Should schools still teach cursive writing?

Poll of the Day

Page of 2
Poll of the Day » Should schools still teach cursive writing?
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/2/260be116.jpg
On a hot summer night, would you offer your throat to the wolf with the red roses?
I bet you say that to all the boys...
Fuck no
No. It's downright detrimental. They made us write in cursive from third grade up til like 10th. I still have the writing skills of a second grader because of it.
What would Bligh do?
Damn_Underscore posted...
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/2/260be116.jpg
Who the fuck writes G like that? It's supposed to look nothing like a G
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/5/52058176.jpg
[05:45:34] I bought an American L and it was like a tent
No, its baseline utility has been replaced by technology and there are better ways to develop the same skills it reinforces.
And with that... pow! I'm gone!
I think there's a reasonable limit to what schools should teach and we need to be smart about it.

Computer/tech literacy should likely be taught, my understanding is a lot of that has been cut.

Cursive can be thrown in the fucking dumpster of history. Might as well teach Latin.
http://i.imgur.com/1XbPahR.png
Cursive became obsolete the moment we invented the ball-point pen. If you're not writing with an inkwell, it doesn't really serve a purpose.

The immense amount of time we used to spend teaching it could be repurposed to so many other, better things. It won't be, because the modern education is flaming horseshit, but it's still better off gone.



Blightzkrieg posted...
Might as well teach Latin.

Latin would actually have more utility, for multiple reasons (etymology. medicine, historiography, etc).
"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family
Who are the ten psychos that voted yes
As a teacher, I say fuck no and Ive always refused to teach it.
About the only thing I retained from cursive was how to write my signature. And even that has been relegated to two scribbled lines on a paper after all these years.
My bookshelf: https://www.goodreads.com/review/list/152760030
Comics: https://leagueofcomicgeeks.com/profile/dikitain
If you can't read cursive how are you supposed to be able to get giant novelty publisher's clearing house cheques?
"Salt cures Everything!"
My YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/Nirakolov/videos
ParanoidObsessive posted...
Latin would actually have more utility, for multiple reasons (etymology. medicine, historiography, etc).
PO is right. We should teach them cuneiform instead.
http://i.imgur.com/tsQUpxC.jpg Thanks, Nade Duck!
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[|||||||||||||]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
Pretty much the only use cursive writing has these days is for signing things (which is slowly dying out and has never really been as secure as people like to think it is) and for transcribing historical documents written in cursive (which is pretty niche and OCR is getting to a point where you only really need a person to double-check the output).

Well, that and letting boomers look down on "the youth," but nobody cares about that.
This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.
Damn_Underscore posted...
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/2/260be116.jpg

Excuse my snobbishness, but what is this chart lol

The real cursive alphabet:
https://i.imgur.com/1A13bII.jpg

Anyways, given the few practical uses of it, I don't think it should be required; though I do think it should be kept as an elective or something like that and not eliminated completely.
Music: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLv4cNOBY2eCInbxg6B-KRks6vKMfmFvtp
Genshin Showcase: https://enka.network/u/608173646/
The truth is there is more than one way way to write in cursive. I usually use print capital letters. The 2 as a capital Q is just dumb tbh
On a hot summer night, would you offer your throat to the wolf with the red roses?
I bet you say that to all the boys...
I've heard it's good for young children's brain development in some way. Don't remember exactly why
Or if it's just bs which it probably is
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/d/da35b94c.jpg
OhhhJa posted...
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/d/da35b94c.jpg

I feel like "activates or engages different parts of the brain" is something that could be said about a lot of things. Like how much of that is actually missing from a normal curriculum that excludes cursive vs. one that includes it? Like the way most of those are worded, you could probably say the same thing about texting or posting on GameFAQs.
My bookshelf: https://www.goodreads.com/review/list/152760030
Comics: https://leagueofcomicgeeks.com/profile/dikitain
Honestly? It's a waste of time and computers are the reason why.

I do know cursive, but I never ever use it. If for no other reason than most people these days can't read it.

The point of cursive was to increase the speed of writing. But typing is faster, more legible and easier to edit than cursive.

