Schools to Stop teaching Cursive!

[jillio]

Yep. I don't think my teachers would miss my doodles though.

Probably not. Doodles are a sure sign a student is bored to tears.

 

[Reba]

Like with video games!

Hardly the same skills!

 

[Oceanbreeze]

Yes, those actually develop fine motor skills as well as eye/hand coordination. So does using a mouse. And learning to feed yourself.

Thank you. I was about to make the same point, but you beat me to it. I can attest to that very thing. I played video games as a teen and it helped a great deal with my hand eye coordination.

 

[Oceanbreeze]

Daughter took up beading to help with her hand/eye coordination and motor skills. She plays on her DSiXL daily and also on the XBox 360 daily. Still her handwriting is atrocious.

Ah well, we still work on handwriting daily. She has 20 sentences daily that must be printed 5 times and done in cursive 5 times each, then she has to copy a paragraph from any book in the house in both print and cursive daily. She and son both have to do this. I do as well, just to prove to them that you're never too old to work on handwriting.

I did the same thing, and guess what? My handwriting was also atrocious. Still is! My cursive is better than my printing, though. Please, God. DO NOT ask me to print something for you! Oh, Lawd!

 

[Oceanbreeze]

Beading will most definately help with the fine motor skills. Actually, any kind of artwork will: painting, sketching, pen and ink...etc.

Yep. I don't think my teachers would miss my doodles though.

Guess what I also sucked at....ART!

 

[Oceanbreeze]

Probably not. Doodles are a sure sign a student is bored to tears.

...and staring at the window (which I was quite fond of doing while sitting in class).

 

[Jiro]

I rarely do doodles on my notes. I don't like my notes to be cluttery and messy.

 

[deafskeptic]

I'm a complusive doodler.

 

[Jiro]

Today's students are so deficient in abilities that they can't do both? I thought they were all wizards at multitasking?

So, what complex technical skill do second graders learn in that 15 minutes that they save from learning cursive writing?

they are and they rarely need cursive writing for what they're doing in their careers. If people can read what they're writing (block writing style, print, etc.).. that's fine.

nowadays - jobs are becoming more high-tech and very specialized. I can't even play PS3/XBOX360 at the level of skill that kids have. I'm stuck in Nintendo era

 

[StSapphire]

Daughter took up beading to help with her hand/eye coordination and motor skills. She plays on her DSiXL daily and also on the XBox 360 daily. Still her handwriting is atrocious.

Ah well, we still work on handwriting daily. She has 20 sentences daily that must be printed 5 times and done in cursive 5 times each, then she has to copy a paragraph from any book in the house in both print and cursive daily. She and son both have to do this. I do as well, just to prove to them that you're never too old to work on handwriting.

Yeah, video games can help hone generic motor skills, but specifics, such as "having legible handwriting" probably need actual practice with writing to get any decently, since legible handwriting requires more than just motor skills. I was just suggesting video games if handwriting was being used primarily to aid motor skills, rather than for its own use.

If I ever have kids, though, I'll be giving them their own 3DS (or whatever equivalent is out by them) as early as they're able to hold it. Lots of games that I like to play can work on both developing motor skills (via point and tap gameplay) and language development (because they're essentially interactive storytelling games).

Hardly the same skills!

Haha, well, sure. But some of the skills (visual, motor skills) have been shown to be enhanced and aided in development by playing video games.

Luckily, I've got a game that would combine both of those with also developing actual writing skills, too. Scribblenauts, a game which lets you write any word you can think of, and then whatever you write it makes, and you use to complete certain challenges. So you can practice handwriting, too.

I'm a complusive doodler.

I've tried not to nearly as much, but when I'm in a meeting and get extremely bored, I still end up finding myself doodling, since the options are often either that or falling asleep, lol.

 

[Reba]

they are and they rarely need cursive writing for what they're doing in their careers. If people can read what they're writing (block writing style, print, etc.).. that's fine.

If parents want more dumbing down in their kids' education, so be it. If they really believe that by eliminating cursive instruction their kids' grades will soar, so be it. If they want to limit their options, so be it. If grown ups prefer to print like kids, rather than kids wanting to write like adults, so be it. If we can't get our kids to make a little effort and use a little time away from the games to learn another skill, so be it. I guess the upcoming generation isn't as capable as previous generations to learn skills, so we should make school easier for them.

nowadays - jobs are becoming more high-tech and very specialized. I can't even play PS3/XBOX360 at the level of skill that kids have. I'm stuck in Nintendo era

Some jobs are becoming more high-tech and specialized. It's not across the board.

I guess the Renaissance Man concept is dead. People learn one job skill now, and that's it. No one wants to learn any more than necessary just to get a job. Learning for learning sake's, and for being a well-rounded person are out the window.

