Is Cursive Writing No Longer Essential in Indiana Schools?

[jtbell]

Starting this fall, the Indiana Department of Education will no longer require Indiana’s public schools to teach cursive writing.

http://tribstar.com/news/x1435410216/Archaic-Method-Cursive-writing-no-longer-has-to-be-taught (Terre Haute Tribune-Star)

I type faster and more neatly than I can write, so the only things I write now are my signature, shopping lists and other short lists, notes on freehand diagrams, and mathematical stuff (solving a physics or math problem, or just playing around with equations). And stuff on the whiteboard when lecturing. I almost never use PowerPoint for lectures.

Almost all of my handwriting is "scribble-printing." I use cursive only for my signature, and the "for deposit only" notation when endorsing a check for deposit in my bank account. Sometimes I write a paragraph or two in cursive, just to keep in practice. I have to focus on it when I'm doing it.

I've gotten good enough with MathType in MS Word that I even use it to write up math that I want to keep "for the record," such as solutions to test or homework problems that I assign. For me, MathType alone is slower than hand-writing the equations, but faster than writing them first and then transcribing to MathType. I suppose I really should be using LaTeX for that, but I've never gotten into LaTeX for entire documents.

 

[Evo]

Most people have dropped cursive except for signatures, I have. Do we really need two ways of writing, when most writing after you leave school is usually jotting notes?

No one turns in hand written reports, it's all typed on a computer and printed out.

 

[dlgoff]

Most people have dropped cursive except for signatures, I have. Do we really need two ways of writing, when most writing after you leave school is usually jotting notes?

No one turns in hand written reports, it's all typed on a computer and printed out.

I'm glad to hear this. I thought I was weird for not being able to write cursive (except my signature). I started printing when I started college back in the '60s and have completely forgotten how to write in cursive.

 

[thegreenlaser]

All through junior high and high school, once cursive was no longer a requirement, I used printing pretty much exclusively where hand written work was necessary. When I got to college, though, I found that I couldn't write fast enough to keep up with some of my profs, so I actually (painfully) switched back to cursive for the first semester. It sped me up a little bit, but once I got proficient in cursive, I found myself naturally switching to a sort of mix between printing and cursive. I've written like that ever since, and while it's not as neat as my printing was, it's improved my writing speed by at least 2 times.

However, I agree that typing is a more important skill than cursive. Probably 90% of my handwritten text (not including math/calculations, which is a different story) comes from lecture notes, assignments where hand writing is a requirement (like lab reports), and written exams. The rest is just quickly jotting things down or writing an explanation here and there within my math. If I weren't taking classes, the ability to write in cursive would be of very little benefit to me. I'd definitely trade that for another 10-20 wpm of typing speed.

As the article points out, though, being able to read cursive is still important. For that reason, they probably shouldn't cut out cursive completely, but I think it would be beneficial to cut out a lot of the time spent teaching kids to write in perfect cursive and instead teach them how to type efficiently.

 

[lisab]

How much time does it take to teach a kid to write cursive? I really don't remember how hard it was to learn. If it takes a lot of time, it's probably not worth it.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I keep wondering if typing will soon be obsolete due to voice recognition software.

I too have virtually lost my cursive skills - or any writing skills beyond the chicken scratching that only I can read. On the up side, if someone ever steals my notes it will do them no good.

 

[Evo]

How much time does it take to teach a kid to write cursive? I really don't remember how hard it was to learn. If it takes a lot of time, it's probably not worth it.

It's a lot of time, chidren have to learn cursive and printing. I could print clearly, but all of the silly little flourishes for cursiive were so time consuming, so I just went with semi-connected printing, which a lot of people went to. And only used cursive when it was a test on writing in cursive.

Now in meetings, people usually bring their laptops or other devices and just type notes instead of writing and then typing them. Saves a lot of time, you can spell check, do editing, etc... all at once.

 

[Evo]

I keep wondering if typing will soon be obsolete due to voice recognition software.

I too have virtually lost my cursive skills - or any writing skills beyond the chicken scratching that only I can read. On the up side, if someone ever steals my notes it will do them no good.

LOL, exactly.

 

[KrisOhn]

I was taught cursive in grade 3-4, and was forced to use it until grade 6. As soon as I hit grade 6, I dropped it. I do remember how to write cursive but over the years my hand writing has developed into a form of printing where all the letters are attached, it's fast.

