Is cursive going away?

[pitterpatter]

Seeing how the world isn't going to switch one way or another all at once, if a child doesn't learn how to read it, then how is he/she supposed to read instructions written by his/her boss if that person prefers cursive?

 

Also, pharmacists and pharmacy techs would definitely need to know how to read cursive. Journalists, teachers, postal carriers... Actually, anyone who wants to be able to read a note written in cursive. Even a contractor would need to know that.

 

My cousin is 12. I don't know whether they're not teaching it in her school or what, but she can't even read who her birthday cards are from. She can't read cards printed in cursive script either.

 

PS - I hate writing in true cursive. I've always found most of the capital letters ugly. My script is a hybrid. I'll still teach DD cursive, though. Seems as though it should be part of a well-rounded education.

 

 

Good point...well, maybe physicians, but really is that handwriting? :001_smile:

Edited March 29, 2012 by pitterpatter

[AdventureMoms]

Seeing how the world isn't going to switch one way or another all at once, if a child doesn't learn how to read it, then how is he/she supposed to read instructions written by his/her boss if that person prefers cursive?

 

Also, pharmacists and pharmacy techs would definitely need to know how to read cursive. Journalists, teachers, postal carriers... Actually, anyone who wants to be able to read a note written in cursive. Even a contractor would need to know that.

 

My cousin is 12. I don't know whether they're not teaching it in her school or what, but she can't even read who her birthday cards are from. She can't read cards printed in cursive script either.

 

PS - I hate writing in true cursive. I've always found most of the capital letters ugly. My script is a hybrid. I'll still teach DD cursive, though. Seems as though it should be part of a well-rounded education.

 

Teaching a child to read in cursive is a lot simpler than teaching them to write in it. Reading is just a matter of recognizing a few different-looking letters. Writing requires a great deal of practice to master. And frankly pharmacy techs probably need a whole special class on reading gibbrish, because I can't in good faith call what my doctor writes on her prescriptions "cursive".

 

I don't know what I'm doing with my kids re: cursive, but I haven't written in cursive since I was 12, other than to sign my name. I took notes all through HS and college in print, no problems (and no laptops at that point). I can read cursive script just fine, and I've honestly never had a reason to regret it. On the SATs I did struggle a bit trying to use cursive for that statement, but I ended up writing it in a kind of hybrid cursive/print and it was fine.

[LucyStoner]

 

Also, pharmacists and pharmacy techs would definitely need to know how to read cursive. Journalists, teachers, postal carriers... Actually, anyone who wants to be able to read a note written in cursive. Even a contractor would need to know that.

 

 

 

Don't get me wrong, we teach cursive but in time we are going to see handwritten 'scripts go away. Handwritten prescriptions are problematic and often require calling the doctor to go "what now, what is this supposed to say?":tongue_smilie: There are even people sickened and killed because of confusing handwritten instructions on paper. Pharmacists check everything, but like doctors and anyone else they make mistakes and sometimes bad things slip through. Non-controlled substances can even be electronically signed and sent. The state that we live in is discouraging doctors from handwriting - many use software on a PDA or tablet that prints it to the desk and then they hand sign it only.

Edited March 30, 2012 by kijipt

[SonshineLearner]

I think "teach cursive first" then you're teaching writing once. They'll morph into some form of print, if they need it.

[AdventureMoms]

Don't get me wrong, we teach cursive but in time we are going to see handwritten 'scripts go away. Handwritten prescriptions are problematic and often require calling the doctor to go "what now, what is this supposed to say?":tongue_smilie: There are even people sickened and killed because of confusing handwritten instructions on paper. Pharmacists check everything, but like doctors and anyone else they make mistakes and sometimes bad things slip through. Non-controlled substances can even be electronically signed and sent. The state that we live in is discouraging doctors from handwriting - many use software on a PDA or tablet that prints it to the desk and then they hand sign it only.

 

This definitely makes a ton of sense. It has always seemed absurd to me that we are all staking our health on a handwritten note full of abbreviations written by people who have a reputation for being in a hurry and having terrible handwriting. The fact that prescriptions ever come our right is a credit to pharmacists. Regardless of how you feel about cursive in general, prescriptions seem like a poor place to use it.

[SorrelZG]

I think "teach cursive first" then you're teaching writing once. They'll morph into some form of print, if they need it.

