Dress Code Policy Adherence and Self-Discipline of University Students

The new normal of online learning eventually changed how students dress for online classes. It also highlighted the concepts of self-management through the exercise of self-discipline. This study determined the dress code policy adherence and self-discipline of selected university students through a descriptive-correlational research design involving 100 purposively chosen students. The respondents are mostly young adults, female, third year level taking-up business administration. The researcher-made instrument measured the levels of dress code policy adherence and the self-discipline of the respondents. Results showed that students have high levels of dress code policy adherence and self-discipline. However, only age, sex, and course are significantly related to dress code policy adherence whereas only age and sex are significantly related to self-discipline. The study further reflected that past behavior is significantly related to the self-discipline. The results of the study may serve as inputs to the review of the institutional dress code policy in the new normal.


Introduction
Dress code policies are regulatory policies, or mandates composed and adopted by a university administration, that limit the discretion of students, or otherwise compel them to follow certain types of behavior. The university primarily has the prerogative to regulate the appropriate or inappropriate actions through a policy, guideline, memorandum, etc. Adhering to these policies is seen as good behavior. Dress code policy adherence plays a major role in identification and application of an educational institution's core values that will guide and encourage its students. However, there are institutions that do not implement a dress code policy. Their students are responsible for their own clothing and self-expression (Renales, 2016;Ramirez, 2017). Indeed, every university are distinct and cultural factors could be involved as it regulates student behavior inside the campus (Kaveh et al., 2015).
Students are expected to adhere to this imposed policy. However, given the challenges brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic and the predicaments that students are facing, the university moved meetings to an online platform. Dress codes become a second thought and there is currently no dress code policy being implemented for online classes.
There are only online classroom rules like, "Dress appropriately. No sleeveless, no topless, and no wearing of shorts when attending the virtual class." These virtual setting will inevitably change the way people dress for classes. The way people dress and present themselves during online meetings gives them a sense of normalcy in unusual times (Shepherd, 2020). Before this change occurs, it is equally important to have a comparable study about what the situation was like when students used to engage in face-to-face interaction. It could be beneficial for future research with similar variables whether for the new normal of online classes or adjusting to face-to-face meetings.
According to Sequeira et al. (2014), researchers conducting studies on dress codes are mostly focused on primary, middle school, and high school students, and very few studies have been done on dress code for college students and especially one that includes all departments. Brookshire (2016) also stated that researchers have not conducted follow-up studies, reviews, or evaluations on the impact of uniforms and concluded that future correlational research is vital in acquiring statistical data about whether school uniforms impact behavior. One aspect across the broad spectrum of behavior is self-discipline. relationship between the dress code policy adherence and self-discipline in terms of attitude, subjective norms, past behavior, and behavioral intention. Results of this study may provide valuable insight to the local site to create more informed decisions regarding the implementation of dress code policies.

Dress Code Policy Adherence
Dress code policies are implemented by schools to protect the health and safety of the students, meet standards of community decorum, and promote discipline (Lunenburg, 2011).
Students are generally identified about their level of education and affiliation from their school uniform. It adds to the reputation of the institution and adopting dress codes and uniforms creates social uniformity among students and induces them to behave in a disciplined manner (Sequeira et al., 2014). On the other hand, the University of the Philippines is known for its liberal education, which translates into freedom of expression (Ramirez, 2017). UP is a platform for selfexpression and does not have any dress code. Students can make their own choices in deciding what to wear (Renales, 2016). In the university, both students and professors could dress themselves in the way they want every single day without judgments. Villanueva (2017) investigated the perceived gaps in transmission of these policies and rules from the perspective of the policy actors, which are the students, parents, and authority (teacher/administration). When participants were asked regarding the origin or history of the dress code policy, Villanueva summarized that they simply were "following or continuing what had already been established or what is being practiced." Villanueva concluded that students get lost in translation on the phenomenon of uniform policies because "policies in transmission may seemingly be misunderstood or get filtered." Sarwari (2020) believed that the virtual setting will inevitably change the way people dress for work and even in class. In a remote work setting, Smith (2020) found that about half of employees do not adhere to a modified dress code. If there is an existing dress code for the virtual setting, it should be consistently enforced and should provide guidelines that maintain professionalism. Resistance will be present when people get back into uncomfortable clothes from work. But on the other hand, there are people that may want to reinvent themselves again after the pandemic.
According to Momeni and Asghari (2020), students who had a lack of interest in their chosen field of study did not care about the goals of adherence to professional dress. Through appropriate educational methods and being constantly scrutinized in their implementation and compliance with engagement to policy actors, belief in dress codes can be internalized.

