Jump to content

Would You Teach Your Child To Write In Cursive?


amberleadavis

Recommended Posts

So...am still wondering what people have found helpful for their children? My son started w/D'Nealian..should I continue with that? Italic? The aforementioned American Cursive? Am looking for some guidance.

thanks.

I don't think it matters too much personally about what style is taught / learnt..although I guess maybe keeping it simple and as unadorned will make life easier. My son's school teaches a very simple 'modern' English Roundhand, don't know what it is called exactly but it is something similar to this:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 293
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • TSherbs

    35

  • domnortheast

    32

  • amberleadavis

    23

  • GClef

    18

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Yes, yes! Try as hard as I might to dance around it, I do agree that there has been a laxity and permissiveness in child rearing that has become the norm that started in the 60's, and has evolved to today, where even the simple discipline of penmanship is no longer encouraged.

As someone born in 1963, and a product of public school education, I understand how I got to where I am, and why most from my, and the generations that followed, have some really really bad handwriting.

 

If it weren't for a very early interest in penmanship, I would've never found my way here to FPN, where all I've tried to do from the very beginning was to encourage users to break free of their keyboards, and let loose with the ink. But it's easier to type away, discussing and lamenting the demise of handwriting and penmanship, than to actually take the time to write out and post it as a picture. Yes, a "tutuguan"!

 

Now, anyone who has taken the time to know me here may wonder why did I not handwrite this post.

It was easier, as I lay on my couch, to do it this way (and I do my best to not clog up threads I did not start with pictures some might have a hard time reading, and ignore anyway, because it's easier to read typeface).

 

So, what do YOU think?

I do not think that parents have become more "lax" or "permissive." Nor do I think that this is connected to the teaching of cursive in schools. I was taught cursive for every year of elementary school. My poor handwriting is entirely my responsibility and has nothing to do with what I was taught or not taught. And has nothing to do with how I was parented (I am older than you).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So...am still wondering what people have found helpful for their children? My son started w/D'Nealian..should I continue with that? Italic? The aforementioned American Cursive? Am looking for some guidance.

thanks.

I don't have an informed opinion on what style (if any) is best, although I do lean toward either skipping printing altogether or starting with print that morphs naturally into cursive without a drastic change in letter forms. I suspect it is most important just to be consistent with whichever one you do choose. Make sure to teach good technique (how to hold and move the pen or pencil) as well as letter forms. And work on it for more than just a year or two. Most of those are things I wish I'd done with my own. :-)

 

Jenny

"To read without also writing is to sleep." - St. Jerome

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would I teach my child cursive writing?

In a word, yes.

 

Starting in the first grade, I was taught to print & write cursively.

Each mode of writing served a different purpose, but both were taught at the same time. By grade three the Cyrillic alphabet was added.

 

When I started teaching in the late sixties, the pendulum had begun to swing towards dropping cursive writing from the curriculum.

Undaunted, I soldiered on till my retirement, continuing to teach cursive writing (& printing), even providing a fountain pen work station in my class. The kids loved it.

*Sailor 1911S, Black/gold, 14k. 0.8 mm. stub(JM) *1911S blue "Colours", 14k. H-B "M" BLS (PB)

*2 Sailor 1911S Burgundy/gold: 14k. 0.6 mm. "round-nosed" CI (MM) & 14k. 1.1 mm. CI (JM)

*Sailor Pro-Gear Slim Spec. Ed. "Fire",14k. (factory) "H-B"

*Kaweco SPECIAL FP: 14k. "B",-0.6 mm BLS & 14k."M" 0.4 mm. BLS (PB)

*Kaweco Stainless Steel Lilliput, 14k. "M" -0.7 mm.BLS, (PB)

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would I teach my child cursive writing?

In a word, yes.

 

Starting in the first grade, I was taught to print & write cursively.

Each mode of writing served a different purpose, but both were taught at the same time. By grade three the Cyrillic alphabet was added.

 

When I started teaching in the late sixties, the pendulum had begun to swing towards dropping cursive writing from the curriculum.

Undaunted, I soldiered on till my retirement, continuing to teach cursive writing (& printing), even providing a fountain pen work station in my class. The kids loved it.

