This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Indiana curses the cursive: No more cursive writing in curriculum
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
xaratherus
Recently, the Board of Education in my birth-state of Indiana announced that the teaching of cursive handwriting will no longer be required in the state school curriculum. Instead, typing and keyboard use will replace cursive handwriting as an educational requirement.
Schools are not banned from teaching cursive writing, but it's no longer a required part of the system's curriculum.This also is not any sort of hamper toward legal signatures; after a bit of research I found that a legal signature can technically be a complete nonsense symbol, as long as it can be consistently attributed to a particular individual.
Here's
one brief sample article on the topic.
Is this a good idea, given the shift toward electronic communication in a modern-day world? Or is this just another sign of the decline of educational standards in the United States?
As usual, I'll hold my opinions for a bit until others chime in.
Post by
Jubilee
I find cursive pointless. I can print just as fast as I can write cursive and it's easier to read. I haven't written in cursive at all since graduating high school, and I doubt I ever will again.
Post by
pezz
I spent third grade in South Africa, where they taught some weird cursive-printing hybrid. My handwriting is terrible because of it but the fact that I didn't know cursive never really negatively impacted my life. I never had any reason to know cursive, and that was back in the late 90's.
As I understand it, cursive is more some sort of formal writing, isn't it? When does anyone need to write formally anymore? The only things I write by hand anymore are notes and in-class exams, but college professors don't exactly mark you down for penmanship. As long as it's legible they take it.
Post by
Azazel
I think it's a good idea, seeing as we are internet-ifying the rest of the world more and more. Besides, I myself, and probably many more kids in Indiana, couldn't read cursive. It was something my parents were taught. The letters we use now are also the ones used on computers, making it a necessity(spelling?) to be able to read them. I think it's a nice change.
Post by
Atik
I remember being taught cursive writting.
I don't know... it's... wierd. To think about something I spent so much time learning and practicing. The only thing I even know how to write in it now is my signature.
I mean, after learning it? We never had to write anything in cursive afterwards besides our signature. So why bother remembering anything else?
But still, it is wierd to think about. Spending all that time on something so worthless. I mean, nearly everything else in school leads to something else. Even if the only time it will come up again is later in school, it is still coming up again.
Just... odd...
Post by
gnomerdon
I wouldn't say it is a good idea. But I wouldn't say it's a bad idea. We are shifting towards a electronic communication in a modern-day world. I would treat cursive as a form of art. It's certainly not a decline of educational standards because people rarely use it anymore. And anything in cursive writing always has to be deciphered because everyone has their own unique style. The style is very loose.
Since it's "no longer required," at least it can still be taught if teachers feel compelled to teach it.
If I was a teacher, I would still encourage teaching cursive handwriting. I had struggles learning it, but the art is beautiful. In fact, it's the only useful thing that I appreciate.
Post by
xaratherus
Interesting. Not quite the responses I expected.
My penmanship is atrocious, but I can't imagine
not
being able to write in cursive.
Overall I dislike the change. I feel that it does reflect a lowering of educational standards - not because of the topic, but because it feels like an unnecessary removal. It feels like another step in the direction of, "Let's not unduly challenge our poor children."
Why are
both
not required? They were in my school system, and it didn't seem like a massive imposition. We were required to take a typing/keyboarding course for a semester in my eighth grade year and achieve a speed of at least 40 WPM (which, according to Wikipedia, is the "moderate" average speed) in order to pass.
Post by
gamerunknown
They should just teach children the origin of the font names "serif" and "sans serif", then if the kids wanna get fancy, give them optional calligraphy classes.
Post by
gnomerdon
chinese caligraphy. =D
Post by
xaratherus
We studied calligraphy in one of my elementary school art classes. There's a rather drastic difference between the calligraphy and cursive.
For instance, cursive was meant as a way to speed up handwriting; the more flowing style allowed people to write without lifting their pens as frequently.
Calligraphy, on the other hand, was meant as a method of artistic expression; calligraphy was never meant to speed up handwriting (if anything, it slows it down drastically, as in standard English calligraphy you are only supposed to ever "pull" your pen strokes; if you would have to "push" the stroke to continue it you are supposed to lift your pen and then continue drawing the letter from the opposite direction).
Post by
Sweetscot
I think it makes more sense to teach typing and then to let cursive be something a person can learn on their own. Like xath I can't imagine not being able to write cursive, but at the same time I can see where other subjects could be a better use of student time.
For all the ones that think cursive is completely useless though...did you know that there are people who have jobs that involve JUST writing in cursive? There are :) It's not a totally useless skill...but I can certainly see how it should maybe take a backseat to other subjects below college level.