Self-Discipline
Self-discipline is the effort an individual exerts to regulate their own moods, that results in reducing their internal conflicts between normative preferences and temptations (Mihm & Ozbek, 2016). It is of pivotal importance for students to exercise this skill as sustained self-discipline is required to continue with their goal commitment and to successfully attain them. A lack of self-discipline may cause student's intellectual potential to shorten. However, there are relatively simple self-regulatory strategies students could learn to use that may substantially improve their ability to attain their academic goals. This further imply that educational institutions could consider if their missions and objectives should extend to directly optimizing self-regulatory strategies to their students, as well as opportunities to maintain and practice them (Duckworth et al., 2011). Furthermore, when students abide and conduct themselves accordingly, they can maintain self-discipline and uphold the LSPU system's policies, rules and regulations (LSPU Handbook, 2014).
A student's level of self-discipline is positively related to their level of emotional intelligence (Moneva & Gatan, 2020). They can identify several factors in coping with stress by employing their emotional intelligence and self-discipline. In addition, students could improve their intellectual capacities and associate themselves with positive affirmations and encouragements in facing problems they may encounter in school and in life. Wu (2016) claimed that at the university level, students who want to understand and master a large number of operating rules and mainstream social values, put these rules and values into their own inner thoughts and motives, so that their actions are consistent with the requirements of society. Students' self-discipline is formed and developed under the influence of constraints. These constraints come from school, family, and society that forms a restraining force. So, the development of self-discipline encouraged students to better consciously accept the influence of external constraints that may lead to its improvement.
Improving college students' self-discipline can achieve college students' self-management.
According to Han (2019), college students are in the critical period of personal growth and success. Students' personal growth and development totally depends on their own sense of self-discipline. Hence, the sense of self-discipline plays a particularly important role in their development. Students with strong self-discipline will make full use of resources, better plan their own time, study hard, and enrich their college life.
Surprisingly, studies have shown that women might have troubles with selfdiscipline. According to Meyers (2016), if a woman falls short of the expectations they have to meet, they often view their unsuccessful attempts as personal failures. This may be attributed to how women are presented with unreasonable standards that they have to achieve. These expectations may cause them overwhelming feelings of shame, stress, inadequacy, etc. Also, women tend to report stress more than men as stressful events have a different impact on women (Núñez-Rocha et al., 2020).
Various research revealed the positive impact of self-discipline on a wide range of life outcomes. According to Garcia and Subia (2019), self-discipline helps student athletes develop better time management skills. It also prepared them thoroughly for competitions and improved focus on their plans. Meanwhile, Gelles et al. (2020) found that most students identify time management, creating and adhering to a schedule, removing distractions and setting boundaries as actions rooted in being self-disciplined. Lastly, Şimşir and Dilmaç (2021) discovered that self-discipline makes a significant contribution to a peaceful life. It promotes numerous human behaviors with positive psychological outcomes.

