Cursive Versus Printing

[tonybelding]

Slashdot covered a story with the rather histrionic title: "Finland Dumps Handwriting In Favor of Typing". It turns out that was partially based on a mis-translation. The schools are merely going to drop cursive as a mandatory requirement and instead focus on printing and typing, which is a shame but IMO not too surprising these days. However, somebody in the comments section posted this:

 

 

I use to be like you and believed that cursive is faster than printing, but that all changed one day half a lifetime ago when I was reading tips on how to take better notes in college, and one tip was to print your notes because printing is faster and neater than cursive.

 

"(bleep)!" I said, "Everyone knows that cursive is faster than print. Who do they think they are kidding?". On top of this heresy they also stated that writing with a pencil is neater than with a pen. Their tips were changing from heresy to blasphemy! "Little kids print with pencils." I smugly muttered, "and adults write in cursive with pens, where the letters are joined beautifully together in flowing strokes in order to save time and be neater.". Although I knew cursive would best printing in speed and neatness, I must have had some doubts, for at that moment I grabbed my best pen, some crappy dog-chewed pencil, a few sheets of foolscap, and picked out a couple paragraphs in a book to copy to prove them wrong. I should have left well enough alone.

 

After numerous iterations of writing and printing with pencil and pen, I could not believe the results but had to accept them:printing, with pencil or pen, was about 30% faster than writing, and clearly more legible. My fastest writing was nothing better than the worst chicken-scratches and would be unreadable by another person, whereas my quickest print was still legible and neat.

 

"Oh my god!" I exclaimed just as the dizziness hit me. As I fell to my knees, then to the floor, as my belief system crumbled around me, the last thing I remember before I lost consciousness is muttering "Printing IS faster than writing!"

 

Seriously. Write,then print a few paragraphs as fast as you can. The fastest printing is faster and much more legible than the fastest writing. I (bleep) you not.

 

Challenge accepted!

 

I pulled out a book and found a long paragraph to transcribe, first in cursive with a fountain pen, then printing with a mechanical pencil. My results: 7 minutes 53 seconds with the pen, 9 minutes 20 seconds with the pencil. That works out to a 15% speed advantage for cursive. It's not a huge, dramatic difference, but it's significant. Also, writing with the fountain pen was much less tiring to my hand, and it came out looking neater and easier to read (although I think both were perfectly legible).

 

So... Maybe this guy just had really bad cursive handwriting? Maybe it depends heavily on what you're used to and well-practiced with? Maybe it just naturally varies from person to person?

 

[dragos.mocanu]

It's interesting that most people associate the term 'cursive' with a more or less ornate fashion of handwriting, resembling Copperplate or Spencerian (without the line variation, hence, the flex), whereas cursive actually implies joining letters together (so that your words aren't interrupted, but...cursive), which means, by an extent, that printing can be (and definitely is by some people) written cursively...I know I wrote like that until I discovered italic (which coincidentally can also be written cursively...hence, cursive italic...which is my main handwritten style at the present moment). My point is that we shouldn't think only about the fancy loopy style when we're saying 'cursive', and realize that cursive is actually a way of writing any type of font faster, since you don't have to pause between letters. But again, that's simply my opinion...

Edited December 1, 2014 by Murky

[brunico]

It's interesting that most people associate the term 'cursive' with a more or less ornate fashion of handwriting [...]. But again, that's simply my opinion...

 

Not simply your opinion. Most people here are Americans, or nearly so, and I also get the impression that cursive to them means a particular style, first and foremost. But I was confused by the word here for a while, as in British English cursive is just the Latinate equivalent of joined-up and doesn't refer to any particular style. Since we take it for granted that any grown-up should be able to write joined-up, there's not much need for anyone to use the word cursive. The whole point of being taught to write joined-up was to be able to write quicker - for school essays, note-taking and so on.

 

If American cursive is the fancy loopy style - I love your description! - that I'm thinking of, then I'm not surprised that some people are quicker at printing a plainer, more obviously Roman style of letter.

Edited December 1, 2014 by brunico

[______Zaphod_Beeblebrox]

I hated cursive growing up and always print everything.

