Things I've changed my mind on: #1. Cursive

[Reya]

Original opinion: There's no point in teaching cursive.

 

New opinion: There's no point in teaching print, then cursive.

 

The problem is that the traditional writing progression gets kids extremely comfortable with print before introducing completely new letter forms of cursive and demanding that they start over. It often takes a child at least 2 years to regain speed and fluency. The frustration this engenders seemed entirely pointless to me--and it does still. Before, I questioned the value of ever progressing to cursive. Now, I think that the ball-and-stick print letter forms are far worse than cursive and much more pointless to an adult system of writing.

 

So I still don't see the point of Zaner-Bloser. :-) But I enthusiastically endorse Cursive First and similar programs! I still like Italic for kids with middling to poor fine motor skills, and I'm over the moon about Handwriting Without Tears' print program for substantially disabled kids.

 

Anyone else?

[EKS]

HWT has been a lifesaver here.

 

And I agree with you about cursive. My kids each learned to do reasonably good looking cursive, but each also reverted to printing--to the point that my 14yo can't even sign his name in cursive.

 

Now, I realize that I could have insisted that they use cursive exclusively, but with dysgraphic kids, there's only so much one can insist upon.

[Reya]

Italic actually worked fine for my DS, but I'm helping another for whom it would be an insurmountable mountain....

 

I don't think ANYTHING will speed up DS' writing, though! I'm not going to let him start to type for a while, though, because my fine motor skills (not really dysgraphia...) were so poor that in college, I really was incapable of taking notes. I don't want that to happen to him! I used to tutor people in return for their notes!

 

It was funny because some of my classmates thought I was a show-off for turning in typed work whenever possible. The truth was that it was much faster, and the profs and my grades both showed their appreciation!

[boscopup]

Ball and stick style print drives me batty. I will NOT be using it with my next two children. HWT print made a lot more sense, and GDI is pretty similar in letter formation.

 

My oldest is a little weaker in fine motor skills (not abnormally so... just the normal 6 year old boy stuff), and HWT print has majorly sped up his handwriting. We'll do connected GDI next year. I'm learning it too, as my traditional cursive is awful. I remember taking the GRE, and they had you write this paragraph basically saying you wouldn't cheat... It had to be in cursive. I hadn't used cursive (except for my signature) in YEARS at that point. I spent a few minutes trying to remember how to do a capital 'I'. :lol:They were moving on to the beginning of the test just as I was finally finishing up the paragraph. That was the most stressful part of the test for me! :tongue_smilie:

[MeganW]

I may be remembering this totally incorrectly, but doesn't the new SAT essay require cursive?

[kim.4dogs]

No, you can print the SAT essay.

[boscopup]

I may be remembering this totally incorrectly, but doesn't the new SAT essay require cursive?

 

I heard someone say that recently, and I was :confused:, because cursive is not really pushed in a lot of schools these days. I know nothing about the SAT now though. I took it almost 20 years ago. I'm sure it's changed a wee bit. :tongue_smilie:

[Spy Car]

I heard someone say that recently, and I was :confused:, because cursive is not really pushed in a lot of schools these days. I know nothing about the SAT now though. I took it almost 20 years ago. I'm sure it's changed a wee bit. :tongue_smilie:

 

The SAT does not require "cursive" but there is a handwritten essay component from what I understand. So fast and legible handwriting are important for doing well on this portion of the exam.

 

Bill

Edited March 8, 2011 by Spy Car

[boscopup]

The SAT does not require "cursive" but there is a handwritten essay component form what I understand. So fast and legible handwriting are important for doing well on this portion of the exam.

 

 

Ah. That doesn't necessarily mean cursive then. :) I can write faster and more legibly in print than I can in cursive.

[Laura Corin]

That's why I like the UK system of 'joined up print'. You don't need to re-learn your letters. Instead, you write your printed letters with tails from the beginning and just join them up when you are ready.

 

I think there's a declaration that has to be written and signed on the SAT which is meant to be in cursive for verification purposes: it's only one sentence long.

 

Laura

[Spy Car]

Ah. That doesn't necessarily mean cursive then. :) I can write faster and more legibly in print than I can in cursive.

 

Yes, one could print.

 

Bill

[Reya]

I may be remembering this totally incorrectly, but doesn't the new SAT essay require cursive?

 

Some of the standardized tests require(d) that you write a statement of academic honesty in cursive. That's all.

[Reya]

That's why I like the UK system of 'joined up print'. You don't need to re-learn your letters. Instead, you write your printed letters with tails from the beginning and just join them up when you are ready.

