Would You Teach Your Child To Write In Cursive?

[domnortheast]

no, my point was that teaching cursive discourages left-handedness, especially with a fountain pen. Are you left-handed? If not, then you might not have thought about this from the "sinister" point of view.

 

And who mentioned "money"?

I'm afraid I'm a right-hander, I can't offer an informed left-handed cursive writer's opinion so will defer.

 

As to the subject of mentioning money, no one mentioned it (other than me) but I believe it is implicit in the way the curriculum in schools is set....the curriculum is geared towards supporting the economy and commerce by producing moderately educated employable people rather than free thinking individuals. Those who get through the National Curriculum^TM (UK) and still retain an ability to think and behave imaginatively and creatively do so (again, in my humble opinion) in spite of rather than because of it.

[LionRoar]

To me your argument seems really rooted in what is practical and useful and I don't believe every skill people posess need be the most efficient way to do something, or the most practical way. Surely if that had been the only concern when I was in school, they'd have never bothered to teach me art or music?. My point is that there are things that enrich us in other ways without being what you deem to be most efficient. Why then should we even teach children of history then- if they should focus soley on "modern things"?

 

I don't disagree with most of this, believe it or not. I only disagree that spending so much time learning an obsolete method of writing from the nineteenth century is the best use of public school time when there is so much else we could be teaching children, including art and music, foreign languages, Latin, extra enrichment in science or civics, ancient Greek literature, etc.

 

What happened at the end of the nineteenth century, by the way, is that the typewriter was invented. From that point, over time, handwriting became less important, because important documents were expected to be typed so they could be easily legible. And now that goes triple in the modern day of word processors and universal typing proficiency.

Edited February 9, 2015 by LionRoar

[domnortheast]

http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m496/gclef1114/Tutuguans/2015-02-09_13-18-38_247-1.jpg

Personally I think they are of equal importance and both the use of technology and the practice and execution of good handwriting should be given the same degree of attention in schools.

 

But apparently there is insufficient time in the curriculum for such unnecessary, outmoded skills as handwriting. I don't believe this.

 

I think many topics and subjects taught in schools can be picked up and/or built upon later in life or at home. I work in HE and also with local youth groups and the pressure on the kids to cram complex concepts and theories into their heads is enormous especially during exam time, yet a high proportion of them struggle with simple handwriting and basic spelling & grammar.

 

One fantastic thing about the information age is that it contains heaps of information, readily available to absorb at any time....what it doesn't contain are physical, practical skills....such as.....handwriting.

Edited February 9, 2015 by Stanley Howler

[domnortheast]

Ummm. I think I may have strayed into the No No area of 'Political Debate' in those last couple of posts. If so apologies...I'm going to be quiet now

[GClef]

 

Posting pictures for me is easy, second nature really, just like handwriting, because it's practical, for me. I don't think everyone could, would, or should do it, but it would be neat to see more handwritten posts.

But we would be limiting the number of people who could read such posts--unless we take the time to type the post underneath, or something, so it can be translated by any user around the globe.

For right now, that's just too much work for me.

[GClef]

Okay:

 

http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m496/gclef1114/Tutuguans/2015-02-09_17-08-12_621-1.jpg

 

Children - not all, but enough - are learning how to use, and manipulate iPhones and such devices, because they are encouraged by parents who've learned to rely on technology.

 

I can see in my lifetime, a generation of kids who will regard even printing a hassle...like how I feel about filing income taxes - it's better to use Turbo Tax, or better yet, pay someone else to do it for you.

 

(Well, that wasn't so bad.)

[Cryptos]

I actually cannot recall being taught to write - at least not in any detail - and yet I do so with ease. I have a vague memory from about the age of 3 or 4 of alphabet letters on a blackboard.

 

The thing is, in my opinion, if children are expected to hand in handwritten reports then there is ample time to practice that handwriting skill. I do not really believe that children today have to learn more about a particular subject than they did when I was one of them, such that there is a need to move to a different recording medium.