Theoretical Framework
The study was anchored on Martin Fishbein and Icek Azjen's Theory of Reasoned Action (1975). According to this theory, a person's behavior is determined by their behavioral intention. It is described as the intention to perform a certain behavior in a specific way in certain situations. This theory also focused on a person's attitude towards a behavior and the subjective norms that potentially affects their behavior, attitude, views, and perception. These subjective norms are influenced by the beliefs of the people around them like parents, friends, partners, colleagues, etc. In addition, Ryu and Han (2010) found that attitude and past behavior were significant predictors of tourists' behavioral intention. They found that based from past studies, the inclusion of the past behavior as a predictor significantly enhanced the predictive ability of the TRA model in intentions and/or actual behaviors. Findings showed a positive causal relationship from past behavior to behavioral intentions.
According to Kaveh et al. (2015), the theory of reasoned action can be efficiently used in determining and studying students' behavior regarding university dress code. Based from the survey on 472 students of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, 26 percent of the students had negative attitude towards the dress code. For the student's subjective norms, the results were considerably far from the expected level as only 8 percent were informed about the dress code through professors and other students but 67 percent reported that it was important for them because of the support of parents, instructors, and peers. Meanwhile, the behavioral intention of the participants towards dress code-based dressing was relatively good, with 62.3 percent of the students adhering to the dress code, while 26.4 percent did not have the same intention. Most importantly, Kaveh et al. (2015) stated that subjective norms played a more critical role in explaining the dress code behavior among the students.
The Self-Regulation Theory by Roy Baumeister was also used to support the study.
This theory outlines the system and process of conscious personal management where the mind exerts controls over its drives, functions, and states. It helps individuals to become in line with a preferred state on a regular basis, in both short-and long-term situations. There are four (4) components of SRT: (1) standards of desirable behavior, (2) motivation to meet standards, (3) monitoring of situations and thoughts that precede breaking standards and (4) willpower or internal strength to control urges. The SRT relates to self-discipline as it is a system and process where it can outline the effort an individual exerts to regulate their own moods, that results in reducing their internal conflicts (Mihm & Ozbek, 2016).
Self-regulation theory fits the investigation of self-discipline and how it is related to dress code policy adherence as an individual's goals can be attained by their standards, motivation, monitoring, and willpower. Further, Cepe (2014) used the delay of gratification theory to measure the self-discipline of college students but still required a multi-informant approach, while Mbaluka (2017) used the self-determination theory which also needed an additional questionnaire to gather reports from parents and teachers. Furthermore, the selfregulation theory, paired with the theory of reasoned action, seems to be the most appropriate theoretical approach in assessing student's perspectives and self-report on their selfdiscipline. Lastly, Walukouw and Simbolon (2019) stated there is a significant relationship between self-regulation and discipline. Thus, discipline requires self-regulation.

Methodology
The study used descriptive-correlational design since it described the behavior of the respondents and determined the relationship between the independent variable and dependent variable. The respondents of the study are 100 college students of Laguna State Polytechnic University -San Pablo City Campus. Using purposive sampling technique, the criteria set in the selection of respondents are as follows: (1) respondents must be a college student of LSPU-SPCC who has studied with face-to-face class for at least a semester in the university, and; (2) they must be willing to participate. Demographics of the participants showed that: 91% were 18 to 23 years old; 58% were female; 77% were in the third year level; and 30% were Bachelor of Science in Business Administration.
Researcher-made questionnaires were used to measure the level of dress code policy adherence and level of self-discipline of the respondents. The instruments were validated by experts in the field of psychology. Suggestions and recommendations were considered for refinement before going to the actual phase of the study, where the researchers selected college students qualified in the criteria set in choosing the respondents. The researchers explained the purpose of the study and were ensured that all answers gathered will be kept confidential. They were administered questionnaires through an online survey. After answering the provided test, the researcher gathered, tabulated, analyzed the results.
Lastly, the study used the following statistical tools: frequency and percentage distribution were used to describe the respondents' profile data. Mean was used to measure the average of the scores of the tests taken. Lastly, Pearson Product Moment Correlation was used to measure the relationship between dress code policy adherence and self-discipline. Table 1 Level of Attitude of the Respondents Table 1 shows the level of attitude of the respondents. Indicator 1 "I feel confident when I'm wearing the prescribed uniform." had the highest Mean = 3.45 and Standard Deviation = 0.72 interpreted as "High". This implied that the respondents follow the dress code because the feelings of confidence surfaces when they do so. When they wear their uniforms, they view themselves with pride and honor.

Findings and Discussion
On the other hand, Indicator 2 "Dress code policy restricts student's way of selfexpression." had the lowest Mean = 2.00 and Standard Deviation = 0.83 interpreted as "Low", which would likely mean that respondents may have a low level of dress code policy adherence because they believed that it interfered with their freedom of expression. Dress and grooming are generally viewed as a form of self-expression. Restrictions on these behaviors could make students feel that they have no freedom in expressing themselves.
With an Overall Weighted Mean = 2.94 and a Standard Deviation = 0.92, it is implied that the respondents have high level of dress code policy adherence in terms of attitude. The respondents could have mixed feelings about the dress code. Most notably, the positive feeling is confidence and honor while the negative feeling can be restriction on selfexpression. Nevertheless, the positive outweighs the negative when it comes to college student's attitudes, resulting in a high level of dress code policy adherence.

