Gonna go with 'no'. I printed my college exams (in the 80's & 90's). My cursive was always atrocious, and when I was no longer required to use it, I stopped. I now only use cursive for my signature. The last time I recall my son using cursive was grade school. He's now a published academic currently pursing a Master's degree; clearly, a lack of cursive hasn't slowed him down.
Should Schools Bring Back Cursive Handwriting?
- Thread starter The Count of Merkur Cristo
- Start date
"He's now a published academic currently pursing a Master's degree; clearly, a lack of cursive hasn't slowed him down."
1. It kind of proves my point. Presumably, his ability to read cursive allows him to research cursive handwritten sources and he is progressing.
2. If you cannot read cursive, you cannot research cursive handwritten sources. Not being able to read cursive handwritten sources would be a non starter for many PhD advisers.
Frankly, they never should have stopped teaching cursive. So yes, schools should bring it back.
FWIW/YMMV
1. It kind of proves my point. Presumably, his ability to read cursive allows him to research cursive handwritten sources and he is progressing.
2. If you cannot read cursive, you cannot research cursive handwritten sources. Not being able to read cursive handwritten sources would be a non starter for many PhD advisers.
Frankly, they never should have stopped teaching cursive. So yes, schools should bring it back.
FWIW/YMMV
Over here in the UK they have pretty much given up bothering. All three of my kids use laptops at school. I had TERRIBLE hand writing at when I was young and was made to practise at break times. Nevertheless it took me until I was 15 to write with a legible hand and into my 20s to write with a cursive hand.
The fine motor skills point that someone made above is a great one. First they need to show the kids how to hold a pen. Mine weren't taught to.
The fine motor skills point that someone made above is a great one. First they need to show the kids how to hold a pen. Mine weren't taught to.
I haven't found a single kid yet that could not read the cursive script on a cola bottle.
I agree with Kate Gladstone Handwriting Matters; Cursive Doesn't - NYTimes.com - https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/04/30/should-schools-require-children-to-learn-cursive/handwriting-matters-cursive-doesnt
Handwriting matters. Cursive does not. Something like the Palmer method is a waste of time and effort, and brings up painful memories for many of us. Not an adult in 100 writes with a consistent Palmer "hand." We all connect some letters, and not others and use a mix of letter shapes. Most do not think a Palmer "t" or capital "f" is a useful form.
Something like italics is much more useful and no slower and certainly not less legible. It is easy and fast learning how to read cursive, so sure, teach that.
Handwriting matters. Cursive does not. Something like the Palmer method is a waste of time and effort, and brings up painful memories for many of us. Not an adult in 100 writes with a consistent Palmer "hand." We all connect some letters, and not others and use a mix of letter shapes. Most do not think a Palmer "t" or capital "f" is a useful form.
Something like italics is much more useful and no slower and certainly not less legible. It is easy and fast learning how to read cursive, so sure, teach that.
tankerjohn
A little poofier than I prefer
Interesting perspective. I use semi-joined printing for notes and other “short form” writing and Palmer for “long form” like letters and journaling. I actually do like Palmer “Ts” and “Fs”; the one I can’t ever do is the capital “Q”. In Palmer, it looks too much like the digit “2”, so I just write like an “O” with a slash on the bottom (which is what “Q” is). I’ve tried italic a few times, but haven’t gotten on with it yet. I actually like the loopinees of Palmer method.