 

[jtbell]

Now in meetings, people usually bring their laptops or other devices and just type notes instead of writing and then typing them.

Very few students do this in my classes. It's probably because of the math-intensive content. Even if a student can touch-type text rapidly, s/he probably doesn't have software to write equations, or isn't fluent enough in it.

 

[Evo]

Very few students do this in my classes. It's probably because of the math-intensive content. Even if a student can touch-type text rapidly, s/he probably doesn't have software to write equations, or isn't fluent enough in it.

I'm talking about business meetings where nothing of importance is said.

 

[dlgoff]

I keep wondering if typing will soon be obsolete due to voice recognition software.

LOL, exactly.

Interesting idea. Physicsforums.com/Talk/voice_your_post.

 

[jtbell]

I'm talking about business meetings where nothing of importance is said.

If nothing of importance is being said, then they're probably not taking notes. They're just updating their Facebook status or posting to PF or whatever.

 

[jtbell]

Physicsforums.com/Talk/voice_your_post.

If it can do LaTex, I'm in. "Second partial of psi with respect to x, plus..."

 

[dlgoff]

If it can do LaTex, I'm in. "Second partial of psi with respect to x, plus..."

If you have "Chrome 11 Beta", see if these work.

http://ofneal.com/speechwolfram/"
http://ofneal.com/speechsearch/"

From http://ofneal.com/2011/04/speech-search-simple-free-speech-recognition-for-searching-google-wolframalpha-and-facebook/"

 

[Drakkith]

Oh thank god...now I can get back to practicing my print...I keep thinking a chicken had a seizure on my notepad at work...

 

[BobG]

I keep wondering if typing will soon be obsolete due to voice recognition software.

I too have virtually lost my cursive skills - or any writing skills beyond the chicken scratching that only I can read. On the up side, if someone ever steals my notes it will do them no good.

Not just voice recognition software, but the ability to search for spoken words/word combination and to cross reference to other spoken word sequences, etc and do it as fast, or faster, than computers handle numbers/words now. In other words, the ability to create an organized database of spoken words so no "written" records have to be kept at all.

That would be an interesting development if technology made written language, itself, obsolete, seeing as how written language was the key to so much of our technological development.

 

[rhody]

Don,

This is one instance when I must respectfully disagree with you. An https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2960338&postcount=27" from a post in my Brain Plasticity thread:

I had one quick question, when you said writing 3 hours a day since 1985, by that did you mean typing (a typewriter in those days) or did you write using print or cursive ? The reason I ask is that I have been told through research that writing in cursive is one of the hardest things out brains are asked to do. When we string several letters together at a time our brain must process more complex movements. If you have trouble writing in cursive, you will also have trouble reading, because of the scanning process used to read then comprehend what you have just exposed your brain to. For people who have a reading disability (not you obviously), simple tracing exercises of complex lines stimulate stimulate neurons in the weakened pre-frontal cortex area of the brain improve your ability to speak, write and read.

Abandoning cursive training may have more detrimental effects than simple convenience, it may affect your ability to read and comprehend material. Not to mention the ability to concentrate, comprehend and recall with accuracy lengthy complex material. I don't see the trend changing. I admit, unless I have no other choice, I will type at a computer versus write a letter with pen and paper in cursive, which would be good for my brain. My daughter had to write letters to her boyfriend who is in the military in print or cursive for awhile. Now that he is active duty they communicate by text message and e-mail.

Rhody...

 

[Chi Meson]

In any given school year, I will have one or two students write in cursive, while most have turned to printing, "semi-joined," or chicken scratch. Next to chicken scratch, cursive is THE MOST DIFFICULT TO READ!

Cursive is dying. Let's kill it off!

 

[dlgoff]

Don,

This is one instance when I must respectfully disagree with you.

If you have trouble writing in cursive, you will also have trouble reading, because of the scanning process used to read then comprehend what you have just exposed your brain to. For people who have a reading disability (not you obviously), simple tracing exercises of complex lines stimulate stimulate neurons in the weakened pre-frontal cortex area of the brain improve your ability to speak, write and read.

You have just described me. In my case, I went for several years with a undetected hearing problem from before the first grade to about the forth grade. By the time it was corrected, it was too late. Now my biggest problem is spelling since I heard things differently and phonics made no sense.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

I learned to curse in grade school and my hand is fairly nice, but not great. However, I rarely use it because it is time consuming. I write, like so many others here, with a ruleless style that involves some cursive letters, some block letters and some connecting glue for the purpose, not of looks, but of writing faster. Only my signature is fully cursive.

