• Primary amongst these, you could argue, is the positive impact that patriotism has upon the citizens of a nation. Patriotism encourages people to keep to the laws of the country, work for the greater good of the nation and provide support to other citizens within that nation.
• Patriotism often has the result that people of one nation are seen as a ‘family’, and will stand up for one another, living in unity and respect. The more patriotic the citizens of a nation, the more they will work to build a stronger and healthier nation. This is particularly true for moments of national crisis. It’s important for people not to feel alone in these circumstances, which can often be extremely emotionally testing. A good example of this is the 9/11 attacks in America. The people of the USA banded together to support one another, making the events much easier to cope with from an emotional standpoint.
• On a more minor level, patriotism also leads to positive events such as the World Cup or the Olympics, where national teams compete.

• You could start by enforcing the idea that patriotism is subconsciously xenophobic. We are all members of the human race, and are no different to one another. Countries are just arbitrary borders designed to enforce the idea that English are different from Spanish, Italians from Germans etc. This is not healthy, and often leads to a severe clash of cultures.
• Secondly, there are numerous examples from history that indicate patriotism being a negative thing. Primary amongst these is the world wars. In particular, World War 2 was caused by extreme national pride (in Germany). Combined with severe social unrest, this led to an uprising which resulted in the deaths of millions of people.
• You could also argue that despite the success of events such as the World Cup, there is still an underlying xenophobia prevalent from the citizens of each nation towards other nations. I.e. the English are rooting against the Italians, or the Germans, or the Spanish. Such events could easily be held without this. Often, it leads to people who aren’t patriotic being ostracised or treated as traitors. This is not healthy.

Counter. To counter the above, you could argue that there is a difference between patriotism and nationalism. Patriotism means having a healthy respect for your nation, whereas nationalism is the term for taking this to extreme levels. World wars were caused by nationalism and not patriotism. Patriotic people are not encouraged to hate people of other nations; just to take pride and respect in their own. Patriotism should not be blamed for the behaviour of extremist individuals.

Rebuttal. You could respond to the above by stating that although there is a difference between patriotism and nationalism, patriotism breeds nationalism. By enforcing an unnecessary and unhealthy idea that people of one nation are different from those of another, we generate tension between countries, which leads to a sense of hatred from disenchanted individuals. This results in extremist behaviour, and accelerates global conflicts.

Conclusion. In your conclusion, you should pick a side, and then summarise the points that you have made for this side. Just as in the essay, it is a good idea to acknowledge the other side of the argument or one particular key facet of this side; before dismissing it with a strong counter argument. Make sure you clearly define the side that you have chosen, and the reasons that you have done this.

• Firstly, you could argue that having a uniform encourages discipline. Just as you would set rules for children to abide by, in order to encourage order, you would set out a uniform as a code of conduct.
• Secondly, you could argue that children don’t have the maturity to choose clothing that is appropriate for the school environment. They are at a rebellious age, particularly in their teens, and giving them the choice of what to wear to school could have negative consequences.
• Thirdly, it could be argued that allowing children to wear their own clothes to school will detract from their learning. Schoolkids and teenagers are at a vulnerable age, where they should be focusing on their education. Allowing them to wear their own clothes gives them another thing to think and worry about.
• Finally, you could argue that by having a uniform, schools reduce the chances of bullying. Schoolchildren are competitive, and there is a danger that certain individuals will be singled out for their choice of clothing, leading to conflict and distress.

• Primarily, you could argue that we should be encouraging children and teenagers to express their individuality. Their choice of clothing is a fantastic way to do this, and is a key form of expressionism. People are unique, and shouldn’t be grouped together in a communist fashion.
• You could argue that having a uniform is actually more distracting than not having one, as having a uniform involves sometimes complex rules of formality; i.e. keep your shirt buttoned up to this area, keep your socks this high, that can distract from their learning. Allowing children to wear a relaxed and comfortable choice of clothing will have positive effects in the long run.

Counter. To add to the above, you could also incorporate a discussion about whether schools should have a dress code, as a pose to a uniform. This would be a more relaxed code of dress, which allowed children to wear their own clothes, whilst still keeping to a set of ground rules i.e. no offensive t-shirts, skirts above knee height, etc. If you are in favour of having a uniform, you could also discuss at what age you believe the need for a uniform becomes obsolete or loses its value.

Conclusion. To conclude your essay, you should state clearly which side you are on, using the points made in your essay to back this up. You should also summarise any other arguments that you have made in the essay, for example on whether schools should have a more relaxed dress code instead of a uniform.