 

Do you have any of your old practice sheets that I could copy for my kids?

Fountain pens are my preferred COLOR DELIVERY SYSTEM (in part because crayons melt in Las Vegas).

Create a Ghostly Avatar and I'll send you a letter. Check out some Ink comparisons: The Great PPS Comparison 

Don't know where to start?  Look at the Inky Topics O'day.  Then, see inks sorted by color: Blue Purple Brown Red Green Dark Green Orange Black Pinks Yellows Blue-Blacks Grey/Gray UVInks Turquoise/Teal MURKY

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a Kickstarter for a program to teach cursive that looks interesting. The method that's used groups similarly shaped letters together instead of teaching them one at a time, which allows students to learn more quickly. I think I'm going to back it.

 

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/569049737/cursive-is-endangered-together-we-can-preserve-it/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WomenWagePeace

 

SUPORTER OF http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/100x75q90/631/uh2SgO.jpg

 

My avatar is a painting by the imense surrealist painter Remedios Varo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So...am still wondering what people have found helpful for their children? My son started w/D'Nealian..should I continue with that? Italic? The aforementioned American Cursive? Am looking for some guidance.

thanks.

As an 80's child who was schooled through the 90's my best guess is what I learned was D'Nealian. Not that I think my cursive is some grand wonderful thing, but I don't regret being taught the skill. There are interesting arguments for both sides. My first thought was actually in regard to certain textbooks I had in school, either history or literature, which showed original historical documents written in cursive. It seems sad to think that one day people will not be able to read them because they were never taught how. Truthfully, how much time was really spent in the classroom teaching me cursive, anyway? As an adult I can read cursive and still type proficiently. I learned both without being overwhelmed. I suppose I don't see why one needs to replace the other.

- The poster formerly known as HollyGolightly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My first thought was actually in regard to certain textbooks I had in school, either history or literature, which showed original historical documents written in cursive. It seems sad to think that one day people will not be able to read them because they were never taught how.

 

This is bogus.

 

1. The skill of being able to read historical documents is completely different than being able to write like that as a third-grader. I am sure that a smart person could figure it out even if they never had a single class in cursive handwriting.

 

2. There will always be some historians who will make it their life-work to read old documents, but the reality is that most people have no need to read them. I took a course in Roman History at an Ivy League school and never had to read any handwritten Latin documents. I took a course in the history of the U.S. Constitution and never had to read handwritten documents for that course either. This was in the 1980s too when all of the students presumably learned cursive in school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

This is bogus.

 

1. The skill of being able to read historical documents is completely different than being able to write like that as a third-grader. I am sure that a smart person could figure it out even if they never had a single class in cursive handwriting.

 

2. There will always be some historians who will make it their life-work to read old documents, but the reality is that most people have no need to read them. I took a course in Roman History at an Ivy League school and never had to read any handwritten Latin documents. I took a course in the history of the U.S. Constitution and never had to read handwritten documents for that course either. This was in the 1980s too when all of the students presumably learned cursive in school.

Not really bogus. How would you expect someone to recognize characters and lettering they never learned? I posted this after reading a NYT article about students who when taking an exam and were told not to print their name, struggled to even remember how to do so. People apparently are using cursive less in regards to their own signature because it's not something they learn. This is of course, according to the article I read. ( http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/28/us/28cursive.html ) Granted this was from '11. But clearly it's an issue for some students/young people. I won't presume to say all students would have this problem but clearly it's difficult for some persons.

 

Additionally, learning anything at a younger age tends to make it easier versus learning the same skill as an adult. This is often said of languages, but my assumption is it applies to a lot of other things as well.

- The poster formerly known as HollyGolightly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really bogus. How would you expect someone to recognize characters and lettering they never learned?

 

It’s not a foreign language. It’s regular Roman letters, just slightly different looking and joined together. A motivated smart person could figure it out. And smart people know how to use Google to look stuff up that they need help with.

 

People who aren’t that smart aren’t going to be interested in reading original 18th Century handwritten historical documents anyway, so it’s no great loss that they can’t. If only we could get more people to read the printed version of the Constitution.