 

[timthereaper]

Personally, I think it's beneficial to teach other styles of writing. I'm glad that they're not being forced to teach it, but I'm not convinced it's something we should lose. I think at some point, you have to introduce to kids that there's not just one way to write. Sure, if cursive had any practical point to it whenever we learned it, it's lost that by now, but penmanship has always been a hallmark of any advanced civilization and I think exposure to it at a young age is beneficial.

 

[Studiot]

That explains why nobody here understands wot i rite.

I can only do grr-sive.



Edit

Nobody understands me

 

[aegrisomnia]

I, for one, think it's sad that people think cursive should go away. If they stop teaching this at schools, I'd teach it to my kids at home.

 

[zoobyshoe]

...but penmanship has always been a hallmark of any advanced civilization...

Based on what? I would like to think this is true but I'm not sure it is the foregone conclusion you're making it out to be. Please expand.

 

[Hurkyl]

But if we get rid of cursive writing, nobody will be able to write romantic love letters anymore!

 

[jtbell]

I learned to curse in grade school

You must have had interesting teachers.

 

[kraphysics]

I always thought cursive writing was pointless. Cursive seems harder to read and is useless beyong aesthetic value IMO.

 

[D H]

Now in meetings, people usually bring their laptops or other devices and just type notes instead of writing and then typing them. Saves a lot of time, you can spell check, do editing, etc... all at once.

From my experience, people do not bring laptops or other devices to meetings so they can type notes on the content of the meeting. They bring laptops so they can look up a recipe for tonight's dinner; send emails to their significant other, their cousins, their drinkin' buddies from college; and maybe even do a little bit of work -- but never work related to the topic of the meeting. Heaven forbid! Given that hardly anybody takes notes regarding the meeting itself, there are apparently some new societal rules regarding the use of electronic machinery during in play here.

 

[Evo]

From my experience, people do not bring laptops or other devices to meetings so they can type notes on the content of the meeting. They bring laptops so they can look up a recipe for tonight's dinner; send emails to their significant other, their cousins, their drinkin' buddies from college; and maybe even do a little bit of work -- but never work related to the topic of the meeting. Heaven forbid! Given that hardly anybody takes notes regarding the meeting itself, there are apparently some new societal rules regarding the use of electronic machinery during in play here.

 

[Jack21222]

Typing is becoming such a critical skill, I think they should teach that very early on. Right after learning to write, learning to type should be next on the list. I'm thinking 4th or 5th grade. This would replace the time currently spent on script writing.

I also suspect this might help with spelling as well. A student would get instant feedback on a misspelled word, with the red underline that word processors give. This prevents a child from practicing the incorrect spelling of a word. The first time it's incorrect, they're told about it.

 

[Ben Niehoff]

My girlfriend developed a beautiful Copperplate hand and she can write it very fast. What I've heard is that you should just practice writing correctly and legibly, and the speed will come in time.

As for myself, I stopped writing cursive when it was no longer required, but now I actually miss it...kinda jealous of my girlfriend's beautiful handwriting, actually. So I am trying to re-learn it.

As for voice recognition software, I would hate it. Written word is simply not the same thing as spoken word. When I write or type, I take some time to think about how I'm putting every sentence together, so that everything I want to say is well-organized, grammatically correct, and flows in a way that is easy to read. When speaking, we tend to use fragments, trail off, change our minds...all sorts of things that are easy to deal with in face-to-face conversation, but make for a very confusing read.

Another reason I'd hate voice recognition software is privacy. One thing I love about typing is that I can go to a coffeeshop, library, meeting, whatever, and nobody knows what I'm typing about unless they are very rude and look over my shoulder (I realize it's also rude to be ignoring what's going on in a meeting, that was a joke). If keyboards were replaced by advanced voice recognition software, then I would be forced to speak, which would be quite awkward in public places, or even any place where there is a lot of background noise.

I really think that voice recognition as a primary input device is not the way to go. If anything is going to replace the keyboard, I'd imagine it would be something gesture-based. But given the simplicity and reliability of the keyboard, I have a hard time imagining anything really taking its place.

 

[Evo]

I'm sure there was the same rucus when cuneiform was replaced, and the switch from hieroglyphs most certainly must have caused an uproar. It's obsolete, time to let go. If you want fancy stuff, learn caligraphy.

