Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Education

Why Johnny Can't Handwrite 1356

theodp writes "Handwriting experts fear that the wild popularity of e-mail and IM, particularly among kids, could erase cursive within a few decades. With 90 percent of Americans between the ages of 5 and 17 using computers, it's not uncommon for kids to type 20-30 WPM by the time they leave elementary school. Keyboards, joysticks and cell-phone touch pads have ruined kids' ability to hold a pencil properly, let alone write legibly, says the former president of the International Association of Master Penmen, Engrossers and Teachers of Handwriting."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Why Johnny Can't Handwrite

Comments Filter:
  • Thumbs (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Phroggy ( 441 ) <slashdot3.phroggy@com> on Monday June 09, 2003 @04:59PM (#6154505) Homepage
    I heard something on the BBC about IM on mobile phones becoming so popular in the UK that the next generation will be using their thumbs to do things we would use our index finger for, like ringing a doorbell. I already don't write in cursive, although I did learn in school and could probably manage if I really wanted to try.

    If you want kids to be able to write by hand, you just have to force them to do it in school. If you let them type everything, they will. Of course, this isn't likely to happen on a wide scale; educators don't get paid enough to care.
  • by Binestar ( 28861 ) * on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:02PM (#6154550) Homepage
    It takes much longer than typing (I can type 70WPM, but I bet I can't write in cursive at even 15-20 WPM.) For me it's about what is more efficient. With typing I can at least know that if I hand someone a typed note they will understand it, while if I hand them a hasitly written postit I have to sit there and make sure they can understand what I wrote.

    (My handwriting was terrible even before I started working on computers...)
  • by SPaReK ( 320677 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:02PM (#6154553)
    For communication purposes isn't it better if everyone can read and understand what you are saying. If a typed letter does that, then all the better.

    But as far as actually writing your own notes, one should still be able to write on paper and be able to understand their own handwriting. I don't see the art of physically writing going away anytime soon.
  • by NotAnotherReboot ( 262125 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:02PM (#6154557)
    There doesn't really seem to be a practical use for cursive. I learned it in elementary school, and can still read it, but remembering how some of the capital letters are written is beyond me.

    It seems more difficult to read handwritten papers that are written with cursive. I guess I never really saw a speed advantage in cursive, and add the fact that I can type much faster on the keyboard than I can write by hand, this hardly seems like a surprise.

    I can't really say I feel my education would have been compromised if cursive had been left out.
  • to avoid the "not even able to hold a pencil", incorporate chopstick usage into the kid's diet.

    If you're unfamiliar with chopsticks, one of the two sticks is held essentially the same as a pencil. Getting decent with chopsticks uses some of the same dexerity skills, and if kid's aren't writing much on paper, at least it'll keep them from being completely atrophied in this regard.

    just a thought...

    .
  • by shayborg ( 650364 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:03PM (#6154591)
    Last I checked, almost every elementary school, at least in the US, requires handwriting classes, and every school all the way up to university requires at least some handwritten homework or exams. It's not hard to learn cursive, and even harder to forget it.

    That said, cursive looks nice and all, but it's a lot more difficult to read it than it is to read plain print. I still remember my cursive (for thank you notes and letters to grandparents, etc.) but when writing anything by hand I just use print -- and of course it's not as if I never need to write anything. A sticky note on my alarm clock is much more useful than a sticky note on my computer desktop. Either way, I don't think there's going to be a mass exodus away from use of the pencil anytime soon.

    -- shayborg
  • by Alex Thorpe ( 575736 ) <alphax@@@mac...com> on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:04PM (#6154600) Homepage
    I'm 32 now, but I was required to turn in all assignments in the 4th grade in cursive. As soon as 4th grade was over, I stopped, as it took me 3-4 times longer to write in cursive than in plain text. My signature is all that remains, and I'd have to think long and hard about how to write in script using letters that aren't in my name.

    It was two more years before we got the TI 99/4A at home, so they can't blame the computer for me.

  • So? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by yamla ( 136560 ) <chris@@@hypocrite...org> on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:05PM (#6154614)
    Okay, so kids are soon not going to be able to write cursive. So what? Very few kids these days know how to use a calligraphy pen properly, yet these were mandatory while I was in grade school (1978 on, in England). And you know what, I don't care. While I can still write using my calligraphy pen (and that means using it properly, writing in a typeface suited to it), I don't. It is, for me, a dead art. There's no call for it, not for me in my day-to-day life. Same, I suspect, with cursive writing.

    So yeah, maybe it will die out. But the question really is should we care?
  • by Riachu_11 ( 600557 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:05PM (#6154621)
    If writing is actually not being used enough so that kids can't write, why do we need it? And cursive in the first place isn't that great of an idea. Go read someone else's printed writing. Now go try to read their cursive. Hard, isn't it? It seems to me that if cursive is needed, it will still be learned, and if it isn't needed, you'll just forget it anyway. I actually don't use cursive anymore except for my signature. I don't need it, and nobody else can read it anyway.
  • by EvilSporkMan ( 648878 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:06PM (#6154641)
    Particularly in 6th grade, cursive was heralded as "the Script of God" (I'm paraphrashing). All assignments in sixth grade had to be turned in in cursive to "prepare" us for junior high and high school, where, supposedly, teachers' expectations were similar. Wa-bam, we hit junior high, and I haven't used cursive since. Incidentally, I now take the very laptop I'm writing this on to school as a faster, neater method of taking notes. (high school, not college)
  • by Theaetetus ( 590071 ) <theaetetus@slashdot.gmail@com> on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:06PM (#6154642) Homepage Journal
    I went to a private school for the first few years of my education, where (even in the early 80's) they had a room full of computers on which we learned typing and programming.