But if in a hurry my print can be just as unreadable as my moms cursive.

 

But my biggest case against cursive is reading your doctors writing.

[HildyZ]

I certainly

 

 

Not simply your opinion. Most people here are Americans, or nearly so, and I also get the impression that cursive to them means a particular style, first and foremost. But I was confused by the word here for a while, as in British English cursive is just the Latinate equivalent of joined-up and doesn't refer to any particular style. Since we take it for granted that any grown-up should be able to write joined-up, there's not much need for anyone to use the word cursive. The whole point of being taught to write joined-up was to be able to write quicker - for school essays, note-taking and so on.

 

If American cursive is the fancy loopy style - I love your description! - that I'm thinking of, then I'm not surprised that some people are quicker at printing a plainer, more obviously Roman style of letter.

 

I certainly don't speak for three million of my countrymen, but I think most Americans think of cursive as Palmer method or one of its bretheren (D'Nealean, Zane-Bloser, et al.) in which every word is written as a single, uninterrupted line. I think most people write what you might call a cursive italic, where some letters connect and some don't. My personal handwriting is true cursive (each word is a a single line) but I often use a cursive italic for notes that are meant for other people, especially at work. Several of my coworkers are non-native English speakers, and they have a hard time reading my truly cursive handwriting.

[proton007]

I certainly

 

 

I certainly don't speak for three million of my countrymen, but I think most Americans think of cursive as Palmer method or one of its bretheren (D'Nealean, Zane-Bloser, et al.) in which every word is written as a single, uninterrupted line. I think most people write what you might call a cursive italic, where some letters connect and some don't. My personal handwriting is true cursive (each word is a a single line) but I often use a cursive italic for notes that are meant for other people, especially at work. Several of my coworkers are non-native English speakers, and they have a hard time reading my truly cursive handwriting.

 

 

I find that Cursive relies heavily on the writer possessing a reliable vocabulary with correct spelling. Because the letters all need to be joined, it is important to know beforehand which order the letters go in.

Have second thoughts mid-way and the word gets all messed up because the hand is waiting for inputs while stalling the flow.

Hence, it is very important to maintain the flow.

But that's the thing I like about cursive. More than anything it forces me to keep my vocabulary persistent enough.

 

As a corollary, it is possible that students find Cursive harder to write because it needs them to know the correct spelling. 'Printing' makes it easier because it leaves room for a change of alphabets, and with the majority of writing being done on phones/computers along with the spell checks they contain, remembering how to spell words is no longer a priority.

Edited December 2, 2014 by proton007

[ac12]

If it is for legibility, like taking an exam PRINT wins for me, every time. I want to get all the points I can, so I want to make sure that what I write is legible to the grader. And having been a grader I know how HARD it is to read/decypher some peoples cursive writing. If I could not read the answer written down in a reasonable amount of time, right or wrong, the person got a ZERO on that question.

 

As for speed. In fact my current cursive handwriting is actually pretty slow, because it is quite deliberate in strokes. When I speed up, the quality of the handwriting goes down, to the point that my FAST writing is UGLY.

 

As for the pencil, I always used a soft lead in my mechanical pencil, so I did not have to press hard. This let me write faster than using a harder lead.

[proton007]

If it is for legibility, like taking an exam PRINT wins for me, every time. I want to get all the points I can, so I want to make sure that what I write is legible to the grader. And having been a grader I know how HARD it is to read/decypher some peoples cursive writing. If I could not read the answer written down in a reasonable amount of time, right or wrong, the person got a ZERO on that question.

 

As for speed. In fact my current cursive handwriting is actually pretty slow, because it is quite deliberate in strokes. When I speed up, the quality of the handwriting goes down, to the point that my FAST writing is UGLY.

 

As for the pencil, I always used a soft lead in my mechanical pencil, so I did not have to press hard. This let me write faster than using a harder lead.

 

It's a circular process. In my school I wrote all my exams in Cursive. Most teachers also knew and wrote cursive.

How can we expect the students to use a technique their evaluators themselves abandoned?

It just brings the whole concept of 'education' into view.

