The Great Cursive Writing Debate: Lost Art Or Vital Skill?

[Retro-user]

I appreciate the desire to have scientific proof about cursive. Give this link a chance (it's not political and I don't think they are selling anything). If you read down about halfway, they talk about a Canadian psychologist who found cursive writing, with connected letters, stimulated different brain activity versus typing or printing. This might be the closest we can get to a real scientific study.

 

http://naturalsociety.com/how-cursive-writing-affects-brain-development/

Edited November 30, 2017 by Retro-user

[ParkerDuofold]

I know from personal experience, cursive requires more concentration than printing does... at least it does for me. More concentration = more cognitive function.

 

 

- Anthony

[cat]

Young people can not read my cursive, but I'm not sure if it is because they never learned it or my handwriting is so bad.

[Pickwick]

I know from personal experience, cursive requires more concentration than printing does... at least it does for me. More concentration = more cognitive function.

 

 

- Anthony

 

You've aroused my curiosity, Why do you find you need to concentrate more on cursive writing?

[ParkerDuofold]

I wonder if sentence diagramming has become politicized. The critics seem to call it "rote," "repetitive," and other negative terms. It need not be done until it becomes a chore. It's simply a diagram, like the others I've mentioned, to visually represent language and how it works. I wonder what is the fear of using it as more of a real teaching aid than just a novelty? I think our "national school system" might be invested in keeping some knowledge inaccessible. Given all the psychological research done in the last half of the 20th century, including the realization that there are learning styles, personality types, and aptitudes, it's not hard to imagine educators saying something is a waste of time if they cynically believe only a few can grasp it anyway. Yet despite all the research and well-intentioned "improvements," we still are outranked by many competitor nations when it comes to educational achievement.

Hi all,

 

I do not think it would be "overly political" to mention the fact that after considerable thought and research; Kelly and I decided to home-school our boys... mainly because of the current state of our schools... including some of the parochial schools; depending on the diocese you're in.

 

Moreover, they enjoyed remarkable success; typically testing a grade and a half over their level... and also enjoyed a robust social life. To stay on point... ...they were also learning cursive, (well, A.J. knew it; Dominic was learning),... and I went back and checked our records... and A.J. could also diagram sentences... Dominic was learning.

 

Am I saying knowing how to write cursive and diagram a sentence are the reasons they scored so well... of course not... nobody thinks that simplistically. However, I do believe studying and eventually mastering those particular skills were certainly a small piece of the overall jigsaw puzzle picture of a well-rounded and effective education.

 

The best education you can give a child is to teach him how to think... and think logically... to do that effectively, requires many different puzzle pieces; fused together to form an overall mural... and I do not see why cursive writing and a classical grammar exercise cannot be two of those pieces.

 

Be well all... and teach your children well.

 

 

- Anthony

[ParkerDuofold]

You've aroused my curiosity, Why do you find you need to concentrate more on cursive writing?

Simply put, I find it a lot easier to print than to write in script. Just like it is a lot easier to add than to divide. If cursive was easier than printing, they would teach cursive in the first grade and printing in the third grade.

 

As fate would have it, I was taught the two forms of penmanship in the opposite sequence... just like addition and division. Capisci, Pickwick?

 

 

- Anthony

[ParkerDuofold]

Young people can not read my cursive, but I'm not sure if it is because they never learned it or my handwriting is so bad.

Hi Cat,

 

 

It could be a little of both... I have the same problem.

 

 

- Anthony

[Pickwick]

Simply put, I find it a lot easier to print than to write in script. Just like it is a lot easier to add than to divide. If cursive was easier than printing, they would teach cursive in the first grade and printing in the third grade.

 

As fate would have it, I was taught the two forms of penmanship in the opposite sequence... just like addition and division. Capisci, Pickwick?

 

 

- Ant

My dear friend your school defied all logic. My generation wrote with printing letters until age 8, after that taught cursive which I've used all my life enabling me to write at a faster pace keeping up with my thoughts, ideas and inspiration {which happens at the rarest of moments and usually inconvenient times}. It's totally beyond my capisci! In fact it surpasses all capisci!!

[ParkerDuofold]

My dear friend your school defied all logic. My generation wrote with printing letters until age 8, after that taught cursive which I've used all my life enabling me to write at a faster pace keeping up with my thoughts, ideas and inspiration {which happens at the rarest of moments and usually inconvenient times}. It's totally beyond my capisci! In fact it surpasses all capisci!!

Hello Pickwick,

 

Please read what I said again... particularly the first paragraph... I think you missed my elements of sarcasm in the second paragraph... ...and if I'm missing your's; you'll have to forgive me... it's 2:48 a.m. and I'm still up.

 

Be well.

 

 

- Anthony

 

EDITED to clarify text.

Edited November 30, 2017 by ParkerDuofold

[stevekolt]

Vital skill.

[praxim]

Simply put, I find it a lot easier to print than to write in script.

It is? Not for me. Now that I am back writing (with a fountain pen) as a normal activity, I find when deliberately printing that if I try to write more quickly, or fail to concentrate on the print, then I lapse into cursive. Yet, my printing is more legible.