    When I entered the public school ranks at grade 3, I was already behind in handwriting, and was never able to catch up. I can type at a sustained 90+WPM now with no errors, while I can only write by hand at something around 15-20 WPM - much slower than I can think. Additionally, since I pretty much had to teach myself to use a pencil, I apparently use it in a bad way and get painful hand cramps after an hour of writing.

    As more and more kids are learning to type and word process earlier (and as more schools insist on typed reports and/or have computers in the classroom) it seems quite apparent that handwriting skills will decline.

    So, what's the problem with this? I can still write well enough to take notes for my own purposes, and if I'm writing something for someone else, I'm going to type it up (and email it, or even just write up a memo). I don't necessarily see the decline of handwriting as a horrible tragedy, simply a shift to new methods - consider, calligraphy died out years ago (except among artists) and no one shed a tear.

    -T

  • What Cursive? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by man_ls ( 248470 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:08PM (#6154687)
    The last time I used cursive was taking the SATs. I had to copy the honor pledge in cursive and sign it.

    I ended up just printing it and going back and connecting the letters randomly because it was so much faster and looked plausable enough anyways -- better than taking the time to try and write proper cursive.

    Even my signature is *barely* cursive...only about half of the letters are real "cursive" letters, and maybe 2-3 of the connections are done properly. And I don't even have a very long name...it's 8 letters total in my signature, first AND last names.
  • Re:absurd (Score:3, Interesting)

    by garcia ( 6573 ) * on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:08PM (#6154689)
    sure, we will need to jot things down, does that mean that I have to write it in cursive? I haven't used cursive since the teachers stopped requiring it in 4th or 5th grade.

    When I take notes it's in my cross of scribbling and printing. It works for ME. It's not something that anyone else can really decipher.
  • Perspective. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Azathoth!EDC ( 222280 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:12PM (#6154775)
    With the advent of mechanical/disposable pens, the skill required to use quills and ink wells is not tought in handwriting class anymore.

    Point being, pens are tools to convey our thoughts and feelings. They are also being replaced by the personal computer.
  • by chia_monkey ( 593501 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:13PM (#6154786) Journal
    It would definitely be a shame for people to miss out on a lot of history. A lot of works (written in English nonetheless) were written in cursive and our kids won't have any idea what they're reading. It will all be Greek to them. Granted I don't write in cursive much either, unless I'm writing a nice letter to someone, but the inability to read it would be quite detrimental.
  • Not critical (Score:3, Interesting)

    by autechre ( 121980 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:15PM (#6154822) Homepage
    I'm 25, and I stopped using cursive back in high school. Printing is so much neater, and it can be just as personalized as cursive.

    Obviously, some sort of writing-by-hand is still a necessary skill. If you're trying to take notes in class or a presentation which include diagrams, tables, complex equations, etc., I haven't found a computer interface that can match a pen and paper for speed and expressiveness. And post-it notes will always be around (how many times have you seen one stuck to a computer screen?). The teacher's point about handwritten letters being much more meaningful is a good one.

    But bad handwriting isn't some new problem that has been introduced by widespread computer use. Worsened, perhaps, but I have ancient joke collection books that have the one about a doctor's prescription note being used for its intended purpose, then as a train pass for a year, and finally played on the violin.

    There are plenty of people that just weren't going to have good handwriting anyway, and then there are people like my friend's father, who labels floppies using careful Medieval calligraphy (inkwell and all, IIRC). It will continue to be like that. The sort of people who send handwritten letters because they mean more will continue to do so.

    Writing should and doubtless will still be taught, but I don't think it's a problem if it's slightly de-emphasized in favor of keyboarding skills, which are more relevant. When I was in elementary school, no one was typing their papers, but now almost everyone is (in this part of the U.S., anyway). The bulk of communications will probably be done via a keyboard (or some newer device) rather than handwriting. And not without reason; some of the kids' quotes in that article are dead on. Rough drafts in pencil (and rewriting twice in ink) royally sucked.

  • Re:Who cares? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by rgm3 ( 530335 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:15PM (#6154827) Homepage
    Googling for 'cursive Q' turns up:
    http://www.peterson-handwriting.com/animCrsvCap/Q% 20crsvcapAn.html [peterson-handwriting.com]

    For the billy madison person, capital Z is:
    http://www.peterson-handwriting.com/animCrsvCap/Z% 20crsvcapAn.html [peterson-handwriting.com]
  • Printing (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Dixie_Flatline ( 5077 ) <vincent...jan...goh@@@gmail...com> on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:16PM (#6154846) Homepage
    As long as kids can PRINT the letters, who cares if they can write cursive or not?

    I was always told that writing cursive is faster than printing, which I now hear has been pretty much disproven. Most people will do a form of cursive-ish writing when printing something quickly, and it's faster because they aren't tied down by a bunch of meaningless codified rules that tell them what's fastest for them to write.

    Cursive is a moronic system. I've always hated it. The sooner it's abolished from everything except the hobbiest's view, the better.
  • by TomatoMan ( 93630 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:17PM (#6154857) Homepage Journal
    And I'm not even talking about cursive. I mean ordinary printing. I type virtually everything, and have for about 15 years now - and shortly after I learned Palm Graffiti for my III in '98 or so, I found I started making my printed letters like Palm graffiti - and now, I can really barely read my own writing. Writing legibly takes TREMENDOUS effort, and it's so gawdawfully slow.

