Students and teachers press Muhlenberg County school board to revise dress code after early enforcement

Members of the Muhlenberg County community urged the Muhlenberg County Board of Education on Sept. 11 to revise and clarify the district dress code after several students said they were pulled from class and sent home for alleged violations in the opening weeks of school.

Students and teachers described repeated classroom disruptions from dress-code enforcement that they say have driven some students to miss school. The board said it has distributed an updated diagram clarifying the policy's definition of torso and had reprimands issued under the earlier guidance removed from students' records.

"We were pulled out of class by at least 6 administrators while taking a test," said Montgomery Duball, a junior at Muhlenberg County High School, describing one incident in which students were given three options after being stopped for dress-code concerns: in-school suspension, the resource center, or to go home. "Can you guess what we were wearing? Pajama pants. That's all."

Katie Perkins, an English teacher at Muhlenberg County High School, told the board enforcement has "diminished student relationships, disrupted learning, and damaged the culture that we have worked so diligently to build." Perkins cited district reading data and said students who check out because of discipline miss instruction she called critical to literacy.

"If our mission is truly to provide students with the knowledge and skills they need to be successful after high school, I call us back to literacy," Perkins said, asking the board to revise the code, survey students about school climate, and "partner with your educators." She also urged easing specific length restrictions and allowing more varieties of attire so students return and remain in class.

Several other student speakers echoed that enforcement felt public and shaming. "Every student who has endured that deserves more than silence. They deserve a genuine apology from the Board of Education," said Jovi Keter, a junior, who said she had organized an online petition (she cited the petition had collected "9 56" names during her remarks).

Class president Wilson Walker, a student in the class of 2027, said an update to the short-length standard and clearer definitions would help build trust. "My question is simply why was the change made? Understanding the reasoning behind it ... would help students accept and follow the rule more willingly," he said.

Board member Kim Barr acknowledged public frustration and urged in-person dialogue rather than social-media posts. "When you're posting on social media, are you helping or are you hurting?" Barr said, adding she had apologized in person at school buildings for lack of clarity in the policy's language. Barr also noted she owns a local distillery and that she is a community member who supported the district.

Another board member described reviewing surrounding districts' dress codes and said the district had not intended to punish students en masse when school opened; that board member said the inaccurate diagram previously provided to administrators had caused inconsistent enforcement. "We reached out to Ms. Orr ... to have all of the reprimands to that point removed from the students so that they were no longer in trouble. They started fresh and new, clean slate," the board member said.

The board also told the audience that pajamas would not be permitted going forward and that the district intended to enforce a dress code consistent with neighboring counties while permitting certain individual expression so long as clothing met the clarified torso standard.

The board said it had discussed the policy at three open sessions over the summer, made some concessions requested by students, and would not reopen formal debate at the meeting. Several speakers asked the board to undertake a climate survey, to provide clearer online definitions in the policy, and to apologize publicly for incidents where students were singled out.

The superintendent, Stacy Orr, and board members did not move any formal policy changes during the meeting; instead, they said clarified guidance had been issued to staff and prior disciplinary entries tied to the earlier diagram had been removed. Several students and staff left the meeting urging further review of enforcement practices.

The board did not take a new formal vote to change the dress-code policy at the meeting; its remarks focused on clarification, communication, and removing prior reprimands as an administrative remedy.