 

 

That's what Italic does, which is half of why I chose it!

[Renee in NC]

Calvert and Memoria Press both start with manuscript in K, but move to cursive in first grade. According to my MP 2nd grade manual, the expectation is that all work will be done in cursive by week 10 of 2nd grade.

 

I am substituting HWOT for the MP selections, but otherwise we will follow the same progression.

[brownie]

Our ps used d'nelian (hooks at the ends of letters and a few other changes like a cursive k from the start) so we continued that with the older 2 when they were pulled out. I don't know how much it eases the transition as I have no comparison.

 

DS5 is using HWOT, but I have to figure out what to so with him next year.

Brownie

[cherylw]

My fourth grader's cursive is much neater than his print. It drives my batty that he still writes an "a" with a circle and then a stick. He's getting the hang of it but is slow. It took about a month to get him to hold his pencil corrected...was never correctly in ps.

 

Also, My dh said that Abraham Lincoln did not know how to write print. ?? They only learned cursive I guess. He got his inof from some TV history show.

[lulubelle]

My ds 8, at this point in time, writes better cursive. He also likes cursive. He is definitely slower with it, but I have been pleasantly surprised how well he does with it. We have been using Zaner-Bloser for 4 years. Works here.

[FO4UR]

Starting my first with with cursive was a good decision. Print is so common that he learned print without much instruction at all.

 

I am OH SO GLAD!!! that he already knows cursive now that we are end of 2nd, looking ahead to 3rd. He still needs practice (copywork), but no intensive teaching.:hurray:

[abbeyej]

The SAT does not require "cursive" but there is a handwritten essay component from what I understand. So fast and legible handwriting are important for doing well on this portion of the exam.

 

Bill

 

I believe that cursive was once at least *expected* for the honor statement. Perhaps that's where the confusion came in.

[ChandlerMom]

Societally, I thought cursive was on the way out?

 

Historically, every personal thing you read was handwritten (most things, even gov't and official never got "printed" or typeset). So, learning to read and write cursive was a critical skill.

 

Now, unless you are an ancient historian, everything you read is printed: internet, email, books.... So reading, typing, and on the rare times you aren't at a computer PRINTING is standard.

 

Even 20 years ago, when I started college, sometime during freshman year I completely switched from cursive to printing for note taking. Printing is MUCH faster and more legible when written fast. I'm a scientist, so you print equations and derivations anyways. By grad school, I might be taking 15 pages of notes during one 90min class (boy, my hand hurt!) and it was all printing. I didn't know any science majors who used cursive.

 

Today, the only time I use cursive is to add notes to birthday cards and the like. 7yo DD is learning to read cursive from notes she gets from her grandpa, but I probably won't teach her cursive until she is 9 or 10.

 

Sorry this got long, but recently I've been thinking a lot about how much time we spend to teach very young kids to tell time (meaning read analog clocks), often before they can skip count by 5s or even read. It was the only thing in math dd struggled with (she's 2 levels accelerated), I ended up tabling it until last week we covered it all in a few days and it was easy for her now (since she's mastered times table and angles). With my other dc I probably won't even start until they are older. I mean, when I was a kid there was ONLY analog clocks. You had to learn to read them in K or you wouldn't be able to tell time at all! Now, we had to search thrift stores to even FIND one so we can teach the kids how to read it. I decided to embrace our digital world and accept every skill I learned isn't important now, and others (like keyboarding) that were reserved for high school should be learned earlier. :D

 

My 2cents.

Edited March 8, 2011 by ChandlerMom

[boscopup]

I believe that cursive was once at least *expected* for the honor statement. Perhaps that's where the confusion came in.

 

That's the way it was when I took the GRE about 10ish years ago. That took me FOREVER. They said it HAD to be written in cursive. I didn't realize writing in cursive was a requirement for entering grad school. :lol:

[Tracy]

Original opinion: There's no point in teaching cursive.

 

New opinion: There's no point in teaching print, then cursive.

 

The problem is that the traditional writing progression gets kids extremely comfortable with print before introducing completely new letter forms of cursive and demanding that they start over. It often takes a child at least 2 years to regain speed and fluency. The frustration this engenders seemed entirely pointless to me--and it does still. Before, I questioned the value of ever progressing to cursive. Now, I think that the ball-and-stick print letter forms are far worse than cursive and much more pointless to an adult system of writing.