    I look back at high school papers I wrote by hand, and I can barely believe how far I've fallen in 20 years. Handwriting is a long-lost art, for me.
  • Uniquely American?? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by d_lesage ( 199542 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:17PM (#6154861) Homepage
    [...] computers are speeding the demise of a uniquely American form of expression [...]

    Begging your pardon ? Cursive writing is "Uniquely American" ??
  • by Realistic_Dragon ( 655151 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:21PM (#6154926) Homepage
    The protypes of these kids are people like me. I got my first computer when I was ~6, could easily touch type before I left primary school, and can probably beat 50 WPM easily, even in C - let alone English. (Not including debugging time, regrettably.)

    On the other hand I can write very fast and pretty accuratly as well. It takes me under 10 minutes to fill a side of A4 (~500 words or so) with words that make sense - a skill I _had_ to develop for exams. One of my economics A level papers required about 8 sides of answers in two hours. (That seriously kills your hands folks!) I was perfectly capable of writing in cursive before leaving primary school however, spending several hours a day playing with computers didn't make me forget what I had been taught.

    If these kids can't write in cursive however, because they are too stupid to learn it or remember it, what can they possibly write that will be of any use?

    At least with the proliferation of computers kids are _reading_ and practicing reading - a far more useful thing than writing. After all, if you can learn to read you can find a book that tells you how to write.

    What shouldn't be allowed is the continuing trivialisation of computers - the idea that they are there for nothing but entertainment. There are people in this world who don't actually realise that the black box they use every day can be hacked to make it do far more interesting and fun things, to make it do what you want better or faster. Common perception of people who do hack around is that they are doing something wrong, not something right! This IMO is far more dangerous than any slip in percieved handwriting ability in children and corrected as soon as possible..
  • Why cursive is good. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by sporty ( 27564 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:21PM (#6154937) Homepage
    Cursive is good for one very good reason. You can't have a typing device everywhere you go. Cursive/script is great for writing a little faster than manuscript. Especially for writing notes in class, or in meetings. Typing while in a meeting situation can be considered rude in some places, though not all.

    It does not solve writing script TOO fast and making garbage of what should look like script.

    It doesn't solve the problem for those who write manuscript faster than script.
  • Re:Who cares? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by KludgeGrrl ( 630396 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:22PM (#6154949) Homepage
    AIM is destroying another MORE important part of writing. Grammar, sentence structure, and spelling.

    I wholeheartedly agree. What am I saying? Ayone who has read freshmen papers lately can attest that it is already having an effect!

    Moreover it might be a good thing for students to be allowed an alternative to cursive. I was forced to write exclusively in it from first grade on (I was at an experimental school), and hated it since it took me forever to form the letters, and demanded an inordinate amount of my attention. Moreover, it wasn't until I started typing papers (this was before affordable computers) that I was able to express myself quickly enought to produce intelligent essays. I was able to convince my department to allow me to type my PhD comprehensives since I warned them that anything I handwrote would be a feeble reflection of my abilities. And it was the truth.

    And don't even get me started about the utility of spellcheckers. While they have their dangers, for slight dyslexics such as myself they have been a godsend!
  • by sulli ( 195030 ) * on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:33PM (#6155122) Journal
    They claimed, back in the day, when they taught it to me in the 1970s, that it was "faster to write that way." WRONG! (I heard this sometimes when getting docked a grade for not using cursive - this was in third grade or so.)

    For me printing has always been faster - even when I write legibly (admittedly less often than not). All the curlicues and squiggles just to have your writing look like the Declaration of Independence? There's exactly zero (0) point to it.

  • by BarakMich ( 90556 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:35PM (#6155155) Journal
    Does "in-class essay" mean anything anymore?
    There's no way to use a computer on those things.

    And then the AP tests -- those HAVE to be handwritten.

    In AP US we were reading Xeroxes of past year's essays -- the ones that were harder to read were the ones in cursive, simply because of the damn loops.

    I've noticed the loss of cursive, however. In taking the SAT some months ago, when asked to copy the honor phrase ("I certify that this is my test" stuff), with the explicit order "DO NOT PRINT" in the box, the whole room broke out in a self-concious laughter, as we had to think carefully on how to write in cursive, as opposed to printing.

    And, because I hate to do it on the computer, all my MATH homework is done by hand. (equations are still icky to set up. Much nicer just to draw the damn integral)

    The upshoot of it all?

    Handwriting is a huge facet in the lives of high school students. It will stay that way.

    Do I bemoan the loss of cursive? No.
    Do I fear a loss of handwriting? No.
    Is there a problem here? No.

    Case closed.

    (and who in the world liked that D'Nealian or whatever that my grade school taught before cursive? *shudder*)
  • Re:Printing (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Cubeman ( 530448 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:38PM (#6155194)
    Cursive can be faster than handwriting, after years of practice. I can write 50-60 WPM in cursive, nine years after I first started writing everything in it.

    There's just one tiny drawback, I'm the only person who can read it. But that's a problem with your character recognition, not my writing :)

  • Unnecessary (Score:2, Interesting)

    by ctve ( 635102 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:39PM (#6155207)
    No-one needs to handwrite anymore beyond the odd note written on a cigarette packet, birthday cards or romantic notes.

    When I started work about 15 years ago, we had to give a handwritten spec to a typist who would enter it into a word processor, print it, return it and I would proof read it and then return it with corrections. She would then photocopy it and distribute it to everyone on the list.