 

Also, no one is saying that you shouldn't teach your kid how to sign his or her name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It’s not a foreign language. It’s regular Roman letters, just slightly different looking and joined together. A motivated smart person could figure it out. And smart people know how to use Google to look stuff up that they need help with.

 

People who aren’t that smart aren’t going to be interested in reading original 18th Century handwritten historical documents anyway, so it’s no great loss that they can’t. If only we could get more people to read the printed version of the Constitution.

 

Also, no one is saying that you shouldn't teach your kid how to sign his or her name.

My comments were in reference to the article. Not sure if you read it or not, but they weren't related to your post. I didn't say there was an argument for not signing your name in cursive- but how does one have a cursive signature without bothering to learn how to write the letters in cursive? You can of course just write connective letters but I hardly think a person's individual mish-mash of letters is the same as learning a specific hand, imo.

 

Also, if you go to university you're likely to take classes that may not fall within what you are interested in, regardless of how "smart" you are (though I don't equate knowing cursive with being particularly intelligent, just dilligent perhaps). It's silly to think it would never come up ever. You can navigate studies without having to know it perhaps- but maybe someone finds letters written by a grandparent or great grandparent and finds they can't readily read them (something that was in the linked article). My point is simply that it seems like a shame.

- The poster formerly known as HollyGolightly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really bogus. How would you expect someone to recognize characters and lettering they never learned? I posted this after reading a NYT article about students who when taking an exam and were told not to print their name, struggled to even remember how to do so. People apparently are using cursive less in regards to their own signature because it's not something they learn. This is of course, according to the article I read. ( http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/28/us/28cursive.html ) Granted this was from '11. But clearly it's an issue for some students/young people. I won't presume to say all students would have this problem but clearly it's difficult for some persons.

 

Additionally, learning anything at a younger age tends to make it easier versus learning the same skill as an adult. This is often said of languages, but my assumption is it applies to a lot of other things as well.

 

April 27, 2011

The Case for Cursive

By KATIE ZEZIMA

For centuries, cursive handwriting has been an art. To a growing number of young people, it is a mystery.

The sinuous letters of the cursive alphabet, swirled on countless love letters, credit card slips and banners above elementary school chalk boards are going the way of the quill and inkwell. With computer keyboards and smartphones increasingly occupying young fingers, the gradual death of the fancier ABC’s is revealing some unforeseen challenges.

Might people who write only by printing — in block letters, or perhaps with a sloppy, squiggly signature — be more at risk for forgery? Is the development of a fine motor skill thwarted by an aversion to cursive handwriting? And what happens when young people who are not familiar with cursive have to read historical documents like the Constitution?

Jimmy Bryant, director of Archives and Special Collections at the University of Central Arkansas, says that a connection to archival material is lost when students turn away from cursive. While teaching last year, Mr. Bryant, on a whim, asked students to raise their hands if they wrote in cursive as a way to communicate. None did.

That cursive-challenged class included Alex Heck, 22, who said she barely remembered how to read or write cursive. Ms. Heck and a cousin leafed through their grandmother’s journal shortly after she died, but could barely read her cursive handwriting.

“It was kind of cryptic,” Ms. Heck said. She and the cousin tried to decipher it like one might a code, reading passages back and forth. “I’m not used to reading cursive or writing it myself.”

Students nationwide are still taught cursive, but many school districts are spending far less time teaching it and handwriting in general than they were years ago, said Steve Graham, a professor of education at Vanderbilt University. Most schools start teaching cursive in third grade, Professor Graham said. In the past, most would continue the study until the fifth or sixth grades — and some to the eighth grade — but many districts now teach cursive only in third grade, with fewer lessons.

“Schools today, we say we’re preparing our kids for the 21st century,” said Jacqueline DeChiaro, the principal of Van Schaick Elementary School in Cohoes, N.Y., who is debating whether to cut cursive. “Is cursive really a 21st-century skill?”

With schools focused on preparing students for standardized tests, there is often not enough time to teach handwriting, educators said.

“If you’re a school or a teacher, you can bet that if kids are being tested on it, that it’s going to receive a priority emphasis in your curriculum,” Professor Graham said.