 

I wish I had done so. DS currently, now that he's apparently satisfied his curiosity, thinks that cursive isn't the "real" way to write letters. I guess I should have had him seeing cursive letters from the beginning when exposing him to phonics. I think I did a little, but obviously not enough. He pretty much did start printing on his own, it's only cursive that has required instruction.

[ClassicalTwins]

Like anything else the ps does, give it 5-10 years and it will be back, and those parents won't be able to help their children or even read what they are writing.

[Guest tonyloffredo]

Hello – Tony Loffredo here,

 

I am a substitute teacher for Miami-Dade Public Schools with a BA in elementary Ed.

 

However, I did my student teaching in a private Catholic school. I was assigned to the third grade and they were learning cursive, in fact they were told that after a certain date everything had to be in cursive. This was in 2008.

 

One day this year I was subbing in the fifth grade in a Miami Public School and I was writing something on the board in print. Then I thought. These kids are in fifth grade I can write in cursive so I did.

 

I was really surprised at the complaints that followed. “Are we going to have to write in cursive?†“You mean you don’t write everything in cursive,†I asked. They were reluctant to answer. I told them that cursive was much faster than print. They seemed unimpressed. I just figured I had some lazy learners on my hand and gave it no further thought until I read this post.

 

The next time I get called in to substitute I will ask one of the teachers about it and get back to you with the answer!

 

Kind regards’

 

-Tony :confused1:

[LaxMom]

Not in my house! And my 7 year olds are much neater in cursive, and able to write much more without fatigue.

 

In my former tech career, I wrote longhand for lots of things. I can't imagine the need is going to just go away, though I do imagine there are any number of aids out there for the growing number who never learned. (I was working with a 24 year old colleague this morning who was working on her notes for her bootcamp class... In cursive. In fact, the entire staff - teens to 60s - leave notes for each other, generally written in cursive.)

[Guest tonyloffredo]

One day this year I was subbing in the fifth grade in a Miami Public School and I was writing something on the board in print. Then I thought. These kids are in fifth grade I can write in cursive so I did.

I was really surprised at the complaints that followed. “Are we going to have to write in cursive?†“You mean you don’t write everything in cursive,†I asked. They were reluctant to answer. I told them that cursive was much faster than print. They seemed unimpressed. I just figured I had some lazy learners on my hand and gave it no further thought until I read this post.

The next time I get called in to substitute I will ask one of the teachers about it and get back to you with the answer!

Kind regards’

-Tony

[Iucounu]

I told them that cursive was much faster than print. They seemed unimpressed.

They had good reason to be, because that isn't true. What is true is that a person's chosen method, in which they have the most practice, is faster for them than the one they use less; printing is a little faster than cursive in general (i.e. for practiced users); and mixed styles with printing dominant are the fastest.

[justamouse]

Not in this house. They learn cursive first, and their handwriting is gorgeous.

 

In 20 years when they do brain scans on people writing in cursive as opposed to print they'll prove all kinds of stuff and the schools will be teaching it again.

 

Frankly, speed doesn't matter to me. The lessons in line, perception, form and contour is what makes me keep using it.

[SorrelZG]

And then someone here mentioned that taking notes using a computer was difficult. I used to feel that way too. In fact, in college I always hand wrote my papers then typed them because I was so used to writing. Over time I began doing that less and less and now I can't stand doing a ton of writing anymore. I can type much faster than I can hand write.

 

I guess it's just what one is used to.

 

I can type far faster than I can write also (especially what I can write neatly), but I still prefer handwriting notes because my mind prefers I take notes almost pictographicly (did I just make that word up?). I need to write this over here, that over there and this with a highlight back up here, a picture or diagram or two, etc. - if I am working out ideas for school years in advance I start by drawing a spiral so each year is one rotation). The left to right, top to bottom quality of typing is extremely restrictive. My mind will recall what I drew but has difficulty with the linear type-written format.

 

So, point being, speed isn't a key factor for me. I think I'm going to research some of this stuff a few have mentioned about cursive and the brain. I'm tempted to be utilitarian about it and just go with whatever is easiest or fastest but I think I want to explore these other ideas first.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

They had good reason to be, because that isn't true. What is true is that a person's chosen method, in which they have the most practice, is faster for them than the one they use less; printing is a little faster than cursive in general (i.e. for practiced users); and mixed styles with printing dominant are the fastest.

 

IMHO that is your opinion based on one study with students who may not have been truly proficient IMHO.