    Making an amendment was a similar process. Now, I can change the spec myself and circulate it by email.

    I think I spent longer proofreading than it takes me to make the changes now.

  • Cool article. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by mindstrm ( 20013 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:40PM (#6155216)
    I'm 29 years old.. and my handwriting has always been of the messy type. All through school, I was the messy handwriter. Now, it wasn't that I had some dysfunction.. I mean I could write, I have superb hand eye coordination.. but anything involving drawing, I have trouble doing neatly.

    My current "handwriting" If you want to call it that, like most people, is an individual style, developed as a mix between what I can read again later, and what's most comfortable to write. It would certainly flunk me out of any penmanship class.. but most people could read it without too much difficulty, especially if I intend it to be for them.

    I never write a capital E properly.. it looks more like a backwards 3 with a little leading curl on top... my capital D has no proper slanted lines.. just curves. And so on... Many of the letters don't fall into any known official writing system, but I guarantee you would recognize them anyway.

    I guess what I'm saying is, in the end, there are two types of handwriters in our society: those who write for the sake of reading it back later, who invariably develop their own style, and those who adhere to an official writing standard.

    For instance, a while back I took it upon myself to improve my handwriting. It's going okay, it just takes lots of practice. I picked up a Spencerian Handwriting tutorial.. now Spencerian is not the Italic or Cursive or whatever we were taught in school. it's what our grandfathers and great grandfathers were taught in school. And you know what? It's NOT hard! Yes, I struggle with it, but that's due to my aforementioned difficulties with pen and paper... It's extremely logical, and it's a system.. where every letter is composed of more or less seven basic skills (curves, lines, etc). It becomes easy to remember the logical way to make any letter, and the eye can tell if it actually looks right when written. If you havent' seen it, properly written spencerian is both easy to read and very pleasing to the eye. It's also designed for a fountain pen with a spencerian nib.. but I actaully find it easier to write with a fountain pen than a ballpoint, I just like the way it actually lets me feel the texture of the paper, I think.

    So it got me thinking: From what I recall of learning to handwrite at an early age, it was boring. They didn't tell us anything about different styles, or that there was more than one way to write, or that in the future it woudln't even matter.. they just went ahead and showed us one thing. Now.. why don't we get back and take penmahship seriously? When you start teaching handwriting, pick something like spencerian. Teach them to write beautifully, not just to write. Or at least put people through a mandatory course in highschool, even just a couple days a week, on penmanship. Let them pick what style they want, but make them study it.

    And then I think, does it matter? I do 90% of my work on computers, the only writing I do is a note to myself throughout the day on a notepad, or a quick post-it to someone else. And I type around 100wpm.... so writing serves no real practical purpose, other than as a hobby, I guess.

    Now, my writing still sucks, but it's getting there.
  • by glazed ( 122100 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:41PM (#6155225)
    I cross my 7's, my Z's. I put a slash through it if it's a zero. It's generally very neat, consistently universal. It is not however perfectly suited to graph paper like his. Mine is adapted well to legal pads, which I became a fiend of in business school. He was a mechanical engineer.

    I learned cursive but abandoned it in favor of block print. Our cursie was "Daneelean??" and very suited to being a 3rd grader, but I didn't feel it was...professional.
  • by mike_c999 ( 513531 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:44PM (#6155264)
    A very good point actually.
    I never had neat handwriting, ever... But since getting a PDA (IPaq 3950), with what I thing is very good recognition software, my handwriting has improved immensely. In fact it is now legible, and still improving.

    Mike

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:47PM (#6155311)
    Mine says "ASK FOR ID" ;-)
  • by _ph1ux_ ( 216706 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:49PM (#6155335)
    I have been involved in drafting since I was a little little kid. I was given an engineering text book by my grandfather when I was young, that same book turned out to be my text book in High School drafting classes.

    By the time I had gotten to high school I had drawn every last thing in that book many many times.

    During all this time - learning drafting - I perfected manually writing at 1/8" text.

    I haven't been able to write in cursive since grade or middle school. I can ONLY write in block text.

    I can actually write each individual letter in cursive still - although I just am terrible at getting them to connect well.

    so its not just computers and such, but more how you actually practice writing for the forative years that will have impact.
  • Re:So...? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Coz ( 178857 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:53PM (#6155401) Homepage Journal
    It's not that they don't care - it's not on a standardized test. "Penmanship" is not something the No Child Left Behind Act requires; neither is memorizing Latin verse. Just as one has gone the way of the dodo, so is the other going, for sheer pragmatic reasons of budget and schedule. What else could the valuable class time be used for, if you drop penmanship?

    BTW, my local public school system dropped it altogether from the elementary curriculum several years back - apart from a few predictable hysterical letters to the editor, gone in a week, nobody noticed.
  • Where is the loss? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Niche Slasher ( 680114 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @05:58PM (#6155468) Homepage
    We don't seem to bemoan the fact that we don't know how to light a fire with a cinder, or even say, light a fire by rubbing two pieces of wood together, or the fact that most Americans don't know how to ride a horse, or most of us don't know how to drive a carriage, etc etc.

    The only possible threat I see to this tech-dependence is the possible threat of massive power failures. But honestly, we don't even need to be literate to have fun in life, and I doubt those power failures would last long anyhow. At least the kids will continue to draw. No technology will take away that interest from them, nor any current or near-future fansy new input devices can replace paper and pen yet (yeah, there's the Wacom tablets, but it's not the same, most importantly, the fashion of art doesn't necessarily evolve that way).