 

[Beowulf]

If parents want more dumbing down in their kids' education, so be it. If they really believe that by eliminating cursive instruction their kids' grades will soar, so be it. If they want to limit their options, so be it. If grown ups prefer to print like kids, rather than kids wanting to write like adults, so be it. If we can't get our kids to make a little effort and use a little time away from the games to learn another skill, so be it. I guess the upcoming generation isn't as capable as previous generations to learn skills, so we should make school easier for them.


Some jobs are becoming more high-tech and specialized. It's not across the board.

I guess the Renaissance Man concept is dead. People learn one job skill now, and that's it. No one wants to learn any more than necessary just to get a job. Learning for learning sake's, and for being a well-rounded person are out the window.

You know, I agree with you. I think we are brainwashed into just chasing the dollar and to heck with everything else. We are becoming overspecialized, like swamp birds. You know what happens to them? Their beaks keep getting longer and bigger in order to reach their food, until there comes a time when they are too heavy to fly. Along comes a swamp fire, and POOF! Instant extinction. We are becoming swamp birds here.

 

[StSapphire]

If parents want more dumbing down in their kids' education, so be it. If they really believe that by eliminating cursive instruction their kids' grades will soar, so be it. If they want to limit their options, so be it. If grown ups prefer to print like kids, rather than kids wanting to write like adults, so be it. If we can't get our kids to make a little effort and use a little time away from the games to learn another skill, so be it. I guess the upcoming generation isn't as capable as previous generations to learn skills, so we should make school easier for them.

See, this attitude, this is what I disagree with. You're taking this as basically an attitude of "this is hard, we want it to be easier for our kids, so we just won't make them learn it". And yeah, I've seen that attitude in education as well, and that I strongly disagree with. I just don't see removing cursive from the curriculum as evidence of that.

When you're referring to "getting children to write like adults" or the opposite, it appears to imply that you basically think that cursive is somehow innately "more mature" or "more grown up" than block writing. This, I disagree with entirely. Your other arguments, about cursive being more useful, faster, etc, could easily be true for many people, and if that's the purpose for learning to write cursive, then I would not say their time is wasted. However, the underlying main reason that cursive seems to have been taught is because of this attitude that some people seem to have that it's "more mature" or whatnot.

That idea, primarily, is what has been rejected here. That is why many of us consider learning cursive to be a primarily pointless exercise. It's not (just) because we think learning how to type faster and better from an earlier age is likely to be more useful to a child's education (we do), it's much more that we don't see any differences in the inherent quality of writing in cursive rather than in block print.

We don't think it's "more mature" or "more adult-like" to write with loopy handwriting and connected letters, we mostly just think that's an alternative option, in the same way that typing a document in Times New Roman isn't inherently "more mature" or "more adult-like" than typing it in Helvetica.

Some jobs are becoming more high-tech and specialized. It's not across the board.

I guess the Renaissance Man concept is dead. People learn one job skill now, and that's it. No one wants to learn any more than necessary just to get a job. Learning for learning sake's, and for being a well-rounded person are out the window.

Well, to be quite blunt, for a great many people, yes. Of course, that ignores the fact that for a great many people, the "Renaissance Man" concept was never "alive" to begin with. Even in the actual Renaissance, you had some wealthy folks who already had enough money to survive and could dabble in whatever subjects interested them, at their leisure, without needing to worry about silly things like "bills" and "jobs" and the like. And then you had the rest of the commoners, the plebeians who had to actually work to survive, and since living conditions relative to now were quite shitty, they didn't even have a choice about what work they did, because they only had the opportunity to learn a few trades, and that's what they ended up doing.

People can still learn for learning's sake, but that doesn't mean that we should cram the core curriculum for every student in a county/state/country with every conceivable subject ever. As it currently is, simply with the advancement of knowledge that naturally occurs, the education an average high schooler gets today probably contains roughly as much information as a college undergraduate would have received 50 years ago.

 

[Beowulf]

See, this attitude, this is what I disagree with. You're taking this as basically an attitude of "this is hard, we want it to be easier for our kids, so we just won't make them learn it". And yeah, I've seen that attitude in education as well, and that I strongly disagree with. I just don't see removing cursive from the curriculum as evidence of that.

When you're referring to "getting children to write like adults" or the opposite, it appears to imply that you basically think that cursive is somehow innately "more mature" or "more grown up" than block writing. This, I disagree with entirely. Your other arguments, about cursive being more useful, faster, etc, could easily be true for many people, and if that's the purpose for learning to write cursive, then I would not say their time is wasted. However, the underlying main reason that cursive seems to have been taught is because of this attitude that some people seem to have that it's "more mature" or whatnot.