Table 2
Level of Subjective Norms of the Respondents Table 2 shows the level of subjective norms of the respondents. Indicator 7 "I am aware that the dress code policy should be followed as I am seeing my fellow students doing it." has the highest Mean = 3.44 and Standard Deviation = 0.66 interpreted as "High". This indicates that college students become aware of following the dress code when they see people like them doing the same thing. If their peers adhere to the dress code policy, then they will likely perform the same behavior.
In contrast, Indicator 4 "I feel compelled to follow the dress code policy due to social pressure." has the lowest Mean = 2.55 and Standard Deviation = 0.77 interpreted as "High".
This means that as college students, they feel that their actions partly comply to social norms but is not entirely reliant on them when it comes to deciding what actions to take in regards to their adherence to the dress code policy. It is also possible that they may choose to do so as well on their own volition. With an Overall Weighted Mean = 3.02 and Standard Deviation = 0.86, it can be understood that the respondents has high level of dress code policy adherence in terms of subjective norms. This implied that college students may perceive their fellow students as individuals that have important and effective expectations regarding the performance or avoidance of a behavior, particularly their dress code policy adherence. As they see them performing the stated behavior, they would be aware that they should follow the dress code.
However, it is possible that college students understand and are aware of their own interests which could also influence their adherence. Nonetheless, the college student's subjective norms result in a high level of dress code policy adherence.    Table 4 shows the level of behavioral intention of the respondents. Indicator 1 "I like to follow the dress code policy of the school." had the Highest Mean = 3.43 and Standard Deviation = 0.74, interpreted as "High". This implied that most of the respondents follow the dress code policy of the school because they like doing it. College students prefer to wear their uniforms because they enjoy them.
On the other hand, Indicator 6 "I follow the dress code because I am required to." had the lowest Mean = 1.49 and Standard Deviation = 0.63 which is interpreted as "Very Low". This means that the respondents may have a very low level of dress code policy adherence because they are required by the university. Being a requirement means that following the dress code is mandatory for college students. The respondents may feel that they are forced to conduct adherence since the student's control over the behavior is incomplete. Therefore, they may not engage with the desired behavior.
With an Overall Weighted Mean = 2.90 and Standard Deviation = 1.00, it means that the respondents have high level of dress code policy adherence in terms of behavioral intention. This implied that college students may decide to follow the dress code on their own due to them personally liking the uniforms and that they desire to have a pleasant appearance.
However, they may also see that adhering to the dress code is not motivated by their own decisions as they are expected to do so as students of the university. Nonetheless, the college students' intention has a high level in following the dress code.   which is interpreted as "Very High". This implied that the respondents own up to their mistakes in order to grow and become a better person. They have the potential to acknowledge the usefulness of mistakes. They recognized their setbacks and failure as lesson that make them continue with additional knowledge. With an Overall Weighted Mean = 3.17 and Standard Deviation = 0.82, it means that the respondents have high level of self-discipline in terms of standards. This implied that college students have personal standards for mistakes and plans. They could acknowledge mistakes as "lessons" that may help them grow deeper. Also, there could be failures in setting plans and processing schedules. Nonetheless, college students have personal standards, and set their goals and efforts towards them, making them disciplined. Table 7 shows the level of motivation of the respondents. Indicator 8 "I am motivated in fulfilling my goals." had the highest Mean = 3.53 and Standard Deviation = 0.56 which is interpreted as "Very High". This implied that the respondents are motivated to fulfill their own goals. They could deal with tasks and challenges but they are motivated to overcome them for their goals and ambitions. Students that recognize the value of their goals will be motivated to invest effort.
On the other hand, Indicator 6 "I feel overwhelmed in facing problems or challenge." had the lowest Mean = 2.17 and Standard Deviation = 0.79 which is interpreted as "Low".
This means that the respondents may have a low level of self-discipline because those who are faced with problems or challenges, feel overwhelmed by them. Students may be burdened with weighing and choosing among alternatives and solutions to problems and challenges.
Thus, they may fail to achieve their goals. Table 7 Level of Motivation of the Respondents With an Overall Weighted Mean = 3.03 and Standard Deviation = 0.89, it means that the respondents have high level of self-discipline in terms of motivation. This implied that college students that has goals can become motivated. These goals can give them a clear view of what they want in the future. After they set a goal, the next step is to pursue it.
However, they could face overwhelming challenges and problems along the way.
Nonetheless, college students have a high level of motivation to overcome them.   This implies that the respondents are confident in keeping track of their individual progress as they work towards the achievement of their goals. Table 9 Level of Willpower of the Respondents Table 9 shows the level of willpower of the respondents. which is interpreted as "Very High". This implied that as college students, the respondents are open to life opportunities because they know that they should have the capacity to walk on different paths to reach their goals. They may seize opportunities in order to succeed.
In contrast, Indicator 8 "I struggle working towards my goals." had the lowest mean=2.08 and Standard Deviation = 0.75, which is interpreted as "Low". This means that the respondents may have low levels of self-discipline because they experience struggles in achieving their goals. College students may struggle to strive towards their goals because they may be pushed by their parents, and not their own selves.
With an Overall Weighted Mean=2.74 and Standard Deviation=0.93, it means that the respondents have high level of self-discipline in terms of willpower. This implied that college students have the willpower to seize opportunities and make healthy choices in various areas of life, and accomplish their dreams and goals. Thus, student who possess willpower would successfully work towards their dreams and goals.