 

So I still don't see the point of Zaner-Bloser. :-) But I enthusiastically endorse Cursive First and similar programs! I still like Italic for kids with middling to poor fine motor skills, and I'm over the moon about Handwriting Without Tears' print program for substantially disabled kids.

 

Anyone else?

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree: We just made the transition last summer. It was earlier than usual, so it is "taking" faster than if you wait until they are older. But learning to write twice and starting with the more difficult way seems completely pointless to me.

[Irishmommy]

My son started with d'nealin in ps as well. He's got great printing. He is struggling with cursive so we are hitting typing this year, forget about the cursive.

 

When I taught 9th grade English, I told them that I had to be able to read their work, PERIOD. I didn't care how it was written, as long as it was legible.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Societally, I thought cursive was on the way out?

 

Historically, every personal thing you read was handwritten (most things, even gov't and official never got "printed" or typeset). So, learning to read and write cursive was a critical skill.

 

Now, unless you are an ancient historian, everything you read is printed: internet, email, books.... So reading, typing, and on the rare times you aren't at a computer PRINTING is standard.

 

Even 20 years ago, when I started college, sometime during freshman year I completely switched from cursive to printing for note taking. Printing is MUCH faster and more legible when written fast. I'm a scientist, so you print equations and derivations anyways. By grad school, I might be taking 15 pages of notes during one 90min class (boy, my hand hurt!) and it was all printing. I didn't know any science majors who used cursive.

 

Today, the only time I use cursive is to add notes to birthday cards and the like. 7yo DD is learning to read cursive from notes she gets from her grandpa, but I probably won't teach her cursive until she is 9 or 10.

 

Sorry this got long, but recently I've been thinking a lot about how much time we spend to teach very young kids to tell time (meaning read analog clocks), often before they can skip count by 5s or even read. It was the only thing in math dd struggled with (she's 2 levels accelerated), I ended up tabling it until last week we covered it all in a few days and it was easy for her now (since she's mastered times table and angles). With my other dc I probably won't even start until they are older. I mean, when I was a kid there was ONLY analog clocks. You had to learn to read them in K or you wouldn't be able to tell time at all! Now, we had to search thrift stores to even FIND one so we can teach the kids how to read it. I decided to embrace our digital world and accept every skill I learned isn't important now, and others (like keyboarding) that were reserved for high school should be learned earlier. :D

 

My 2cents.

 

I was able to take extensive notes in cursive much faster than print:001_smile: I am 50 and had to write in all cursive from 4th grade on so maybe it is a function of how much one had to write in cursive. I think not having to lift the pen off the paper as much would make it quicker for cursive IMHO as long as one has extensive practice in it. As for legibility, my notes were for me and not as neat but I could write neater easily in cursive when not writing so fast:)

 

I prefer cursive first:)

 

My 2 cents:) which could be wrong:tongue_smilie:

Edited March 9, 2011 by priscilla
spelling

[Kuovonne]

I guess that I got lucky with Sparkle. I taught her printing first, just before Kindergarten. Then, in 2nd grade, I taught her cursive. It took her about two weeks to learn cursive, except for a few capital letters. She uses both print and cursive, depending on her mood. I do demand that she use the same style of handwriting for a single sheet of paper when doing school.

 

So far neither method of handwriting has slowed her down. She thinks so slowly that her handwriting easily catches up with her thoughts, and most of her time spent "writing" is actually spent dawdling.

[Hunter]

I've been working really hard on my cursive writing. It is now a lot nicer than my printing.

 

Several times a week I need to write on a form that says "print only". I'm doing D' Nealian/Modern cursive. I'm thankful that when I start the printing lessons, they will be similar to the cursive ones I am learning.

 

Unless a child has a disability, it helps in life to be able to both print and write in cursive.

[Laura Corin]

 

Several times a week I need to write on a form that says "print only".

 

They are very easy and quick to learn because they look like the capitals we see in print.

 

Laura

[Alicia64]

I spent way too much time trying to decide whether I'd teach cursive. . . what was the point? etc. etc.

 

Finally I realized I wanted them to be at least able to read grandma's letters.

 

I bought Handwriting Without Tears and have really loved it.

 

Here's what I found: it's easier to teach cursive then it is to have the internal debate about should we learn cursive vs. should we let it go.

 

I finally just taught it. Done. If they really don't need it, so what it was something of a brain exercise.

 

When we're finished w/ HWT -- we're 3/4 done -- we're moving onto a keyboard program. So now dh says, "keyboards will soon be obsolete and computers will be voice only."

 

Whatever.

 

I'm teaching keyboard.

 

Alley