[knarflj]

Interesting challenge - I'm curious now what I'd learn if I timed myself in print and cursive. Not that I'd probably change my practice, though, no matter how it turned out. I always print when I take notes, because an upright hand is so much easier to read later than a slanted one - especially when skimming quickly through a notebook to find some particular bit of information. Speed has never been a problem, possibly because when I print quickly a lot of the letters seem to connect themselves, so I end up with a semi-cursive upright hand. I can't imagine trying to take notes with a pencil, though; I much prefer the high contrast of ink to paper when trying to read them later!

[brim]

Interesting challenge!

 

I was about a minute quicker printing through the first few sections of The Raven.

 

This is probably just familiarity on my part. I've printed everything for the past 20 years, so I didn't even have to think about it and it allowed me to concentrate on thinking about the words to come. I've only started writing in cursive again this past year, so I had to concentrate quite a bit more.

 

That being said, I think that for the words I was familiar with (the, for, this, etc.) actual pen on paper time was less with cursive. It's just for the less practiced words I had to concentrate on forming the letters, so couldn't concentrate on the words to come.

 

Anyway...interesting!

[Liquidmetal490]

The printing vs. cursive debate is certainly interesting. I've always written in cursive since I learned it in elementary school, but for the sake of the challenge will give printing a try.

 

This might be just my personal experience, but I notice, quite ironically, that I can write faster and in better handwriting if I'm not trying to write fast, if that makes any sense. In other words, if I try to write as fast as I can, my handwriting (whether with a fountain pen, ballpoint pen, pencil) starts to look like chicken scratch and I write more with my fingers and less with my wrist, which actually then slows my writing down and wears out my hand. If I write slower and form each letter more properly, I use more of my wrist to write and can write longer, more smoothly, and faster than I otherwise would.

 

My concern with printing is that I will start writing as fast as I can because I'd have to pick up the pen and move it after each letter as opposed to each word, thereby ending up with poor handwriting and slower writing speeds.

 

In the end, I'll probably always write with cursive, even if it is slower than printing. I just think flowing cursive script has a personal beauty to it that's lost when words are printed.

[WaskiSquirrel]

During high school I went through a spell where I switched to printing. I was faster and neater.

 

But, truthfully I like cursive better. I have no objective reason for such. I just prefer it.

[Dickkooty2]

Back in the '50s (Oh God, another olde guy story) I learned Morse code at Ft Hood Texas in the summer! We sat in an unairconditioned class room with big earphones on learning code including numbers so we could take messages in the back of a jeep, or in a sweltering APC, or maybe in an office doing 24 in 3 8 hour shifts.

 

Handwriting was important. We printed in all caps for letters. Numbers were numbers but 1 had a line at the base and 0 had a line through it,Everyone's handwriting was the same, We were striving to be intermediate speed radio operators at 25 wpm. No words were actually used. The messages were in five letter code groups because that is how many would be sent in the field.. That was as fast as what was needed down at battalion level.

 

We printed and 25 wpm was 125 letters a minute. You wrote down one group while remembering the last group and were listening to the new group as it was being sent. I don't know how this compares with the speed tests described above. But I do know the top speed guys could do 33 wpm and just listen and understand messages sent in the clear as they were being tapped out and do it while talking to you.

 

I think the Army had decided on printing in simple caps because it was fast and legible to someone else. And it could be taught to draftees quickly.

Edited December 4, 2014 by Dickkooty2

[Newjelan]

I feel hot, sweaty and my hand is aching just reading this.

[kestrel]

If it is for legibility, like taking an exam PRINT wins for me, every time. I want to get all the points I can, so I want to make sure that what I write is legible to the grader. And having been a grader I know how HARD it is to read/decypher some peoples cursive writing. If I could not read the answer written down in a reasonable amount of time, right or wrong, the person got a ZERO on that question.

 

As for speed. In fact my current cursive handwriting is actually pretty slow, because it is quite deliberate in strokes. When I speed up, the quality of the handwriting goes down, to the point that my FAST writing is UGLY.

 

As for the pencil, I always used a soft lead in my mechanical pencil, so I did not have to press hard. This let me write faster than using a harder lead.