In the few situations where you need to write by hand, everyone would rather you just print.
Dikitain posted...
I feel like "activates or engages different parts of the brain" is something that could be said about a lot of things. Like how much of that is actually missing from a normal curriculum that excludes cursive vs. one that includes it? Like the way most of those are worded, you could probably say the same thing about texting or posting on GameFAQs.
Sure, but I think the point is that teaching very young children to write in cursive is good for development of fine motor skills. Like sure, there are lots of things that we learn that aren't necessary but still taught in school. Hell, you could make the argument that writing in general probably won't be necessary in a decade
How the actual fuck is yes winning
Cursive should be the default way to write. Writing in print looks ridiculous.
It wasnt a lie, it was ineptitude with insufficient cover. ~ Donald Draper
OhhhJa posted...
Sure, but I think the point is that teaching very young children to write in cursive is good for development of fine motor skills. Like sure, there are lots of things that we learn that aren't necessary but still taught in school. Hell, you could make the argument that writing in general probably won't be necessary in a decade

There are many activities that can help children develop their fine motor skills, including:

  • https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/5/5da0d3ab.jpg Puzzles: Selecting and placing puzzle pieces activates the small muscles in a child's hands and wrists, and improves hand-eye coordination.
  • https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/4/48d9281a.png Coloring and painting: The actions and grip involved in coloring can help develop the muscles in a child's fingers, hands, and wrists. This can lead to better handwriting.
  • https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/a/a91d543d.jpg Cutting with scissors: The opening and closing motion of cutting with scissors helps develop fine motor skills.
  • https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/8/87ee012d.jpg Playdough: Rolling, shaping, and molding playdough with their hands can help children develop their fine motor skills, creativity, and imagination.
  • https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/0/044e4d39.jpg Building blocks: Engaging with building blocks at the same time uses both the hands and eyes, which helps develop hand-eye coordination.
From Google AI, obviously.

I would argue all of these are way more enjoyable to a kid then learning cursive.
My bookshelf: https://www.goodreads.com/review/list/152760030
Comics: https://leagueofcomicgeeks.com/profile/dikitain
MICHALECOLE posted...
How the actual fuck is yes winning
Were getting brigades by boomers
http://i.imgur.com/1XbPahR.png
OhhhJa posted...
Sure, but I think the point is that teaching very young children to write in cursive is good for development of fine motor skills. Like sure, there are lots of things that we learn that aren't necessary but still taught in school. Hell, you could make the argument that writing in general probably won't be necessary in a decade

I question how much of that development isn't offered by teaching them to print. Cursive forces them to revisit writing and figure out how to fit a new technique/style in on top of what they already know, which I'm guessing is where the whole "different parts of the brain" thing comes from, but printing still calls for a comparable amount of fine motor skills, especially if you try to do it quickly.
This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.
Dikitain posted...
There are many activities that can help children develop their fine motor skills, including:

* https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/5/5da0d3ab.jpg Puzzles: Selecting and placing puzzle pieces activates the small muscles in a child's hands and wrists, and improves hand-eye coordination.
* https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/4/48d9281a.png Coloring and painting: The actions and grip involved in coloring can help develop the muscles in a child's fingers, hands, and wrists. This can lead to better handwriting.
* https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/a/a91d543d.jpg Cutting with scissors: The opening and closing motion of cutting with scissors helps develop fine motor skills.
* https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/8/87ee012d.jpg Playdough: Rolling, shaping, and molding playdough with their hands can help children develop their fine motor skills, creativity, and imagination.
* https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/0/044e4d39.jpg Building blocks: Engaging with building blocks at the same time uses both the hands and eyes, which helps develop hand-eye coordination.
From Google AI, obviously.

I would argue all of these are way more enjoyable to a kid then learning cursive.
None of this negates cursive writing as being beneficial. In fact, an argument could be made we should write in cursive instead of manuscript since it appears to be more beneficial. Sure lots of things develop fine motor skills. My 4 year old goes to Montessori and they teach cursive because of the prior pros mentioned

I believe cursive is definitely better for motor skills as a child than building blocks or playdough. It takes a lot more skill to write in cursive for a small child than it does to make things with play dough or play with building blocks lol. It takes way more precision
Dikitain posted...
About the only thing I retained from cursive was how to write my signature. And even that has been relegated to two scribbled lines on a paper after all these years.

And even that is becoming less and less necessary, considering the push towards digital signatures, stuff like thumb and retina printing, and the fact that you've always been able to just sign with an X anyway.



GanonsSpirit posted...
PO is right. We should teach them cuneiform instead.

I can definitely get behind that. If nothing else, it would give me a chance to dust off my own childhood writing skills again.



OhhhJa posted...
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/d/da35b94c.jpg

I'd be curious to know where that came from. It has the vague whiff of the sort of pseudoscience-style writing you tend to get from quacks and New Age medicine, where it sounds just science-y enough to fool laypeople but which is almost entirely full of shit.