    -N
  • by Jucius Maximus ( 229128 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @06:01PM (#6155509) Journal
    Firstly some background:

    I learned cursive writing in the regular Canadian school system. Back in my grade 4-6 days I was always getting bad marks on cursive writing so my parents requested that the school give me extra exercises on that subject. As a result, I developed very legible, artful cursive writing. It's many years later now and I'm in university (Engineering), but if I pick up a nice Sanford Uni-Ball Vision Micro pen, I can still do it.

    I am also a serious user of typing. As a side effect of learning the alphabet through computer games (thanks to a techie dad), I learned to type before I learned to do regular printing in grade 1. Another side effect was that early on, I could type the alphabet but not know how to pronounce any of the letters. Even as I was learning to write cursively, I could type much more rapidly and accurately than people twice my age: 30 wpm by age 6, 50 wpm by age 12, now 100+ wpm in university (assuming I'm in the groove where I can think at 100 wpm.)

    Why I prefer Cursive:

    Cursive writing is more of an artform to me as well as a tool to enforce certain frames of mind. If I am in a class that requires right brain thought (typically anything that requires critical thought in relation to someone else's non-technical writing) I will use the cursive. It helps keep me in the right-brained frame of mind. My thoughts flow onto the page. When I write something in cursive, it's flowing onto a piece of paper from my pen. It's written there in stone and you can't erase it. (No, white-out does not count.) What I have written there is a reflection of myself that is expressed through words and the physical characteristics of what I have put down onto the paper. Because cursive is like art, a lot more thought goes into what I stroke down onto the paper. It makes me think at a higher level and use my brain more effectively.

    And Now The Case For Typing:

    Typing is incredibly useful to me because of its utility and flexibility. As the girl in the article mentioned, you can easily fix mistakes with a backspace ( or ^H ;-). The main benefit of typing is that whatever you create is infinitely replicable. If your dog eats your homework, you print off another copy. It can be instantly formatted, transmitted, stored, replicated, processed and so on. The difference between handwriting and typing is like the difference between a Band's Live Performance and the CD. You can't perfectly duplicate that piece of paper with your personal pen strokes on it. But you can copy that OpenOffice file to a web server. (And yes, I do use OO.org.)

    The main thing that you lose with typing is the separation of personal effort from the results of that effort. You don't see the emotion and streaks of ink on your word processor. It's the difference between sending a "Blue Mountain E-Card" where you personally wrote the greeting for someone's birthday, and sending a Personally Written Hallmark Card with the same greeting. The effort and thoughtfulness comes through with physical card but not the e-card.

    The Moral of the Story. (According To Me, Anyway.)

    I say that the typing separates emotion/effort from content but with the added value of making something highly utilitarian. You can't replicate the paper, but that makes it all the more precious.

    I say that the purposes for writing and typing do not entirely overlap, and thus neither will cancel out the other any time soon.

  • by MtViewGuy ( 197597 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @06:02PM (#6155523)
    I'll say this: in much of Asia handwriting skills are still important.

    This is especially true in China and Japan, where both languages uses thousands of unique characters for the written language. Because of this situation, these two languages are not easily adopted for computer use, though the Japanese have tried with special keyboards and the JIS, Shift-JIS and EUC character sets. Is it small wonder why low-coast fax machines first took off in popularity in Asia, because it was in many ways faster to write up a handwritten note in Japanese and fax it to another location than to use a Japanese language keyboard to create the characters and then send the message electronically?

    Besides, writing Chinese and Japanese characters is still considered a revered art form in Asia. That's why a lot of art exhibitions in China and Japan show the masterful art of calligraphy, especially writing characters with brushes.
  • Re:What Cursive? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by read-only ( 35561 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @06:03PM (#6155526)
    I should point out why I can't write in cursive.

    I earned a degree in engineering about 5 years ago from a major university with a well-regarded engineering program. As part of the required classes for all engineering students, I took a general engineering class which actually focused on handwriting. And remember all those rules your elementary school teacher taught you? Well, forget them. Example: Remember being told not to make your 8's as to seperate circles (the "snowman")? As an engineering student I was told precisely the opposite. Needless to say, this course forever changed the way I write.

    Occasionally I find something that I wrote by hand prior to being taught how to write "like an engineer". It is scary.

    Anyone else get re-taught how to write at the university level?

  • its history (Score:2, Interesting)

    by itsme ( 6372 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @06:05PM (#6155562) Homepage
    there are not that many people left that can write on clay tablets either. nor are there many people around that can memorize entire books. when something stops being useful it will disappear quickly.
  • Cursive == Useless (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Alkaiser ( 114022 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @06:11PM (#6155619) Homepage
    Exactly. Damn cursive handwriting. I sucked at it in elementary school, and my mom would make me spend all this time outside of class practicing it. Who really gives a damn? I've been in the job world for over 10 years now, and never ONCE have I seen a cursive letter sent by ANYONE.

    So cursive goes the way of the microfiche? Good riddance. I'll be happy the day they take it out of schools, and start using that time to teach kids something useful with it instead. (I mean, not like they will, but there's always hope, right?) Typing is faster, easier to read, and takes far less time to learn.

    Good luck finding new jobs, all ye who work at the Society for Cursive Writing.
  • Re:Thumbs (Score:2, Interesting)

    by djmitche ( 536135 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @06:18PM (#6155687) Homepage

    educators don't get paid enough to care.