Table 10
Summary Results of Level of Self-Discipline of the Respondents Table 10 shows the summary results of level of self-discipline. It shows that majority of the respondents have a high level of self-discipline with an Overall Mean=2.91, with standards having the highest Mean=3.17. This may indicate that respondents are highly disciplined to set goals, driven to reach them, monitor their progress, and be energized to successfully attain them. Most college students can practice self-discipline by following and evaluating their own standards of success and making sense of their personal strengths and resources.  Table 11 presents the test of correlation between profile of the respondents and their dress code policy adherence. Among the variables, it is found out that the variable "Course" have a positive significant relationship (r = 0.23, p = 0.026). In this study, those studying business administration are more likely to have a positive attitude towards following the dress code policy than other courses. According to Sequeira et al. (2014), college students in business administration believes that having uniforms, incorporates discipline among them and develop their image to suit the corporate world as professionals.
On the other hand, "Age" (r = 0.236, p = 0.024) and "Sex" (r = 0.226, p = 0.021) has positive significant relationship. As the age of the female students' increases, the level of their subjective norms increases. In this study, female college students who are ages 18 to 23 are more likely to be influenced by their peers than male students who are ages 17 or younger, and 24 or older in their dressing behavior. According to Kaveh et al. (2015), a student's type of dressing is influenced by their parents in lower ages. However, as the child ages and enters social networks, such as school and friends, the role of parents would diminish and replaced by that of peers. Kaveh et al. referred to the effect of peers on the dress code behavior in girl adolescents where female students were more affected by peers when compared to male students. The girls' higher scores of subjective norms in their study could also demonstrate the higher importance of social preferences in selection of type of dressing for girls.
For past behavior, it shows that only the variable "Course" is significant (r = 0.259, p = 0.030) and has a positive significant relationship. In this study, those studying business administration are more likely to have regularly wear their uniforms and adhered to the dress code policy than students in other courses. According to Sequeira et al. (2014) andKaveh et al. (2015), for business administration students wearing the uniform reflects on their personality and adds to the reputation of the institution. Their past behavior could be a significant factor for determining their adherence as they explained that a college student's field of study may have different subcultures and may display different behaviors.