Sandy Schefkind, a pediatric occupational therapist in Bethesda, Md., and pediatric coordinator for the American Occupational Therapy Association, said that learning cursive helped students hone their fine motor skills.

“It’s the dexterity, the fluidity, the right amount of pressure to put with pen and pencil on paper,” Ms. Schefkind said, adding that for some students cursive is easier to learn than printing.

While printing might be legible, the less complex the handwriting, the easier it is to forge, said Heidi H. Harralson, a graphologist in Tucson. Even though handwriting can change — and become sloppier — as a person ages, people who are not learning or practicing it are at a disadvantage, Ms. Harralson said.

“I’m seeing an increase in inconstancy in the handwriting and poor form level — sloppy, semi-legible script that’s inconsistent,” she said.

Most everyone has a cursive signature, but even those are getting harder to identify, Ms. Harralson said.

“Even people that didn’t learn cursive, they usually have some type of cursive form signature, but it’s not written very well,” she said. “It tends to be more abstract, illegible and simplistic. If they’re writing with block letters it’s easier to forge.”

Sally Bennett, an 18-year-old freshman at Central Arkansas, signs her name in all capital letters and never gave any thought to it until she took the ACT college entrance exam. Students must copy a prompt, with explicit instructions that they do not print. So the classroom of test-takers tried cursive, Ms. Bennett said.

“Some people in there couldn’t remember,” she said. “I had to think about it for a minute. It was kind of hard for me to remember.”

An ACT spokesman said students are not required to write in cursive on the ACT. A spokeswoman for the SAT — for which only 15 percent of students wrote the essay portion in cursive in 2007 — said students must also copy a paragraph.

“Students are instructed not to print the statement,” the spokeswoman, Kathleen Steinberg, said in an e-mail.

Richard S. Christen, a professor of education at the University of Portland in Oregon, said, practically, cursive can easily be replaced with printed handwriting or word processing. But he worries that students will lose an artistic skill.

“These kids are losing time where they create beauty every day,” Professor Christen said. “But it’s hard for me to make a practical argument for it. I’m not one who’s mourning it because of that; I’m mourning the beauty, the aesthetics.”

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: April 30, 2011

An article on Thursday about potential challenges arising from students’ not learning cursive handwriting misstated the name of the university at which Jimmy Bryant, who said that a connection to archival material is lost when students turn away from cursive, is director of Archives and Special Collections. It is the University of Central Arkansas, not Central Arkansas University.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: May 24, 2011

An article on April 27 about the unforeseen challenges created by the decline of cursive handwriting paraphrased incorrectly comments by a spokesman for the ACT standardized test. He said that students are not required to write in cursive on the ACT, not that he was not familiar with a cursive requirement.

I agree that the texts do become more foreign when you don't read or write the same letters. No the language isn't different entirely, but the vocabulary and context change over time. At Christmas, we were reading my Grandfather's letters written when he was overseas during WWII. My grandmother still had to translate some of the vocabulary. My youngest cousins couldn't read the cursive at all. They were really missing out on a wonderful experience.

Fountain pens are my preferred COLOR DELIVERY SYSTEM (in part because crayons melt in Las Vegas).

Create a Ghostly Avatar and I'll send you a letter. Check out some Ink comparisons: The Great PPS Comparison 

Don't know where to start?  Look at the Inky Topics O'day.  Then, see inks sorted by color: Blue Purple Brown Red Green Dark Green Orange Black Pinks Yellows Blue-Blacks Grey/Gray UVInks Turquoise/Teal MURKY

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Do you have any of your old practice sheets that I could copy for my kids?

Now, in retrospect, I should have kept the old curriculum document for hand writing. I also should have kept a few examples of my student's notebooks.

When I moved from the Big Smoke to the "boonies" all my school boxes were thrown out. How would I have known that a decade & a half later I'd be visiting the FPN & this thread?

 

There were large commercially printed cards, displayed in a row on top of my chalk-boards, demonstrating all the "approved" upper & lower scale letters + the numerals. Each term I lined one of my green boards with white Laurentian crayon, which served as our practice board. The students worked from my large chalk examples.

