Wait until - God forbid - the aftermath of an EMP attack. Cursive will be mighty handy to know then, by cracky.
Handwriting matters — but does cursive matter? The fastest, clearest handwriters join only some letters: making the easiest joins, skipping others, using print-like forms of letters whose cursive and printed forms disagree. (Sources below.)
Reading cursive matters, but even children can be taught to read writing that they are not taught to produce. Reading cursive can be taught in just 30 to 60 minutes — even to five- or six-year-olds, once they read ordinary print. Why not teach children to read cursive, along with teaching other vital skills, including a handwriting style typical of effective handwriters?
Adults increasingly abandon cursive. In 2012, handwriting teachers were surveyed at a conference hosted by Zaner-Bloser, a publisher of cursive textbooks. Only 37 percent wrote in cursive; another 8 percent printed. The majority, 55 percent, wrote a hybrid: some elements resembling print-writing, others resembling cursive. When most handwriting teachers shun cursive, why mandate it?
Cursive’s cheerleaders sometimes allege that cursive makes you smarter, makes you graceful, or confers other blessings no more prevalent among cursive users than elsewhere. Some claim research support, citing studies that consistently prove to have been misquoted or otherwise misrepresented by the claimant.
What about signatures? In state and federal law, cursive signatures have no special legal validity over any other kind. (Hard to believe? Ask any attorney!)
All writing, not just cursive, is individual — just as all writing involves fine motor skills. That is why, six months into the school year, any first-grade teacher can immediately identify (from print-writing on unsigned work) which student produced it.
Mandating cursive to preserve handwriting resembles mandating stovepipe hats and crinolines to preserve the art of tailoring.
SOURCES:
Handwriting research on speed and legibility:
/1/ Steve Graham, Virginia Berninger, and Naomi Weintraub. “The Relation between Handwriting Style and Speed and Legibility.” JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, Vol. 91, No. 5 (May - June, 1998), pp. 290-296: on-line at http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/27542168.pdf
/2/ Steve Graham, Virginia Berninger, Naomi Weintraub, and William Schafer. “Development of Handwriting Speed and Legibility in Grades 1-9.”
JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, Vol. 92, No. 1 (September - October, 1998), pp. 42-52: on-line at http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/27542188.pdf
Zaner-Bloser handwriting survey: Results on-line at http://www.hw21summit.com/media/zb/hw21/files/H2937N_post_event_stats.pdf
Kate Gladstone
http://www.HandwritingThatWorks.com
I don’t get it, or I don’t understand what this cursed “cursive” means. Does this whole kerfuffle mean that children nowadays are taught only to type on keyboards, or else, only to write in block, uppercase letters when using pens and pencils? ‘splain, Lucy!
It’s not dead in my house. I was taught the Palmer method, and use it every day.
My children did learn cursive in (Catholic) school, but it wasn’t as nice as Palmer (IMO). When I began homeschooling my younger son, I taught him the Palmer method as well. Now his penmanship is excellent — almost as good as mine.
My older boy...well...he also writes in cursive all the time (for note-taking in school), but HIS handwriting looks more like the marks left by a chicken in the final throes of a horrifying death caused by a spectacular gastric disturbance. Still, he seems to be able to read it. His signature is MUCH neater and even passes muster with me.
Regards,
Bad news: Cursive writing no longer taught.
Good News: Words per minute (WPM) typed is increasing, albeit Eubonics’ words are more common than English.