teachers who will do random checks to see if anyone is trying to get away with more comfortable (but still dressy black) shoes. That is just as much a waste of educational time as any dress code enforcement done in a school without uniforms.
There are really two ways a school can go with uniforms. They can impose specific brand and style rules, which can be VERY expensive for parents (DD's blazer, for example, cost $125) and can create problems because the same cut doesn't fit all bodies equally (esp. a problem when schools choose unisex styles that do not accommodate curvy or busty girls). Or they can specify basic traits, ie. khakis and polos, in which case it is more affordable there's still enough potential variation to have some kids in super-skinny khakis from Old Navy while others are in conservative Dockers. And of course, length of shorts and skirts is VERY subjective based on the rates at which different students grow so unless you disallow them entirely you still have length-enforcement issues.
.
