• Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s not a matter of handwriting vs typing, we still teach handwriting in school and always will, and we don’t teach typing at all.

    It’s a question of whether we teach cursive in addition to handwriting. Non-cursive print is necessary as most official writing Americans will do in their lives requires it. It’s also more than good enough for journaling, note taking, and personal letters. Those who hand write a lot will even use joined-up writing to increase their writing speed, which just leaves no purpose left for the use of cursive besides the elegance.

    • Tavarin
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      and we don’t teach typing at all.

      I had typing classes.

      • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Typing classes were briefly popular during the advent of the computer workstation, but they’re pretty rare these days. They’re not part of required curriculums so not a lot of schools teach typing or “keyboarding”. Some may still teach it, though some still teach cursive.

    • dumpsterlid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Cursive isn’t necessarily more difficult for all students, for some students cursive is easier to grasp (and helps them learn to write print better as well).

      • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not a matter of difficulty, it’s a matter of benefit vs the cost of resources. You can’t eliminate the teaching of print handwriting, so if you want to teach cursive you have to do that in addition to teaching print handwriting. There is limited space in a school’s curriculum, and though there would be some personal benefit to teach cursive, there isn’t enough practical benefit to include it over other subjects.

        You have to remember that school is compulsory in the U.S. and so public schools need to choose subject matter that will best prepare the average student for adult life. Cursive is more useful as an art form than as a practical skill, and there are better art forms to teach in school as well that allow for more creative expression.

        Cursive writing might be personally enlightening for students that enjoy it, but it’s not something that needs to be or should be taught as part of the required curriculum.

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I suppose it shows the lack of cursive education that y’all are calling cursive an art for . Definitely not. You want calligraphy. Cursive is connected writing with modifications to make it smoother and more efficient to write

          • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            We have connected writing with modifications to make it smoother and more efficient to write. This is often taught in school and is very commonly used. “Cursive” to an American however refers to a very specific type of script which is much closer to calligraphy than it is regular handwriting and it’s this type of script that the post is referring to.