I have graded roughly 16,000 Advanced Placement Biology essays over the years. I have a reputation for being the guy at the table who can read anything (I call the worst ones Hamster Papers) so fellow readers bring me their "challenging" papers. Virtually all of the illegible ones are cursive. I think. A few might have been Sanskrit. Sometimes it is speed related (AP Bio is a timed test) but more often it is just lousy penmanship. I have seen a couple of illegible printed papers but they were written by people with ornate, highly stylized, and/or florid lettering that was more about trying to make a personal statement than communicating an idea.

 

On tests I print. For everything else except marking the work of my students (many of whom only read block printing) I use cursive. I agree that speed breeds illegibility with cursive but it is much faster and less fatiguing. It takes longer to grade papers when I print.

 

 

It's a circular process. In my school I wrote all my exams in Cursive. Most teachers also knew and wrote cursive.

How can we expect the students to use a technique their evaluators themselves abandoned?

It just brings the whole concept of 'education' into view.

Amen, friend. If it isn't in the state standards or assessed on the state tests it isn't taught. Most of our newly minted teachers are from a generation that didn't learn the proper way to write and it isn't taught in education schools. Penmanship, period, is no longer taught in most public schools. I shudder when I see the various grips my students use to hold their writing instruments. Legibility is an increasing problem. So is hand fatigue during long writing sessions. I shouldn't have to teach high school students how to hold a pen but I do a lot of it these days (using Bobo's technique for the tripod grip).

 

For the OP: Tony, I took the challenge, too. The first three paragraphs of Shirley Jackson's The Haunting of Hill House. Cursive was 25% faster and my hand felt better when I finished. I tried it once with printing first, cursive second and then waited a few hours and reversed the order. The sample size is small but I am satisfied.

[ac12]

We printed and 25 wpm was 125 letters a minute. You wrote down one group while remembering the last group and were listening to the new group as it was being sent. I don't know how this compares with the speed tests described above. But I do know the top speed guys could do 33 wpm and just listen and understand messages sent in the clear as they were being tapped out and do it while talking to you.

 

 

My college professor (a ham) could do that, and it was spooky.

He talked to us while copying code and replying with a hand key.

And he was FAST.

I was told that the FAST guys would not copy individual letters (t-h-e), they would copy words (the) or phrases (my QTH is, my name is, etc.).

Edited December 5, 2014 by ac12

[Dickkooty2]

I was told that the FAST guys would not copy individual letters (t-h-e), they would copy words (the) or phrases (my QTH is, my name is, etc.). from ac12 (above)

 

​Tes there are/were a whole series of Q signals which speeded up the process. And were from the Ham procedures. Also some specialized signals about the actual transmission process

 

My frequent signal was diddi dahdah diddi ( IMI ) "say again your last transmission".

 

Shades of

 

 

Bill Murray and two guys now lost to us: John Candy and Harold Ramos!

 

Dick

Edited December 5, 2014 by Dickkooty2

[VivienR]

In elementary school we taught cursive,, but few years later I changed to printing style, went for a while, and now as I started using fountain pens again, I kind of mixing the cursive with printing, because its suit me best. I joint the letters where its kind of easy, and not where its not suit for me. Like my signature, my first name is barely connected, while my surname is. This makes it kind of very unique and hard to copy. Also tend to always use fountain pens, so someone with ballpoints have no chance, nor with rollerball.

[donwinn]

Some 10 years or so ago I read an article which stated that if one has an audience at a lecture, divided evenly between male and female, 90% of the females will take notes in cursive, and 90% of males with take notes in printing. My bride and I are both in the top 10% -- I take notes in cursive, and she does in printing.

[donwinn]

Some 10 years or so ago I read an article which stated that if one has an audience at a lecture, divided evenly between male and female, 90% of the females will take notes in cursive, and 90% of males with take notes in printing. My bride and I are both in the top 10% -- I take notes in cursive, and she does in printing.

 

Same article stated that the longer one goes to school, including advance degrees, the worse the penmanship gets. The author extrapolated that as one reason doctors and lawyers are notorious at handwriting, blaming the penmanship of too many years of note taking in school.