 

Sometimes I think that the technology just encourages laziness or a half-hearted approach to work.

 

Just an opinion, nothing more.

[GClef]

I actually cannot recall being taught to write - at least not in any detail - and yet I do so with ease. I have a vague memory from about the age of 3 or 4 of alphabet letters on a blackboard.

I was starting to think I may have been the only one to feel this way.

[domnortheast]

I actually cannot recall being taught to write - at least not in any detail - and yet I do so with ease. I have a vague memory from about the age of 3 or 4 of alphabet letters on a blackboard.

 

The thing is, in my opinion, if children are expected to hand in handwritten reports then there is ample time to practice that handwriting skill. I do not really believe that children today have to learn more about a particular subject than they did when I was one of them, such that there is a need to move to a different recording medium.

 

Sometimes I think that the technology just encourages laziness or a half-hearted approach to work.

 

Just an opinion, nothing more.

 

 

I was starting to think I may have been the only one to feel this way.

 

Perhaps because, after the initial period of instruction in primary school we then had regular daily practice, writing essays and assignments, for the next 8 or 9 years.

 

Edit; anyway today I am moderately happy because I spotted two students with inky fingers wandering around the Library.

Edited February 9, 2015 by Stanley Howler

[AndrewThomas]

Why is cursive so important? Why not secretary hand? Or any number of scribal hands? Secretary hand is quite beautiful and not hard to master, even though nothing has been written in it since the 17th century or so. The history of handwriting has been constantly changing--forms, implements, goals, styles, uses. The transition to a digital format is just one evolution in a long line of changes that go back thousands of years. Is the transition from clay tablets to vellum (say) any less precipitous than from wood pulp paper to a digital format? Not really. HIstory is filled with huge, massive, unpredictable changes.

 

 

The fetishism of what came immediately before is short sided. Cultural memory is short and we cannot predict what comes next. Cursive is a wonderful skill. So are thousands of others.

 

 

 

EDIT: Don't get me wrong. I work hard on my handwriting and write a great deal by hand in my profession. I'm just not comfortable translating that into an argument that says that everyone should learn the skills that I know/like because I think they are the best. It seems a little unreasonable and a little arrogant.

Edited February 9, 2015 by AndrewThomas

[domnortheast]

I don't think it matters what the accepted style is (to me anyway) so long as that or a very close style is used by all people speaking that language. Whether it is Chancery, Secretary, Spencerian, Palmerian or any other.

I would, and have, argued that the cursive aspect is important, not because it contains some mystical inherent elegance or beauty but because of the way we have to learn to think when writing that way; simultaneously holding and arranging ideas in our mind, checking grammar, syntax and spelling. All performed while following the rhythm of the flowing ink across the page; words into sentences into paragraphs into ideas. The mental training required to complete those tasks while over and above that discussing the topic in hand are why I think cursive is important and should be taught....cursive in particular because it takes the word as its smallest unit rather than individual letters but whether cursive or print are used at least both come from the human, there is no machine in between to take the strain.

Edited February 9, 2015 by Stanley Howler

[Cryptos]

 

Perhaps because, after the initial period of instruction in primary school we then had regular daily practice, writing essays and assignments, for the next 8 or 9 years.

 

That was my point. Beyond learning the basics I had to write everything (I had finished school just before computers arrived), so plenty of practice!

[TSherbs]

I'm afraid I'm a right-hander, I can't offer an informed left-handed cursive writer's opinion so will defer.

 

As to the subject of mentioning money, no one mentioned it (other than me) but I believe it is implicit in the way the curriculum in schools is set....the curriculum is geared towards supporting the economy and commerce by producing moderately educated employable people rather than free thinking individuals. Those who get through the National Curriculum^TM (UK) and still retain an ability to think and behave imaginatively and creatively do so (again, in my humble opinion) in spite of rather than because of it.

ah, I see.

 

Well, school after the rise of mercantilism has always been in support of commerce, but not exclusively so. I am a teacher; we promote free-thinkers to the degree that that is what parents and the community wants. Sometimes even more so.