It also seems to make a lot of very broad claims that could generalize to almost anything, which in turn kind of makes them effectively meaningless. ie, there are plenty of things we could teach in its place that would also engage other neurological pathways, improve motor and memory skills, and so on.

Hell, we could teach solving Rubik's Cubes and it would fulfill most of the claims in that post, and would take less time besides.
"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family
OhhhJa posted...
None of this negates cursive writing as being beneficial. In fact, an argument could be made we should write in cursive instead of manuscript since it appears to be more beneficial. Sure lots of things develop fine motor skills. My 4 year old goes to Montessori and they teach cursive because of the prior pros mentioned

I believe cursive is definitely better for motor skills as a child than building blocks or playdough. It takes a lot more skill to write in cursive for a small child than it does to make things with play dough or play with building blocks lol. It takes way more precision

Except unless you declare that all computer systems be required to primarily be cursive, the point is moot and you're training kids to write on chalk tablets without getting dust on themselves.
Train people for how the world is, rather than what you want.
I had to learn it despite it not meaning much back in the late 90s, so the kids today should have to suffer through it too!
Muscles
Chicago Bears | Chicago Blackhawks | Chicago Bulls | Chicago Cubs | NIU Huskies
shadowsword87 posted...
Except unless you declare that all computer systems be required to primarily be cursive, the point is moot and you're training kids to write on chalk tablets without getting dust on themselves.
Train people for how the world is, rather than what you want.
We're talking about 4 year olds not high schoolers lol. We're developing motor skills not teaching them macroeconomics
OhhhJa posted...
We're talking about 4 year olds not high schoolers lol. We're developing motor skills not teaching them macroeconomics

Why would anybody be teaching it to 4 year olds? Even among those who support it, Ive never seen it taught younger than 6.
Glob posted...
Why would anybody be teaching it to 4 year olds? Even among those who support it, Ive never seen it taught younger than 6.
My daughter goes to a good preschool. And she going to go to a good private school. Not risking her getting shot in our abomination of a public school system
Her would be school district is literally where a mass shooting just occured like a week ago

But they happen everywhere now. Country is in the toilet
OhhhJa posted...
We're talking about 4 year olds not high schoolers lol. We're developing motor skills not teaching them macroeconomics
Do you think kids learn cursive at 4? Thats what you think?
MICHALECOLE posted...
Do you think kids learn cursive at 4? Thats what you think?
Mine does
OhhhJa posted...
Mine does
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/2/2646cb8d.jpg
OhhhJa posted...
My daughter goes to a good preschool. And she going to go to a good private school. Not risking her getting shot in our abomination of a public school system

I work in one of the most expensive schools in the country. Still never seen anybody argue for teaching it that young. Thats madness and more likely to hinder their writing.
OhhhJa posted...
"In Montessori, it's typically taught starting around three years old. Children are capable of writing cursive before they are capable of writing in print and one of the reasons we believe it's being replaced in public schools is because the window of opportunity for children to learn is not as critical."

Ignorance on your part. It's ok. We all have shortcomings. Weird how mad people get about having to learn cursive because they were too dumb to learn something so simple

Youre not exactly coming across as bright with that comment.

Also, Montessori schools are not without their drawbacks. To be honest, fully committing to something like that is very rarely the right
approach. Its normally better to take elements of what they do, which would be present in any decently funded school anyway.
Ok, nuanced actual answer here instead of my joke answer

Writing cursive is good for "most" schools. This is in the context of a school where only English is being spoken/read. Learning a second+ language greatly improves the ability of students to think abstractly about things and for low-brain lazy duders cursive is basically a second language. It's basically an expansion pack to English to help gateway people into learning additional languages and writing systems.

In schools where you are already expected to learn multiple languages or where the class is likely to speak multiple languages, cursive is not needed.
"Salt cures Everything!"
My YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/Nirakolov/videos
I say no. If they must, though, I say make it optional in later grades
"Life's a game. It's meant to be played."
"Amateurs built the Ark. Professionals built the Titanic."
Glob posted...
Also, Montessori schools are not without their drawbacks. To be honest, fully committing to something like that is very rarely the right approach. Its normally better to take elements of what they do, which would be present in any decently funded school anyway.

The main problem with Montessori Schools is that they usually confuse the method with the message. Or to put it another way, people assume the effectiveness of their system is because of what they teach, when it's actually far more likely because of how they teach.

If you taught a public school curriculum but gave each individual student significant teacher support and allowed them to study at their own pace rather than being carried along by the group, most students would excel. That's not really feasible when you're cramming 30+ kids into a single class, but almost any private school system with smaller classes can produce comparably positive results. Though supplementary tutoring can definitely help offset that.