Post by
238331
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
xlanadenx
I love writing in cursive. I don't think just because it's old and dying that it should cease to be taught in schools. Maybe it's just because I like it that I'm a bit biased. But I don't see any other reason to teach it other than for it to not be forgotten. :(
Not everyone uses art but it's still taught in schools.
^That's my weak argument for keeping cursive in schools :(
Post by
Jubilee
We studied calligraphy in one of my elementary school art classes. There's a rather drastic difference between the calligraphy and cursive.
For instance, cursive was meant as a way to speed up handwriting; the more flowing style allowed people to write without lifting their pens as frequently.
Calligraphy, on the other hand, was meant as a method of artistic expression; calligraphy was never meant to speed up handwriting (if anything, it slows it down drastically, as in standard English calligraphy you are only supposed to ever "pull" your pen strokes; if you would have to "push" the stroke to continue it you are supposed to lift your pen and then continue drawing the letter from the opposite direction).
If you want to teach speed in the classroom, teach shorthand. I think that's a much more practical than cursive. I learned shorthand many years ago, and I still use a pseudo-shorthand to this day.
Post by
xaratherus
If you want to teach speed in the classroom, teach shorthand. I think that's a much more practical than cursive. I learned shorthand many years ago, and I still use a pseudo-shorthand to this day.
I would probably be okay with that. I've never had the chance to learn shorthand but have always wanted to do so.
To repeat, and possibly clarify my complaint: It's not really the particular topic being removed as part of the curriculum, it's the seeming idea that it's being removed because students can't possibly learn both cursive writing
and
keyboarding proficiently - which is what I see as bupkis.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
I haven't used cursive, other than to sign something, since they taught it to me in elementary school. I think that it's a less-legible version of a skill we already have in writing in non-cursive, and as the use of things like snail mail (especially snail mail that's hand written) and even fax machines decline, I can't imagine a reason to teach it. I don't consider it a decline in educational standards- I consider it an evolution.
Every time we come out with a new technology, a new breakthrough, a new format in which we communicate, we're adding something new to the curriculum. 30 years ago, children didn't have to know how to use a computer, use the internet, do online research, etc. They didn't need to be proficient with Microsoft Office to go to college. They didn't need to know how to correctly use all the functions of a graphing calculator, what the correct professional format was when composing an e-mail, or how to cite internet resources. Countries have had their borders re-drawn, recent wars have to be included in the study of history and politics, new scientific breakthroughs change the textbooks. We're constantly re-working our educational system to try and make sure that the information presented was both accurate and useful.
The slide rule used to be standard in formal education- how would you ever get into college without knowing how to use it? How would you do complex math equations. Then they came out with calculators. And gradually, the slide rule phased out. Now, no one I know under thegae of 50 can use one. I wouldn't call that lowering the standards- I'd call it adjusting to the technology level and the demands of society. I consider this the same thing.
EDIT: Art, and music, are things that some people do go on and major in, and form the basis of careers like industrial and graphic design, working in a recording studio, or actually being a musician or an artist. What career currently uses cursive, other than being a teacher who teaches it to children?
Post by
Patty
I hated having to use cursive (if that was what it was called), simply because I specifically was told I was wrong writing in non-cursive, even when everything I had written was completely correct in a technical sense, when there were students who could hardly spell and wrote in cursive who received less negative feedback. So what, I hated joining my letters, I was still writing quickly and my writing skills were a lot stronger than many others in my classes. I support the teaching of cursive to be discontinued, but are learning IT skills going to completely replace learning to write properly? That would be absurd.
Post by
gamerunknown
I'm just biased against cursive writing since it made my writing noticably slower and a hell of a lot more difficult to read (dyspraxic handwriting is generally awful). Not to mention that I wasn't permitted to use a pen until about year 6 and then it was a crappy Berol handwriting pen that couldn't be used in conjunction with a ruler. I was relieved to learn that it wasn't enforced in year 10.
That said, my mother does American cursive where capital letters are joined, which isn't the case in English cursive, which is mainly just adding pointless bridges between letters.
Post by
Patty
I'm just biased against cursive writing since it made my writing noticably slower and a hell of a lot more difficult to read (dyspraxic handwriting is generally awful). Not to mention that I wasn't permitted to use a pen until about year 6 and then it was a crappy Berol handwriting pen that couldn't be used in conjunction with a ruler. I was relieved to learn that it wasn't enforced in year 10.
That said, my mother does American cursive where capital letters are joined, which isn't the case in English cursive, which is mainly just adding pointless bridges between letters.
Ugh, I know! Cursive took
so long
to write with. I'm so glad that as soon as I got into secondary school, they didn't give a #$%^ how you were writing, as long as it was legible and what you were writing was correct.
Post by
296147
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.