That idea, primarily, is what has been rejected here. That is why many of us consider learning cursive to be a primarily pointless exercise. It's not (just) because we think learning how to type faster and better from an earlier age is likely to be more useful to a child's education (we do), it's much more that we don't see any differences in the inherent quality of writing in cursive rather than in block print.

We don't think it's "more mature" or "more adult-like" to write with loopy handwriting and connected letters, we mostly just think that's an alternative option, in the same way that typing a document in Times New Roman isn't inherently "more mature" or "more adult-like" than typing it in Helvetica.



Well, to be quite blunt, for a great many people, yes. Of course, that ignores the fact that for a great many people, the "Renaissance Man" concept was never "alive" to begin with. Even in the actual Renaissance, you had some wealthy folks who already had enough money to survive and could dabble in whatever subjects interested them, at their leisure, without needing to worry about silly things like "bills" and "jobs" and the like. And then you had the rest of the commoners, the plebeians who had to actually work to survive, and since living conditions relative to now were quite shitty, they didn't even have a choice about what work they did, because they only had the opportunity to learn a few trades, and that's what they ended up doing.

People can still learn for learning's sake, but that doesn't mean that we should cram the core curriculum for every student in a county/state/country with every conceivable subject ever. As it currently is, simply with the advancement of knowledge that naturally occurs, the education an average high schooler gets today probably contains roughly as much information as a college undergraduate would have received 50 years ago.

That was then, and this is now, yet people are inexorably being steered to corporate jobs. Damn, this is depressing.

 

[StSapphire]

That was then, and this is now, yet people are inexorably being steered to corporate jobs. Damn, this is depressing.

No disagreement with that here. But quite honestly? I can't think of a single solution that would actually work. If you make the things that are necessary for a comfortable life (shelter, food, etc) cheap enough that all people don't have to rely upon having a job to afford them, then nobody will provide them in the first place. You could try to rely upon the government providing them, but then you just push the problem back to "where does the government get money to provide it", as well as losing a great many choices and opening it up to corruption from individuals who will find some way of getting a personal profit from the system at the cost of others.

Quite simply, I dunno what the solution is. (But I'm pretty sure the solution isn't "teach cursive to 3rd graders", )

 

[Beowulf]

No disagreement with that here. But quite honestly? I can't think of a single solution that would actually work. If you make the things that are necessary for a comfortable life (shelter, food, etc) cheap enough that all people don't have to rely upon having a job to afford them, then nobody will provide them in the first place. You could try to rely upon the government providing them, but then you just push the problem back to "where does the government get money to provide it", as well as losing a great many choices and opening it up to corruption from individuals who will find some way of getting a personal profit from the system at the cost of others.

Quite simply, I dunno what the solution is. (But I'm pretty sure the solution isn't "teach cursive to 3rd graders", )

I'm being wistful here, I know, but maybe if the kids rebel?

 

[dogmom]

I have no issue with letting cursive go

and I have no issue with keeping it


for many kids growing up, it IS pointless in the greater context of what they have to deal with and if the extra 15 minutes a day for what COULD be cursive, is NEEDED to teach things like reading, writing, deal with emotional/social issues that are not dealt with at home <find clean clothes for the kid whose been wearing the same ones for two weeks including underwear; try to determine why someone sitting in a corner sobbing; discuss with class shooting death of schoolmate> then I think the focus needs to be on the greater whole, not learning how to write a specific type of text.

"Renaissance Man" concept implies already coming from a certain starting point - a point of access to opportunity, ability to see a future for oneself, a certain equality that ALL is achievable if I just open up my learning and pick THIS thing and THAT thing and enjoy contemplating so-and-so....

many children and adults do not have that luxury - they start from an entirely different point. And sometimes, the starting point is irrelevant and this "Renaissance" ideal still is possible - but sometimes, it is not - and to assume that such an ideal has historically held true as a concept everyone could embrace and use, does not see the history we have in this country.
And elsewhere.

 

[StSapphire]

I'm being wistful here, I know, but maybe if the kids rebel?

Rebel how?

 

[Beowulf]

Rebel by not conforming, by refusing to be like the others, to be individuals, by asking questions. There are all sorts of ways kids could rebel.

 

[StSapphire]

You mean like this?

But in seriousness, generic "rebellion against the man" is a privilege you can only afford if you're already lucky enough to already not be reliant upon "the man" (be it the government or large corporations or whatever the bogeyman of the day is) for your survival.

And your solution isn't one that can be germinated across the generation and aided help everyone (or even a large majority). It can help a few, but realistically only works if the majority of everyone doesn't do that.