[praxim]

I appreciate the desire to have scientific proof about cursive. Give this link a chance (it's not political and I don't think they are selling anything). If you read down about halfway, they talk about a Canadian psychologist who found cursive writing, with connected letters, stimulated different brain activity versus typing or printing. This might be the closest we can get to a real scientific study. http://naturalsociety.com/how-cursive-writing-affects-brain-development/

In the approximate middle of the article, are you referring to Professor Virginia Berninger, the journalist Andrea Gordon, or Dr Norman Doidge? Two of those may be looked up by entering their names in Google Scholar to discover their papers and the relevance of same. I am not trying to make specific commentary on the topic so I will leave that to interested people. My point is that a basic literature search is far easier today than when I was ploughing through library cards and journals, so should be done when formulating a somewhat academic argument. Secondary sources mean one is interpreting an interpretation, which is not so good.

[TSherbs]

In the approximate middle of the article, are you referring to Professor Virginia Berninger, the journalist Andrea Gordon, or Dr Norman Doidge? Two of those may be looked up by entering their names in Google Scholar to discover their papers and the relevance of same. I am not trying to make specific commentary on the topic so I will leave that to interested people. My point is that a basic literature search is far easier today than when I was ploughing through library cards and journals, so should be done when formulating a somewhat academic argument. Secondary sources mean one is interpreting an interpretation, which is not so good.

I looked up the name Gordon with the Toronto Star. She is/was (some of the links are dead) a contributor under the "Parent" heading in that paper. She does/did not research and does not actually review any (the column is very sort). This is not anything like an academic piece. The claim is that the right side of the brain sees patterns in handwriting like patterns in facial recognition. This would of course be true --if true--for all kinds of handwriting: they all have patterns, even those (rare) who print like a machine.

 

 

No one here has been claiming that cursive or diagramming have no value at all for any students. Sometimes these defenders of cursive tilt against windmills. The debate begins when persons claim that cursive has broad efficacy in learning or language development above other modes of handwriting. There is no evidence for that, that I have been shown or could find myself. Lots of people claim it, or would like it to be true, or slide a study from one field over into another to suggest the possibility.

[Pickwick]

Hello Pickwick,

 

Please read what I said again... particularly the first paragraph... I think you missed my elements of sarcasm in the second paragraph... ...and if I'm missing your's; you'll have to forgive me... it's 2:48 a.m. and I'm still up.

 

Be well.

 

 

- Anthony

 

EDITED to clarify text.

 

My dear friend, Please forgive my gaff! It's a trait which my teacher would remind me quite frequently when I would get a statement wrongly interpreted. He would remind me that I was spending too much time sunbathing and needed to stay in the shade, I only wish I hade taken his advice my brain has been toasted ever since! In future I will ponder over each syllable you write.

 

Yours in utter confusion!

[pajaro]

I can read and write cursive. I don't care about all of the heads-down cell phone tappers.

[ParkerDuofold]

It is? Not for me. Now that I am back writing (with a fountain pen) as a normal activity, I find when deliberately printing that if I try to write more quickly, or fail to concentrate on the print, then I lapse into cursive. Yet, my printing is more legible.

Hi Praxim,

 

Well, we're all different, aren't we?

 

For me,... personally,... I find cursive is quicker and requires less physical effort than printing does, but that cursive requires more mental concentration to make sure all those loops, lines and dashes connect properly... are proportionately harmonious... and do not overlap or intersect with one another in the wrong way.

 

That is why,... for me... printing requires much less concentration. I also think this bears out in the way the two forms are taught... cursive... requiring both more advanced motor skills and cognitive ability; is taught secondarily... as we are all weened on printing first.

 

That said, it is ironic that cursive is quicker, but I attribute that to the physical fact that the pen doesn't have to be continually lifted off the paper and repositioned for every single letter as it does for printing.

 

But if this still does not make any sense to you; then please attribute it to what my Hispanic friends often attribute to me... mi vida loca. (This expression would probably make even more sense to you if we had ever played golf together).

 

 

- Anthony

 

 

EDITED to (hopefully) clarify text.

Edited November 30, 2017 by ParkerDuofold

[ParkerDuofold]

My dear friend, Please forgive my gaff! It's a trait which my teacher would remind me quite frequently when I would get a statement wrongly interpreted. He would remind me that I was spending too much time sunbathing and needed to stay in the shade, I only wish I hade taken his advice my brain has been toasted ever since! In future I will ponder over each syllable you write.

 

Yours in utter confusion!

 

Hello, my friend, Pickwick,

 

Don't give it a second thought... now that I've had a good, long nap here at work... ...I can see how what I said could be interpreted both ways.

 

 

- Anthony

[dkirchge]

I prefer cursive myself, but I wouldn't get bent out of shape if schools taught italic or just legible printing instead of cursive as long as some emphasis on the usage of handwriting remains. It's the handwriting itself that's important to me, not the style.

[TSherbs]

I prefer cursive myself, but I wouldn't get bent out of shape if schools taught italic or just legible printing instead of cursive as long as some emphasis on the usage of handwriting remains. It's the handwriting itself that's important to me, not the style.

This is how most educators who teach literacy and handwriting feel. And all schools, of course, still teach handwriting. And my school still teaches cursive, but not exclusively or even primarily. The assumption that cursive is a more intellectual or more efficacious learning tool has not been evidenced over time as the profession has become more open to research and other styles of writing and had to compete with keyboarding skills. And so cursive has had to give up its most preferred status.

Edited December 1, 2017 by TSherbs

[MISSOURI]

Has anyone touched on the subject of

ONES PERSONAL SIGNATURE?

If cursive wasn't used then could a signature be

Valid if 'printed'.

Any thoughts?