 

[BobG]

I really think that voice recognition as a primary input device is not the way to go. If anything is going to replace the keyboard, I'd imagine it would be something gesture-based. But given the simplicity and reliability of the keyboard, I have a hard time imagining anything really taking its place.

Long, baggy sleeves and a rather sophisticated finger counting method allowed two people to negotiate prices in a crowded marketplace with no one else knowing what price was eventually settled upon, so the gesture-based language/sign language does have a proven history.

 

[thegreenlaser]

Not just voice recognition software, but the ability to search for spoken words/word combination and to cross reference to other spoken word sequences, etc and do it as fast, or faster, than computers handle numbers/words now. In other words, the ability to create an organized database of spoken words so no "written" records have to be kept at all.

That would be an interesting development if technology made written language, itself, obsolete, seeing as how written language was the key to so much of our technological development.

I can't see written word ever being completely replaced by spoken word. I MUCH prefer reading to listening, especially with large documents, and I know a lot of people who would agree.

 

[GeorginaS]

While my penmanship with both printing and cursive writing has always wildly sucked, and frequently I can't even read what I've written down, I've been a bit perplexed by people saying that they've learned how to write (cursive) at one point in their lives and have now forgotten. Really? It's so ingrained in my mind, it's akin to walking; I just can't imagine forgetting how to do it.

About it disappearing, does it matter? I think it should be taught, if for no other reason, so that people can continue to read it. There's so much history that's pen on paper that I think it's a valuable skill, still. In another fifty or so years, maybe not required to widespread. I think there's value in that.

And I think there's value in knowing how to produce written communication without the aid of computer-type-thing. I'm thinking of deserted on islands and needing to write a message in the sand sort of situations. I don't think that it needs be cursive writing, but some method of getting a message set down all on one's own I think is a valuable skill.

 

[Drakkith]

Writing will never go away in my opinion. Print on paper is nearly identical to how it is on a computer or newspaper or book. So I don't think we have to worry about that. And I don't see any reason why we should keep Cursive around. What realistic scenarios are you going to be in that require you to read cursive? If you are in a job or position where you need to look at letters or documents that have cursive, then you will probably learn it for that position/job, just like people do for different languages. And learning to read cursive is much much easier than learning another language. There are only about 52 different characters to learn and they are put together identically to non cursive.

 

[zoobyshoe]

I'm sure there was the same rucus when cuneiform was replaced, and the switch from hieroglyphs most certainly must have caused an uproar. It's obsolete, time to let go. If you want fancy stuff, learn caligraphy.

The problem with this view is that cursive isn't supposed to be a fancy way of writing. It's supposed to be easier than printing, the connecting of the letters, and their change from characters that need so many separate strokes when printed, to shapes that are described in a continuous motion, being a faster, more natural hand motion. In other words, cursive, itself, was a surrender to speed and sloppiness in the beginning.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cursive

People's inability to get the hang of it must be stemming from some erroneous notion on the part of todays teachers that it's a "fancy" way of writing, hence gratuitous trouble for appearances sake.

So, this whole thing bothers me because it suggests that teachers don't know what they're teaching or why they're teaching it. Formal typing lessons will be the next to go, by this logic, because figuring out your own hunt-and-peck system is easier in the short term. The trouble of learning the faster formal method will be seen as unnecessarily burdensome.

 

[Evo]

The problem with this view is that cursive isn't supposed to be a fancy way of writing. It's supposed to be easier than printing, the connecting of the letters, and their change from characters that need so many separate strokes when printed, to shapes that are described in a continuous motion, being a faster, more natural hand motion. In other words, cursive, itself, was a surrender to speed and sloppiness in the beginning.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cursive

People's inability to get the hang of it must be stemming from some erroneous notion on the part of todays teachers that it's a "fancy" way of writing, hence gratuitous trouble for appearances sake.

So, this whole thing bothers me because it suggests that teachers don't know what they're teaching or why they're teaching it. Formal typing lessons will be the next to go, by this logic, because figuring out your own hunt-and-peck system is easier in the short term. The trouble of learning the faster formal method will be seen as unnecessarily burdensome.