    Ahem, for a person who has a well-developed moral code, pay and caring are unrelated. Most teachers care very much. We're just not able to do much because of the financial situation -- that's why most who can leave the profession. We care enough to consider questions carefully, and weigh the relative importance of various ideas and initiatives. And frankly, next to learning proper reasoning skills, reflective reading skills, and persuasive writing skills, cursive handwriting (as long as students can print) is, well not very important.

    Personally, I thought cursive was stupid while I was learning it. "You just taught me to write one way, why are you teaching me another?". I refused to learn it any more than necessary for the relevant assessments, and would need one of those desk-strips if I were asked to write cursive today. I also don't know how to wash clothes with a washboard. And I don't feel one shred of guilt about either one.

  • by LauraScudder ( 670475 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @06:21PM (#6155715) Journal
    Well, I'd actually be pretty surprised in American cursive was identical to British cursive. And the cursive I learned certainly has next to NOTHING in common with the cursive I had to learn to read when learning German. I still can't decipher most old German handwriting beyond picking out u's (they have a little swoosh mark over them to distinguish them from what seems to me to be three other otherwise completely indistinguishable letters).

    Back on topic, based on the accumulated speech differences between American and English, I would bet that cursive writing in the two is isn't identical.
  • Re:Thumbs (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Ryan Amos ( 16972 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @06:41PM (#6155921)
    Not necessarily so. I print and I still write pretty quickly. I still take notes on pen and paper because I've found the act of having to physically write them helps me remember them better.
  • Re:Thumbs (Score:3, Interesting)

    by uberdave ( 526529 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @06:55PM (#6156095) Homepage
    All the more reason to teach it!
  • by uberdave ( 526529 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @07:08PM (#6156250) Homepage
    I seem to be in the minority here. I find cursive to be much faster than block lettering. As a matter of fact, I've lost my lowercase character set when block printing, and I have to "render" them as "graphics" (in other words, I have to think about how they are written, rather than it just being automatic). If I have to do a lot of handwriting, I find that I get cramps faster when block printing, than using cursive.

    What I find more disturbing is that I occasionally find myself using Graffiti symbols instead of the actual block letters.
  • Re:So what? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by guinsu ( 198732 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @07:14PM (#6156307)
    You obviously aren't left handed. Cursive just wasn't designed (or at least wasn't taught correctly) for left handed people.
  • by Zerbey ( 15536 ) * on Monday June 09, 2003 @07:25PM (#6156413) Homepage Journal
    However told you that was wrong. In my home countries (both of them) your signature has to be written in English text but that's the only restriction.

    There's another Urban legend in the USA that states you have to write your first and last names in full on a signature. This is also false.

    Me, I write my first and middle initials and my last name in full - all in cursive. At the end stick a Tengwar rune which is my initial. Yeah, I'm a geek :-) I've never gotten complaints about m signature for anyone, and it's on my passport and green card.

  • by thelandp ( 632129 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @07:33PM (#6156503)
    "Firemaking experts fear that the wild popularity of matches and firelighters, particularly among kids, could erase flint and tinder within a few decades. With 90 percent of Americans between the ages of 5 and 17 using matches, it's not uncommon for kids to light fires in only seconds by the time they leave elementary school. Matches, candles and cigarette lighters have ruined kids' ability to hold a pair of wooden sticks properly, let alone make a spark, says the former president of the International Association of Master Firekeepers, Lighters and Teachers of Firemaking."

    And most of us don't know how to throw a spear at a woolly mammoth either...
    Some skills used to be important, but not anymore. I've read some very plausible sci-fi [amazon.com] with advanced civilizations where most people don't know how to read or write at all, but it's not a problem.

  • by RestiffBard ( 110729 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @07:41PM (#6156583) Homepage
    What a freaking whiner. As for text not having the passion of cursive, who gives a damn? The passion is in the words. As for cursive being more arty or beautiful, hogwash. Well placed text on a nice website can be freaking gorgeous. Someday humanity will get over the disease of nostalgia. I can't wait. Things change. They always have. I hope they always will.

    As for the methods younger people, and older people employ to write, who cares again? Again, language changes and English is certainly the most mutatable language in the world. It's supposed to change.

    Has anyone noticed that no one writes an f as the first s in any word? No. Who cares? Other than the President of that association.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 09, 2003 @08:10PM (#6156823)
    I came upon this fragment in a short story a few months ago:
    Los muchachos de ahora no tienen respecto -- dijo sin darle demasiada importancia--. Està bien que en mi tiempo no se usaban esas mÃquinas, pero yo no me hubiera atrevido jamÃs a escribir asà a mi padre, ni vos tampoco.

    La salud de los enfermos
    by Julio CortÃzar
    An infirm mother is noting that her son has written to her by typewriter instead of by hand; she is commenting on the lack of respect that this implies -- she would never have written to her parents on such a machine. It turns out that she (probably) recognizes that it's a forgery. Her son is dead, and it's unclear if she knows that at this point in the story. This, however, is largely a different matter.
    A few comments:

    Handwriting is something distinctly human, not simply "a uniquely American form of expression".

    This story was written in Argentina over 30 years ago. The fear of losing this form of expression is nothing new. Today, we're just seeing the proliferation of typewritten material from younger and younger people. This bothers people. And rightly so? I agree with this thread's author that "typing separates emotion/effort from content". Yet, I'd like to add to that that typing also removes much/some of the individual character we might otherwise bring to our writing. An extreme case of this is the very authenticity of the document.

