The recent controversy surrounding the University of Professional Studies, Accra (UPSA) dress code policy has sparked a heated debate about the role of universities in shaping the professional lives of their students. While some argue that the policy is necessary to instill a sense of professionalism and corporate culture, others see it as an infringement on students’ personal freedom and autonomy.
At the heart of the debate is the question of what it means to be professional. Is it about adhering to a strict dress code, or is it about developing a set of skills and values that are essential for success in one’s chosen career? The UPSA dress code policy, which prohibits students from wearing certain types of clothing, including ripped jeans, crop tops, and slippers, is designed to promote a sense of professionalism and corporate culture among students.
However, critics argue that the policy is overly restrictive and fails to take into account the diverse backgrounds and experiences of students. They point out that the policy is not only about dress code, but also about the university’s attempt to impose its own values and norms on students. Some have even questioned the relevance of such a policy in a country like Ghana, where cultural and traditional norms around dress and attire are complex and multifaceted.
One aspect that has not been fully explored in the debate is the role of cultural and traditional practices in shaping students’ attitudes towards dress code. For instance, some students may come from cultural backgrounds where certain types of clothing are considered taboo or inappropriate. Others may have traditional or religious attire that is not accommodated by the university’s dress code policy.
Moreover, the policy’s impact on students’ self-expression and creativity has also been raised as a concern. Some students have argued that the policy stifles their ability to express themselves through their choice of clothing, which is an important aspect of their identity. Others have pointed out that the policy’s emphasis on formal attire may not be practical or relevant for all students, particularly those who may not plan to work in formal office settings.
In light of these concerns, it may be useful for the university to consider revising its dress code policy to make it more inclusive and flexible. This could involve allowing students to wear traditional or cultural attire or providing more guidance on what constitutes “professional” dress in different contexts. By doing so, the university can promote a sense of professionalism while also respecting students’ individuality and creativity.
Ultimately, the debate around the UPSA dress code policy highlights the complexities of university life in Ghana. As institutions of higher learning, universities have a responsibility to prepare students for the workforce, but they also have a duty to respect students’ autonomy and individuality. By engaging in open and nuanced discussions about these issues, universities can create a more inclusive and supportive learning environment for all students.