The wiki example shows how wiki can get it wrong thanks to someone uploading examples without knowing the subject, they don't even show an example of standard cursive. The subject title is cursive, the example is D'Nealian. All I remember is all of the ridiculous frills, curliques, peaks, and unnecessary flourishes. If it had just been a way to write quickly and easily, that would have been great, instead it was a nightmare of trying to match unnecessary flourishes. I can't tell you how many hours my teacher would make me re-do my small cursive r.

The wiki example you show is not real cursive, it's is called D'Nealian, a combination of cursive and block print, look at the wiki r http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cursive.svg and compare it to standard cursive http://www.superteacherworksheets.com/cursive/cursive-r.pdf

The wiki example is a modernized version of cursive called D'Nealian, I'm not familiar with it, it wasn't introduced until 1978. This is cursive lower case

http://www.superteacherworksheets.com/cursive/cursive-a-z.pdf

upper case
http://www.superteacherworksheets.com/cursive/cursive-az-capital.pdf

This is D'Nealian http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D'Nealian

 

[BobG]

The beauty of cursive writing is that you only had to follow the standard style (which was the Palmer method when I was in grade school) until you were out of elementary school.

After that, you were free to customize your handwriting style as you saw fit, as long as it was still readable. My dad preferred sharp angles in his letters, while my mom preferred lots of rounded letters.

I tended to lose a lot of the little extraneous loops on a lot of the capital letters, but adopted the bigger Spencerian loops my mom used on her B's, D's, R's, and P's. Yet, I also adapted my Dad's almost minimalist T's and F's, which looked almost more like 7's than T's or F's (with the horizontal line to differentiate between the T and the F). Later on, when I started drawing horizontal lines on my 7's, it occurred to me how similar my Dad's captial T's and F's were to 7's and I reverted back to the more standard T's and F's of the Palmer method, except I kind of lost the sharp corners on them. I also copied my dad's capital G's, which are a lot sharper on the bottom instead of rounded. Eventually, the rythym of writing cursive letters was more important than the flourishes or the non-flourishes (I always hated capital H's and K's because they just never quite fit in the rythym of my writing.)

 

[Evo]

The beauty of cursive writing is that you only had to follow the standard style (which was the Palmer method when I was in grade school) until you were out of elementary school.

After that, you were free to customize your handwriting style as you saw fit, as long as it was still readable. My dad preferred sharp angles in his letters, while my mom preferred lots of rounded letters.

I tended to lose a lot of the little extraneous loops on a lot of the capital letters, but adopted the bigger Spencerian loops my mom used on her B's, D's, R's, and P's. Yet, I also adapted my Dad's almost minimalist T's and F's, which looled almost more like 7's than T's or F's (with the horizontal line to differentiate between the T and the F). Later on, when I started drawing horizontal lines on my 7's, it occurred to me how similar my Dad's captial T's and F's were to 7's and I reverted back to the more standard T's and F's of the Palmer method, except I kind of lost the sharp corners on them. I also copied my dad's capital G's, which are a lot sharper on the bottom instead of rounded. Eventually, the rythym of writing cursive letters was more important than the flourishes or the non-flourishes (I always hated capital H's and K's because they just never quite fit in the rythym of my writing.)

Death to cursive!

I think most people ended up creating their own writing style. As long as it's legible, I'm ok with it.

 

[zoobyshoe]

The wiki example shows how wiki can get it wrong thanks to someone uploading examples without knowing the subject, they don't even show an example of standard cursive. The subject title is cursive, the example is D'Nealian.

There is no "standard" cursive. You might be thinking of The Palmer Method that BobG mentions, but that was not the "standard", merely the most popular during a given time frame. Before that the very fancy Spencerian method was, apparently, the most popular. At the present time, D'Nealian is, apparently, the most popular. They're all cursive.

I wasn't taught Palmer. I don't remember the name of our system but it was adopted by the School Sisters of Notre Dame after much deliberation on their part. We did not write the same way as the public school kids in our town. This was in the 1960's.

All I remember is all of the ridiculous frills, curliques, peaks, and unnecessary flourishes. If it had just been a way to write quickly and easily, that would have been great, instead it was a nightmare of trying to match unnecessary flourishes. I can't tell you how many hours my teacher would make me re-do my small cursive r.

You're not against cursive, you're against OCD penmanship. It does defeat the purpose if you push people beyond legibility into time consuming perfectionism.

But, you'd have had the same bad experience with block printing if there had been no cursive for the OCD teachers to focus on.