Even direct homeschooling is viable if the parent doing the teaching is actually competent, though the downside there is that you start to run up against less effective social development.

What you're teaching matters less than how you're teaching it, and how much support you've giving your students. The teacher who just gives students busywork out of the textbook and barely teaches is obviously going to get worse results than the teacher who manages to turn learning into a game and actually engages their students in the process (I had both types of teacher as a kid, and I know which ones I learned more from).
"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family
maybe they can teach it in art class
In the long run we are all dead
ParanoidObsessive posted...
The main problem with Montessori Schools is that they usually confuse the method with the message. Or to put it another way, people assume the effectiveness of their system is because of what they teach, when it's actually far more likely because of how they teach.

If you taught a public school curriculum but gave each individual student significant teacher support and allowed them to study at their own pace rather than being carried along by the group, most students would excel. That's not really feasible when you're cramming 30+ kids into a single class, but almost any private school system with smaller classes can produce comparably positive results. Though supplementary tutoring can definitely help offset that.

Even direct homeschooling is viable if the parent doing the teaching is actually competent, though the downside there is that you start to run up against less effective social development.

What you're teaching matters less than how you're teaching it, and how much support you've giving your students. The teacher who just gives students busywork out of the textbook and barely teaches is obviously going to get worse results than the teacher who manages to turn learning into a game and actually engages their students in the process (I had both types of teacher as a kid, and I know which ones I learned more from).

Agreed. At my school we have an average class size of 10 and we have at least 2 teachers in each class. We, unsurprisingly, are able to deliver great results.
No. As has already been said, there's really very little use for it. For the handwriting that still goes on, normal print suffices.
"Shhh! Ben, don't ruin the ending!" --Adrian Ripburger, Full Throttle
Glob posted...
Youre not exactly coming across as bright with that comment.

Also, Montessori schools are not without their drawbacks. To be honest, fully committing to something like that is very rarely the right
approach. Its normally better to take elements of what they do, which would be present in any decently funded school anyway.
Lol so many assumptions. We are not committed to Montessori. We were simply choosing it for her early years over other preschools/daycare and I fully belive it was the right choice because she is far ahead of most children her age. But this is her last year and we're moving on to other options that we've been considering. Plus, it's extremely expensive. I am absolutely NOT doing public schooling in the US though and I pity anyone who thinks it's good enough for their child or who lacks the funds to explore other alternatives

Plus, I'd say public schools are dangerous at this point
OhhhJa posted...
Lol so many assumptions. We are not committed to Montessori. We were simply choosing it for her early years over other preschools/daycare and I fully belive it was the right choice because she is far ahead of most children her age. But this is her last year and we're moving on to other options that we've been considering. Plus, it's extremely expensive. I am absolutely NOT doing public schooling in the US though and I pity anyone who thinks it's good enough for their child or who lacks the funds to explore other alternatives

Plus, I'd say public schools are dangerous at this point

I didnt make any assumptions. I just gave some commentary on Montessori. You, however, do seem to be assuming that Im talking exclusively about schools in the US, or advocating for the US school system, which is strange.

Ive been very clear that I work in a fee paying school. It also costs more than any of the Montessori ones in this country. However, just to be clear, this country isnt the US.
My sons kindergarten class has 25 kids to 1 teacher. But its also one of the best public elementary schools in the greater sacramento area.
MaddenDude_ posted...
My sons kindergarten class has 25 kids to 1 teacher. But its also one of the best public elementary schools in the greater sacramento area.

If its a public school and has 25 to a class, doesnt that already put it in a privileged position compared to other public schools?
Glob posted...
I didnt make any assumptions. I just gave some commentary on Montessori. You, however, do seem to be assuming that Im talking exclusively about schools in the US, or advocating for the US school system, which is strange.

Ive been very clear that I work in a fee paying school. It also costs more than any of the Montessori ones in this country. However, just to be clear, this country isnt the US.
I wasn't accusing YOU of advocating for public school. But, overall, people do seem to be very critical/judgmental of people choosing private/alternative schooling over public schools and I think it's because they went through the public school system and see it as some kind of insult to them or believe you think you're superior to them.

I see lots of people critiquing my choices, but I bet if I said I was sending my child to public school they'd be silent because it wouldn't trigger their inferiority complex

Do Montessori schools and other schooling options have their issues? Absolutely. I'd still 100% take it over public schools
Poll of the Day » Should schools still teach cursive writing?
Page of 2