Edited by tinta

*Sailor 1911S, Black/gold, 14k. 0.8 mm. stub(JM) *1911S blue "Colours", 14k. H-B "M" BLS (PB)

*2 Sailor 1911S Burgundy/gold: 14k. 0.6 mm. "round-nosed" CI (MM) & 14k. 1.1 mm. CI (JM)

*Sailor Pro-Gear Slim Spec. Ed. "Fire",14k. (factory) "H-B"

*Kaweco SPECIAL FP: 14k. "B",-0.6 mm BLS & 14k."M" 0.4 mm. BLS (PB)

*Kaweco Stainless Steel Lilliput, 14k. "M" -0.7 mm.BLS, (PB)

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since cursive writing was removed from being a required subject in nearly all public school systems, it's now only taught in public schools with PTAs that demand it (which means public schools in affluent neighborhoods) and in private schools.

I just had a good laugh - my son looks over my shoulder, rolls his eyes, and groans, "I had to learn Chinese cursive, too!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Print is clearer and easier to read than script. For many, it's easier to write and just about as fast.

 

Interesting post! I agree that school time should about productivity rather than hanging to tradition. However, print is never easier to write especially if we are talking about speed writing while maintaining a readable result. Palmer is very popular for a reason.

 

I think it all comes down to this one question: should we still care about the quality of our next generation's hand writing?

 

To answer that question, I'm lost in my own thought :wallbash:. Perhaps, someone wiser will delight us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Interesting post! I agree that school time should about productivity rather than hanging to tradition. However, print is never easier to write especially if we are talking about speed writing while maintaining a readable result. Palmer is very popular for a reason.

 

I think it all comes down to this one question: should we still care about the quality of our next generation's hand writing?

 

To answer that question, I'm lost in my own thought :wallbash:. Perhaps, someone wiser will delight us.

The answer, as always, is "to a degree, yes." Being able to handwrite in a form readable to others is still an important part of literacy. Ease and efficiency are important, also. But literacy is the only imperative. Ease and speed are important, but not essential. Beyond these, the rest is ornament and aesthetics and sensibility (not essential, and quite subjective and culturally variable).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Interesting post! I agree that school time should about productivity rather than hanging to tradition. However, print is never easier to write especially if we are talking about speed writing while maintaining a readable result. Palmer is very popular for a reason.

 

I think it all comes down to this one question: should we still care about the quality of our next generation's hand writing?

 

To answer that question, I'm lost in my own thought :wallbash:. Perhaps, someone wiser will delight us.

 

I disagree with this. It's easier to write legible print, and print degrades much better. Rapidly written cursive turns into an unreadable scrawl. Only people who practice a lot can write legible cursive.

 

Cursive has the problem that loopy letters "c" "a" "e" and "o" can all look like each other, "w" joins awkwardly with a lot of letters, etc.

Edited by LionRoar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I disagree with this. It's easier to write legible print, and print degrades much better. Rapidly written cursive turns into an unreadable scrawl. Only people who practice a lot can write legible cursive.

 

Cursive has the problem that loopy letters "c" "a" "e" and "o" can all look like each other, "w" joins awkwardly with a lot of letters, etc.

Isn't that where one of the fundamental differences between reading and writing cursive script and reading and writing print script lies though?

 

In print script the block unit is the letter and words are constructed by bunching together groups of solitary letters whereas in a cursive script the word itself is the block unit so it is the overall shape of the word and context in which it appears that are (up to a point) more important than the formation of the individual letters themselves.

 

Certainly when I am reading cursive I read the word shapes themselves rather than the individual letters, only being forced to break words down into letters if I come across an unfamiliar word or a word in an unexpected context, but then that is also connected to my general grasp of grammar and syntax and my knowledge of the subject being written about (I wonder - do doctors, on average, understand each other's handwriting better than patients do?).

 

I guess the point I am trying make is that I think 'legibility' is tied to more than just the presentation of well formed individual letters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm reminded of the following graphic which is based off information from a study years ago. The above is true not only of cursive, but of print as well:

 

http://englishwithmsjj.weebly.com/uploads/2/0/8/9/20890384/5126292_orig.png

- The poster formerly known as HollyGolightly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now







×
×
  • Create New...