  • by EvilSporkMan ( 648878 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @08:19PM (#6156900)
    Does "in-class essay" mean anything anymore? There's no way to use a computer on those things. Au contraire, mon ami. It's called a laptop, a floppy, and the teacher's printer :) The ;aptop (my own, they're not really allowed but NONE of my teachers have made an issue of it because I don't play games and stuff during class) is also used for taking notes much faster than the rest of the class =D Incidentally, you know people who DO do their math homework on the computer? What program?
  • Re:In other news... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Carnivorous Carrot ( 571280 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @08:56PM (#6157154)
    > Worldwide cuneriform literacy down 99.999999999%!

    While this is a funny comment, in reality, scientists have demonstrated that physically forming letters when writing, at least during early years, is crucial to understanding writing skills.

    Kids who only learned keyboarding did suffer in their abilities.

    So yes, this is a bad thing folks.
  • Another handicap when writing is left-handedness. Because our language is written left-to-right, left-handed people tend to require much more time to write than right handed people do (and I should know because I am one). Does this mean that we should require all left-handed people to start writing with their right hands? (I'm assuming that you will think this is as absurd as I do, otherwise you're going to have to tell me why it makes sense).

    A lot of people can write more legibly when printing, and this is often more important in creating the impression of a good writer (and when you're writing for someone who is grading 90 papers, the impression can be as important as the writing itself - especially if the actual writing isn't that good), just as good grammar and spelling do.

    Not that this particularly will matter. Typing is more efficient and easier to read. I can't think of any reason why computers won't replace pen and paper for essay examinations; it would certainly make it easier on everybody. Possibly the only reason that this has not yet happened is because the cost isn't low enough - but it will certainly be low enough in the fullness of time.
  • Re:In other news... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by td ( 46763 ) on Monday June 09, 2003 @11:31PM (#6158088) Homepage
    I've been told (by a Babylonian scholar) that there are more people alive today who read and write Babylonian cuneiform than at any other time in history.

    When it was a living language, the world's population was tiny and the literacy rate microscopic. The literate of ancient Babylon are far outnumbered by the linguistics undergraduates who study cuneiform today.
  • by westendgirl ( 680185 ) on Tuesday June 10, 2003 @12:31AM (#6158358) Homepage
    Same here. My elementary school report cards are filled with "needs improvement" grades for penmanship. It's a good thing I eventually learned cursive. I believe it is the sole reason I have been able to finish graduate school. My ability to ask questions, analyze, research, type...all that is merely incidental. In all seriousness, though, my younger sister, who is in her mid-20s, learned to write on a VIC 20. When she got to kindergarten, we had a heck of a time convincing her not to print her name in all caps. And, to top it off, she managed to avoid learning to tell time on a non-digital clock until she was in her early teens. With a VCR (not flashing 12:00), microwave, stove, and digital watches, she never needed to learn how to read an old-fashioned clockface. I just wrote out all my wedding thank you cards. I think my printing sometimes slipped into a semi-cursive style, but that's the closest I've come to long-hand in years!
  • by TheGratefulNet ( 143330 ) on Tuesday June 10, 2003 @12:40AM (#6158399)
    when I was a teen (14 or so), I was taught to write down morse code (as I copied it) in ALL UPPERCASE. the military does this (I was told) and it was due to speed in writing. you can write in all uppercase block letters faster than in upper/lower and cursive just doesn't cut it when copying morse code at 40words per minute.

    so at a very early age, I started to lose my ability to handwrite. then a few years later I got my first computer (trs 80) and from then on, even my schoolwork was done with a printer (dot matrix!) and very little was hand-written.

    I'm now over 40 and still have to think about how to write those checks out - where you have to -write- the amount of the check in cursive ;-) weird to think that's the only reason for me to still know cursive. of course I type well over 100wpm - but handwriting is worse than a doctor, at this point.

    well, its trading one skill for another. I don't mind all that much - but it is interesting to see such a big change in skillsets in such a short amount of time.
  • Re:Shoelaces (Score:3, Interesting)

    by brianosaurus ( 48471 ) on Tuesday June 10, 2003 @02:12AM (#6158751) Homepage
    When I was in grade seven a friend of mine could not write but instead printed everything.

    This is what I don't understand. Why does "writing" automatically mean cursive, as opposed to "enscribing characters on a surface"???

    When I write something, be it a letter, directions somewhere, or some note, i use "printed" letters instead of cursive letters, but i'm still writing. I'm still using a pen or pencil.

    So of course your friend in grade seven could write; he wasn't illiterate. He just didn't write in cursive.

    Oh, and most of those zip up basketball shoes have laces underneath. You tie them, then zip the laces up inside. I guess so you don't trip on them, or they don't come untied.
  • by cr0sh ( 43134 ) on Tuesday June 10, 2003 @03:07AM (#6158912) Homepage
    Take a look at letters and such written by 8-11 year olds back in the 1800's, esp. the latter part. You will find that in many cases, those children of yesteryear were able to write and compose stories better than many contemporary adults, let alone children. I tend to wonder what this shift in ability says about where today's society is, and where it is heading...?
  • Well I'm dyslexic... (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 10, 2003 @04:14AM (#6159095)
    ... and cursive handwriting is a life saver for me. It allows me to learn the shape of entire words rather than having to think through the letters on a keyboard.

    Also my Mum taught me joined-up handwriting one summer - the old fashioned way with joined-up fs, gs, ys even x and s so I can write a whole word and not break the flow.