 

I am sure I can find all kinds of educational research supporting truly bad educational ideas like not teaching phonics and what not as well;)

Edited March 30, 2012 by priscilla

[Iucounu]

IMHO that is your opinion based on one study with students who may not have been truly proficient IMHO.

 

I am sure I can find all kinds of educational research supporting truly bad educational ideas like not teaching phonics and what not as well;)

It's an opinion based on the clear results of a comparative study, yes. Teaching cursive is an idea that's really got no experimental support-- I checked.

[Dmmetler]

As someone with fine motor issues who types almost everything, I teach handwriting/ My rationale was simple-I know, as someone who types whenever possible and who has joked that my handwriting is Times New Roman 12 point that there are many, many times, coming up on about a daily basis, where typing simply isn't the efficient choice, especially not if a hard copy is needed for any reason. Texting, e-mail, and so on hasn't really changed that much. I also know, as someone who depends on it, that it's fairly HARD to take good notes while typing alone, especially when you're in a discipline where you need diagrams, symbols, or mixed forms of notation. I would challenge ANYONE to take good notes in a music theory class in real-time on a computer that can equal what can be done with a staff-lined notebook. (Notability with a staff .pdf on an iPad and a stylus comes closest-and at that point, you're using handwriting).

 

What I saw when I was in PS as a music teacher wasn't that cursive was being replaced by manuscript-it was that writing was no longer being taught systematically at all. Kids might get letter formation instruction in Kindergarten, but by about age 6-7, it was assumed that they knew how to write. The result was kids who had very, very poor handwriting and were unable to write efficiently in either manuscript or cursive. And of the two, I think that cursive is easier to teach systematically and get the letter formation correct from the start, simply because it's much more self-correcting. Start a letter at the wrong point, and chances are high that you won't be able to connect the next one easily. In manuscript, it's possible for a child in Kindergarten to have horrible letter formation, but have handwriting that looks good until they have to write quickly-at which time, they struggle to keep up, and their writing gets sloppy, and habits are so engrained that even if the child is sent to an OT to learn to write or a parent decides to work on it, it's hard to unteach. Then you get teachers requesting that assignments be typed (which also hasn't been taught at all systematically) because they're illegible.

 

I feel it's well worth the time to do a few minutes of copywork in cursive daily, after teaching letter formation-and at age 7, my DD's handwriting is better than most of the 5th graders I taught in PS-and some of my college undergraduates, too.

 

Besides-someone mentioned that telling people that they teach Latin puts stop to questions about whether or not you can homeschool effectively. I've noticed that having your 7 yr old send a beautifully handwritten in cursive thank you note to nosy relatives does the same thing :).

Edited March 30, 2012 by dmmetler

[pitterpatter]

Of course. More and more electronic prescriptions are being used. I was just trying to think of professions where cursive might be handy. A postal carrier would definitely need know how to read cursive, though. ;)

 

Beyond what I said before, so many book titles, ads, greeting cards, T-shirts, etc. have words on them that are written in some kind of script.

 

Short-hand used to be popular. My mom studied it in school. It's no longer around. Maybe cursive is going the same way.

 

 

Don't get me wrong, we teach cursive but in time we are going to see handwritten 'scripts go away. Handwritten prescriptions are problematic and often require calling the doctor to go "what now, what is this supposed to say?":tongue_smilie: There are even people sickened and killed because of confusing handwritten instructions on paper. Pharmacists check everything, but like doctors and anyone else they make mistakes and sometimes bad things slip through. Non-controlled substances can even be electronically signed and sent. The state that we live in is discouraging doctors from handwriting - many use software on a PDA or tablet that prints it to the desk and then they hand sign it only.

[GingerPoppy]

 

In 20 years when they do brain scans on people writing in cursive as opposed to print they'll prove all kinds of stuff and the schools will be teaching it again.

 

Frankly, speed doesn't matter to me. The lessons in line, perception, form and contour is what makes me keep using it.

 

...my mind prefers I take notes almost pictographicly (did I just make that word up?). I need to write this over here, that over there and this with a highlight back up here, a picture or diagram or two, etc. - if I am working out ideas for school years in advance I start by drawing a spiral so each year is one rotation). The left to right, top to bottom quality of typing is extremely restrictive. My mind will recall what I drew but has difficulty with the linear type-written format.