 

But this is not tied to handwriting forms, except that literacy is a form of independence and a tool for thinking. No matter what type of writing tool one uses.

Edited February 9, 2015 by TSherbs

[TSherbs]

oops....double

 

Edited February 9, 2015 by TSherbs

[AndrewThomas]

I don't think it matters what the accepted style is (to me anyway) so long as that or a very close style is used by all people speaking that language. Whether it is Chancery, Secretary, Spencerian, Palmerian or any other.

I would, and have, argued that the cursive aspect is important, not because it contains some mystical inherent elegance or beauty but because of the way we have to learn to think when writing that way; simultaneously holding and arranging ideas in our mind, checking grammar, syntax and spelling. All performed while following the rhythm of the flowing ink across the page; words into sentences into paragraphs into ideas. The mental training required to complete those tasks while over and above that discussing the topic in hand are why I think cursive is important and should be taught....cursive in particular because it takes the word as its smallest unit rather than individual letters but whether cursive or print are used at least both come from the human, there is no machine in between to take the strain.

 

I am a bit confused. A fountain pen is obviously just as much a machine as a computer. It is no more "human" than a computer. The digital text I write "comes from the human" just as much as the lines I make on a piece of paper. And digital text is just as much a shared way of transmitting the written word as any conventional script form.

 

And of course grammar, syntax, and spelling are just as much a part of composing on a word processor as by hand. Words into sentences, sentences into paragraphs into ideas is just as prevalent in digital text composition. They both require a skill and the merging of that skill with composition. And few things are as beautiful as watching a page of type come together, feeling your creative work merge into a clear document.

 

I understand that some people think differently with a pen in their hand, or write differently. I sometimes do. But I don't see how my way is someone applicable to everybody. I can't see anything inherently better about it, even by the criteria you laid out. And again, I love writing by hand. But I don't romanticize it.

Edited February 10, 2015 by AndrewThomas

[Cryptos]

When you press a key, any key, it feels exactly the same as any other key. When you write a letter it is distinct from other letters. Some researchers think there is a subtle connection between forming shapes with our hands and our cognitive abilities - which is lost when using a keyboard.

[AndrewThomas]

ah, I see.

 

Well, school after the rise of mercantilism has always been in support of commerce, but not exclusively so. I am a teacher; we promote free-thinkers to the degree that that is what parents and the community wants. Sometimes even more so.

 

But this is not tied to handwriting forms, except that literacy is a form of independence and a tool for thinking. No matter what type of writing tool one uses.

 

I think this is really well put. It's easy to confuse the trappings of literacy and critical thinking for the real thing. And it's easy to assume that the form that literacy and critical thinking used to take (cursive) is the right, natural, best, or only form it can take.

[TSherbs]

When you press a key, any key, it feels exactly the same as any other key. When you write a letter it is distinct from other letters. Some researchers think there is a subtle connection between forming shapes with our hands and our cognitive abilities - which is lost when using a keyboard.

Which "cognitive abilities"? No one denies that motor skills (and other kinesthetics) are an important part of learning. ALL SCHOOLS, in every country on the planet, engage students in handwriting exercises and assignments.

[Cryptos]

Learning is what I was referring too. I should have been more explicit. And I wasn't suggesting that ANY schools did not engage students in handwriting exercises. However, according to some of the research not all motor skills are equal in their facilitation of the learning process. I'll try to find the study when I get some time, but please be nice, this is not my opinion, it is something I read and thought might be stimulating for this thread.

[TSherbs]

Learning is what I was referring too. I should have been more explicit. And I wasn't suggesting that ANY schools did not engage students in handwriting exercises. However, according to some of the research not all motor skills are equal in their facilitation of the learning process. I'll try to find the study when I get some time, but please be nice, this is not my opinion, it is something I read and thought might be stimulating for this thread.

nice it is!

 

I have read a study that reported that using one's hand to take notes (versus typing them) assisted with long term memory. But the study was not about cursive, in particular.