Because: there's no limit to how well a person can print. The standard level of rigor in block printing required from a drafting student back in the day, for example, was far in excess of what the average non-drafting student had to be able to produce:

Scroll down to fig. 22:
http://www.kellscraft.com/EssentialsofLettering/EssentialsofLetteringCh02.html
The lines, "The ability to letter well can be acquired only by persistent and careful practice..." and the rest in that figure were lettered by hand. (Lots of people used to be able to do this. It was a standard skill for draftsmen and graphic artists.)

Teachers lavish the discipline on cursive because they don't expect people will be doing much printing. Cursive gets the reputation of being harder. In the absence of cursive I'm sure we would have been drilling for more perfect printing.

I don't think, though, that better printing is going to result from dropping cursive at this point in time because the point is really to drop the associated penmanship. I think the ubiquitous keyboard will kill handwriting. When you can type faster with your two thumbs than you could ever write by hand, what's the point?

The wiki example you show is not real cursive, it's is called D'Nealian, a combination of cursive and block print, look at the wiki r

No, you misread that. It's not a combination. There is a D'Nealian cursive and a D'Nealian block printing. Two separate things.

 

[Studiot]

Why does everything have to have fancy titles these days?

My primary school maths exercise book had 'sums' on the front.

My English book had 'writing' - which we called 'loops and joins' and is now apparently called cursive.

One school I went to had special paper, bit like music paper, but with four unevenly spaced lines for teaching loops and joins.

 

[Evo]

You're right zooby.

It also appears Zaner-Bloser is just as (un)popular as D'Nealian.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/ZanerBloser-Announces-Top-16-prnews-159878856.html?x=0

According to this, the two both claim 40% of the handwriting book market.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penmanship#Books_used_in_North_America

Zooby, if you went to a Catholic School you might have been taught Zaner-Bloser from what I read about Catholic schools back when you were in school. I was taught Cursize from Hell, which is the type in my link.

 

[Antiphon]

I can't wait until the kids no longer read cursive. Then I can tell them what I think the world's great political and historical documents contain.

Edit: let's get rid of the multiplication tables while we're at it. Don't we all use computers and calculators anyway? 2nd graders have so many more pressing things to learn.

 

[Jack21222]

I can't wait until the kids no longer read cursive. Then I can tell them what I think the world's great political and historical documents contain.

Edit: let's get rid of the multiplication tables while we're at it. Don't we all use computers and calculators anyway? 2nd graders have so many more pressing things to learn.

Are you seriously suggesting a 4th grader would be able to understand the constitution if only they were able to read it firsthand? I'VE never read the script version of the constitution. And then you're comparing multiplication, which everybody uses every day, with reading and writing cursive, which I haven't done in 10 years?

Was this supposed to be satire?

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

I can't wait until the kids no longer read cursive. Then I can tell them what I think the world's great political and historical documents contain.

Like the Magna Carta?

 

[zoobyshoe]

Zooby, if you went to a Catholic School you might have been taught Zaner-Bloser from what I read about Catholic schools back when you were in school. I was taught Cursize from Hell, which is the type in my link.

That Zaner-Bloser is also not what we were taught. The Capitol P and R are especially different from ours. All I remember is that they said they had spent considerable time deliberating over which system to teach and had chosen ours as "the best". They only mentioned that at all to quell our suspicions when it came out we weren't being taught the same cursive as our parents had learned, or as the kids who went to public school. If they told us the name of our system I don't remember it.

I haven't found anything online that completely matches our method.

Your cursive does look unnecessarily flourish-y compared to ours.

 

[zoobyshoe]

Are you seriously suggesting a 4th grader would be able to understand the constitution if only they were able to read it firsthand?

I think the point is that if someone can't read something and you can, you can tell them it says anything you want. The broader point being that the less you, yourself, can do, the more dependent you are on the good faith of "experts".

 

[Jack21222]

I think the point is that if someone can't read something and you can, you can tell them it says anything you want. The broader point being that the less you, yourself, can do, the more dependent you are on the good faith of "experts".

Alright, are YOU suggesting that if cursive writing isn't taught in 3rd grade, then nobody will learn it? Or do you feel Antiphon was suggesting that?

Why not make that a high school elective? Or a topic in English 101 in college? Or just something people self-study if they're interested in it?

Honestly, I've never read the original constitution, or any other original historical document. I've only read "experts" who copy it down in book or electronic form. I fail to see how knowing cursive would have changed that.