 

 

 

 

Kids might get letter formation instruction in Kindergarten, but by about age 6-7, it was assumed that they knew how to write. The result was kids who had very, very poor handwriting and were unable to write efficiently in either manuscript or cursive. And of the two, I think that cursive is easier to teach systematically and get the letter formation correct from the start, simply because it's much more self-correcting. Start a letter at the wrong point, and chances are high that you won't be able to connect the next one easily. In manuscript, it's possible for a child in Kindergarten to have horrible letter formation, but have handwriting that looks good until they have to write quickly-at which time, they struggle to keep up, and their writing gets sloppy, and habits are so engrained that even if the child is sent to an OT to learn to write or a parent decides to work on it, it's hard to unteach.

 

 

 

:iagree: :iagree: :iagree:(and the bolded was a really neat point!)

 

As a person who must sometimes take notes, I prefer the very visual, almost picture-based notes I write (in a cursive/print mix). Typing would limit me. Not only could I not format the notes the way I like, I also would not retain them to the same level. I need the freedom of the page.

 

As a writer, I find a large difference between writing or typing a first draft--my brain feels more connected down my arm, through the pen, and onto the page when writing. I feel a slight disconnection when typing... it's like my best, most creative self can't find its way out.

 

When I'm required to put words down on paper, I find my arm and hand are much less tired when I'm using my comfortable, casual cursive (a slight hybrid with print, but most letters are joined). I find pure printing to be very hard on the muscles, which affects the flow of words. My thoughts flow more freely when I'm in the zone, and cursive (or slight hybrid) definitely helps me get there.

 

I think it can help with getting spelling to stick in the brain for similar reasons.

 

My dd10's cursive is lovely, whereas her printing is only ok.

 

I do also believe that, because cursive forces kids to work within some precise parameters, it helps to develop specific parts of the brain. Even the fact that the child doesn't go letter by letter, but rather experiences the word as a joined up thing--and that they write the word at a fairly constant rate (which forces their brain to "think on its feet", so to speak), causes the brain to have a workout that can only assist with other learning.

[AnaShoo]

I'm going to teach cursive mostly because I detest teaching printing. Seriously, I am baffled as to why teaching cursive is such a burden... My DS7, who struggles more with his writing than anything else, still, after almost two years of print instruction, doesn't form the letters right. I hate having to watch him and go over the order over and over again. :tongue_smilie:

 

I've wanted to start cursive with him since kindergarten, but since he's been in a public school, I haven't wanted to mess him up, as they don't do it until 3rd grade. I regret that decision, though - I wish we'd done some summer school teaching with cursive. I think he would have been a lot happier (and so would I!).

 

When we start homeschooling this year, I'm going to start both him and his younger brother on cursive. And we're going to use it as long as it works better for us. Plus, I'd be really horrified if they ended up one of those kids who can't read cursive later on in life. It may be true that it's easier to teach to read it, but if you don't care about teaching writing, then why would you want to teach them to read it? Why would they even ask if they've found ways to avoid it (like the person who said her son stopped using it when his classmates complained in college)?

[Iucounu]

I do also believe that, because cursive forces kids to work within some precise parameters, it helps to develop specific parts of the brain. Even the fact that the child doesn't go letter by letter, but rather experiences the word as a joined up thing--and that they write the word at a fairly constant rate (which forces their brain to "think on its feet", so to speak), causes the brain to have a workout that can only assist with other learning.

Is there something to this? Because all I found in the past was statements being parroted by people to similar effect, but without any actual support. I can take anecdotal evidence from OTs that cursive helps their patients in some ways (at least for what it is-- anecdotal, otherwise unsupported evidence). However, I can't help being skeptical of claims of brain effects unsupported by any sort of evidence.

[Iucounu]

Here's an interesting abstract:

 

The Relationship Between Handwriting Style and Speed and Legibility

[JeanM]

 

Also, pharmacists and pharmacy techs would definitely need to know how to read cursive.

 

Many doctors are moving to electronic prescriptions, which are transmitted to the pharmacy. I'm guessing that it is only a matter of time before that is standard practice, and the pharmacists will not need to read handwritten notes.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

It's an opinion based on the clear results of a comparative study, yes. Teaching cursive is an idea that's really got no experimental support-- I checked.

 

Perhaps no one has bothered especially now that many educators seem to have come to the conclusion that teaching cursive is not worth it:( Perhaps this sort of study does not meet their agenda:)(and for the record I am generally known as a liberal:D)