Table 12
Test of Relationship between Profile and Self-Discipline Table 12 presents the test of correlation between profile of the respondents and their self-discipline. It shows that all factors, aside from willpower, have a correlation with some profile factors. For standards, only age is significant (r = 0.236, p = 0.038) with a positive significant relationship. As the age of the respondent increases, the level of their standards increases. In this study, those who are ages 18 to 23 were more likely to be disciplined by having a clear and well-defined standard than the ages 17 or younger, or 24 or older.
According to Bhana (2010), during the period of middle childhood and pre-adolescence, a student would have the ability to monitor their own behavior, and eventually adopt acceptable standards of good and bad behavior. In adolescence, they are finishing a bachelor's degree and are setting goals that require sustained self-discipline. (Duckworth et al. 2011).
For motivation, only age is significant (r = 0.222, p = 0.031) with a positive significant relationship. As the age of the respondents' increases, the level of their motivation increases. In this study, those who are ages 18 to 23 were more likely to be disciplined by being motivated to fulfill their goals than the ages 17 or younger, and 24 or older. According to Vicaria & Isaacowitz (2016), the aging process is naturally and inevitably associated with change, both physical and psychological. As life situations and mental capabilities transform, it is logical that older adults' motivations towards social goals may shift as well. they monitor themselves to achieve their goals in life than male students. According to Meyers (2016), women are presented with unreasonable standards that they have to achieve more than men. These expectations may cause overwhelming feelings of shame, stress, etc.  This implies that as the respondents highly adhere to the dress code because of positive attitudes, they may likely have high standards and motivation. According to Coleman et al. (2011) and Kaveh et al. (2015), factors such as attitude and feelings could influence beliefs and that a university student would have a positive evaluation in following the dressing pattern, if they believed that it's beneficial. In addition, Wyer et al. (2012) found that operations for a goal-directed behavior could influence the plan that individuals select for attaining the goal they happen to be pursuing.
From the variables which include standards (p=0.019), motivation (p=0.023), monitoring (p=0.068), and willpower (p=0.019), only standards, motivation, and willpower have a significant relationship with dress code policy adherence to subjective norms. This implies that as the respondents highly adhere to the dress code because of high perceived social support, they may likely have high standards, motivation, and willpower. According to Heidarzadeh et al. (2019), the professional attire and student adherence to these clothes respects social standards and develops a positive professional image. Furthermore, Coleman The variables which include standards (p =0.011), motivation (p=0.024), monitoring (p=0.025), and willpower (p=0.021), all have a positive significant relationship with dress code policy adherence as to past behavior. This implies that previous adherence to the dress code, like regularly wearing their Identification Card, may likely increase their selfdiscipline. As part of the prescribed uniform, Identification Cards could be used by college students to highly set clear standards, be motivated, monitor their thoughts, situations, and past mistakes, and possess the strength to meet their goals, to assess and gather feedback and use this information to improve their self-discipline. According to Shepherd (2020), individuals could subconsciously remind themselves about their past behavior by practicing it in these virtual settings where it takes even more discipline to stay productive, now that there is less direct face-to-face interaction and supervision. In addition, goal-directed behavior in a past, albeit unrelated situation may influence an individual's plan for goal attainment (Wyer et al., 2012).
Lastly, from the variables which include standards (p=0.027), motivation (p=0.021), monitoring (p=0.020), and willpower (p=0.077), only standards, motivation, and monitoring have a significant relationship with dress code policy adherence as to behavioral intention.
This implies that as the respondents highly intend to adhere to the dress code, they may have high standards and motivation, and highly monitor their situations, decisions, and progress to attain their life-goals. According to Norman & Conner (2017), an important aspect of intentions is awareness of standards which is often necessary to maintain an initiated behavior. Furthermore, a complete lack of intention to behave is at the lowest level of motivation along a continuum. College students could move their level of motivation along the continuum, and hopefully led to more self-determined forms of motivation (Yarborough & Fedesco, 2020). Also, if people have a high self-monitoring skill, they could be more sensitive to their external environment, and their behavioral intentions would have a greater degree of consistency with their behavior (Nantel & Strahle, 2021).

Conclusion
Based on the findings, respondents have both a high level of dress code policy adherence and a high level of self-discipline. Age, sex, and course are significantly related to factors of dress code policy adherence whereas only age and sex are significantly related to factors of self-discipline. Attitude is only significantly related to standards and motivation; subjective norms to standards, motivation, and willpower; and behavioral intention to standards, motivation, and monitoring. Finally, only past behavior is significantly related to the self-discipline of college students.
In view of the findings and conclusions drawn from this study, the following are hereby recommended: Consider a follow-up study using the same variables in other settings and with an increase in the number of participants. Other related factors which may influence students across all levels may be included in future studies. Also, educators may consider requesting students to wear their Identification Cards during online classes to improve their self-discipline in the current virtual setting. At the same time, college students may consider wearing their Identification Cards as it is easy to put, using a lanyard or clip, to help them remain disciplined. Lastly, the community or the university administrators may develop new and updated policies for the new normal or for the return of face-to-face classes to guide and encourage their students.