    I got some of my exams transcribed (written out again by the special needs teacher) until my geography teacher said that my writing was more legible (if a bit less neat) than Mrs Bells.

    So I think learning joined-up writing is very important for some people. Typing kills my train of thought as I get stuck in the spelling all the time.

    Islay
  • In Soviet Russia (Score:3, Interesting)

    by danila ( 69889 ) on Tuesday June 10, 2003 @05:55AM (#6159339) Homepage
    Everybody could write in cursive. Writing in individual letters was a thing of the past, reserved for pre-revolutionary times and people who draw a cross instead of signing their name. I honestly don't understand what is so difficult about cursive. And despite the educational system being totally fucked up today, writing in cursive is still not a problem for the Russian kids.

    I must admit, though, that my own cursive skills are somewhat lucking. When I use handwriting, I tend to use Palm Graffiti instead...
  • by TA ( 14109 ) on Tuesday June 10, 2003 @06:39AM (#6159409)
    My handwriting is terrible and has always been, and I'm 43. The reason? Not keyboards or computers, for sure! The cause is the way handwriting is taught in school, with a reward system that encourages getting through the different stages as quickly as possible. All of my class mates write terribly, at least all of the boys do. Anyway, at 15 I decided to learn touch-typing (using a good old mechanical typewriter and a Scheidegger course, IMO the absolutely best way to learn touch typing).

    I've been happy since then, never looked back. Handwriting can never approach the keyboard. Handwriting is way too slow, even for the best of them. No worries folks, you only need to learn basic handwriting and then you should concentrate (and I mean concentrate, don't be sloppy about it) on learning touch typing. If you end up as a programmer it'll take your productivity to a totally different level.

  • by misterpies ( 632880 ) on Tuesday June 10, 2003 @07:09AM (#6159462)
    But when people are forced to slow down, they have more time to think about what they're writing rather than just writing about what they think. The advantages of word processing - speed and being able to edit what you've written - are double-edged swords. When you've become used to writing up everything on a computer, you forget how to plan and construct a document from the start -- instead you (or at least I) tend to put down a mishmash of ideas and then slowly work them into shape.

    Now I don't doubt that for most written work, I end up with a better result the word-processed way. And many people never need to write anything longer than a birthday card by hand. But the mental skill of being able to develop a proper argument as you go along is essential in many other ways. I'm thinking of SPEAKING.

    Maybe I'm just an old fogey (and I'm not even 30) but it seems to me that kids today have a much harder time having a proper conversation than they used to. They seem to have a 5-word cap on sentences. ("And he was like, yes. And I was like, no. So I said, hi. You what? Oh My God!") Now I'm studying law and I need to be able to stand up in court and make an improvised speech that will persuade a judge and jury, so I'm having to learn those skills back over.

  • Re:Shoelaces (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Chelloveck ( 14643 ) on Tuesday June 10, 2003 @08:55AM (#6159849)

    Why bother? There are plenty of nice, dressy loafers on the market...

    IMHO, both good penmanship and the ability to tie a bow knot are destined for obsolescence. They're simply not needed by the majority of our society any more. This isn't necessarily a bad thing! How many of you can churn butter? Tie knots other than bow knots, and know which to use when? Whittle? Perform basic carpentry, or masonry? Care for and ride a horse? Tan leather?

    Tons of skills which used to be part of everyday life have fallen into disuse, simply because most people don't need to do them any more. And tons of new skills are aquired to fit the new needs. It's called progress.

  • I'm a writer. . . (Score:3, Interesting)

    by PhxBlue ( 562201 ) on Tuesday June 10, 2003 @09:03AM (#6159889) Homepage Journal

    And the only way I can really write, as opposed to rewriting or editing, is to write on notebook paper with pencil, in cursive. That's really the only time I use it, but I'm glad I know it. And I want my progeny to know it, too, if only because more knowledge is never a bad thing.

  • Cyrillic (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Dun Malg ( 230075 ) on Tuesday June 10, 2003 @10:01AM (#6160389) Homepage
    I wonder if they're seeing a drop in cursive writing in Russia? Probably not as much, since the Cyrillic alphabet is too unwieldy to block-print. And if you think our cursive is hard to read, try learning to read handwritten Cyrillic script. Argh! It often looks like a bunch of lowercase M's, U's, and E's strung together. Cyrillic is a perfect example of why linguists should NOT be allowed to develop alphabets.
  • by Krellan ( 107440 ) <krellan@kre l l a n.com> on Wednesday June 11, 2003 @03:23AM (#6168730) Homepage Journal
    I'm glad cursive is dying.

    It is vestigial, useful only for signatures. This is the only time in my life, since elementary school, that I have used cursive writing.

    There are lots of good reasons that have already been posted. It is very difficult to read. It is not very faster than printing. It serves no use.

    My grandmother used to be a shorthand expert (worked decades as a secretary, in the age before dictation machines). Shorthand is now dead. It has been made obsolete. Cursive will soon follow.

    In elementary school, in the early 1980's, there was a fad that swept through, with yet another writing system: Denelian! This was some kind of hybrid between printing and cursive. It was supposed to be easier to learn than cursive, used as a stepping stone after children learned printing. Instead, it combined the disadvantages of both! Fortunately this fad died out after a few years.

    Standard printing is easy to read and easy to write. It is easy to learn. It is just as effective at communicating information as cursive, if not more so. Isn't that what writing is supposed to do?

    I dance on the grave of cursive!

"Everyone's head is a cheap movie show." -- Jeff G. Bone

Working...