Re: Cursive Again

DoneTryin · ‎03-09-2010

@Mellie32 OK, thanks for a sampling of how a teaching prof spends a schoolday. That's all I wanted to know.

PenneyT · ‎02-27-2015

I have nothing against cursive writing, some of my best friends are cursive writers, lol!

HOWEVER, I find the argument that future citizens won't be able to read the Constitution, etc., to be specious. Writings that are deemed important, either personally or societally, will be updated into modern formats. If Granny was German, for instance, her recipes wouldn't automatically be lost; if someone cared enough to do the work, they could be written, printed, texted, etc., for a modern American grandchild.

Another example: the Bible wasn't written in modern English cursive, but it is read all over the world, in many forms.

SaRina · ‎04-17-2015

Sadly, too much time is wasted on disciplinary matters in the classroom. All it takes is one disruptive student to waylay a lesson. Behavioral issues are much more prevalent and more severe today than they were in our day. In our day, if a child created a disturbance, they were quickly put in their place. That cannot be done today because of parental pressure and lack of support by administration.

Subject matter is more complex, given the (almost) 70 years that have passed. Technology that didn't exist in the '50's must be taught today. Basically, we have only added to....not subtracted from....material that must be covered.

Perhaps there are teachers here who can add to this.

Mellie32 · ‎03-13-2010

@SaRina wrote:
Sadly, too much time is wasted on disciplinary matters in the classroom. All it takes is one disruptive student to waylay a lesson. Behavioral issues are much more prevalent and more severe today than they were in our day. In our day, if a child created a disturbance, they were quickly put in their place. That cannot be done today because of parental pressure and lack of support by administration.

Subject matter is more complex, given the (almost) 70 years that have passed. Technology that didn't exist in the '50's must be taught today. Basically, we have only added to....not subtracted from....material that must be covered.

Perhaps there are teachers here who can add to this.

You're right - although my administration is pretty good at listening if we say a certain student needs to be out of the classroom because they are disrupting. I know some schools don't have that.

The literacy and math programs are full of things to do every single day. I'm guessing in the 50s they also didn't have mandatory intervention/small group time to work with kids who need a lot of extra help. Lots of paperwork goes into that as well.

I teach the littles, but I know that the upper grades have every student working on a computer every single day.

DoneTryin · ‎03-09-2010

I can see now that technology probably takes some of the time that teaching cursive would have taken years ago. Children today certainly do have to learn technology to survive in today's world. I hate to see cursive get lost altogether & would hope that perhaps it could be included in art classes. I think some parents/families will also take the time to teach it at home. I don't think it will be lost forever, just not as commonly known as it was in the past. After all, I do have to admit to doing handwork that some people today consider old-fashioned, like knitting, crocheting, embroidery, & needlepoint, though in bygone eras, girls were required to learn all, or some, of those skills.

WenGirl42 · ‎07-05-2012

@PenneyT wrote:
I have nothing against cursive writing, some of my best friends are cursive writers, lol!

HOWEVER, I find the argument that future citizens won't be able to read the Constitution, etc., to be specious. Writings that are deemed important, either personally or societally, will be updated into modern formats. If Granny was German, for instance, her recipes wouldn't automatically be lost; if someone cared enough to do the work, they could be written, printed, texted, etc., for a modern American grandchild.

Another example: the Bible wasn't written in modern English cursive, but it is read all over the world, in many forms.

The Bible is an excellent example of why relying on somebody in the future updating historical U.S. documents into modern formats shouldn't take the place of children/citizens learning how to read them directly. Look how many translations of The Bible there are just into English alone. And look at how much those translations vary based on the interpretations of their authors. Similarly, look how much interpretations of documents like the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence already vary even when everyone involved in the discussion can directly read the source document. Adding a layer of translation from cursive to print on top of that can only further complicate this. I understand schools can't take the time to teach cursive, but I sure wish parents would!

PenneyT · ‎02-27-2015

@WenGirl42, this old dog is too old to learn the new trick of learning so many languages and quirks within languages! If all I trusted was what I can naturally read, I would have missed out on a world of literature and poetry, philosophy and art, and many ideas of government, religion, etc.

SusieQ_2 · ‎03-27-2012

"Adding a layer of translation from cursive to print on top of that can only further complicate this. I understand schools can't take the time to teach cursive, but I sure wish parents would!" @WenGirl42

When it comes to historical documents, what layer of translation is there between cursive and print if they're utilizing the same language?

I agree with you, cursive is something that could easily be taught at home leaving classroom time for subjects that parents may find more challenging and are better left to the professionals.

WenGirl42 · ‎07-05-2012

@SusieQ_2 wrote:
"Adding a layer of translation from cursive to print on top of that can only further complicate this. I understand schools can't take the time to teach cursive, but I sure wish parents would!" @WenGirl42

When it comes to historical documents, what layer of translation is there between cursive and print if they're utilizing the same language?

I agree with you, cursive is something that could easily be taught at home leaving classroom time for subjects that parents may find more challenging and are better left to the professionals.

@SusieQ_2 There isn't one today (and look at all the differences in interpretation!) But if we start relying on having other people translating documents from original cursive into print or other "modern formats" as a reason why people don't need to learn cursive anymore, there will be. I'm expressing myself poorly! Right now, I can go to various online sources and read the text of these historical documents. They all have the same text, because most of us who speak English and learned cursive can go right to the source document and see and understand the words for ourselves. If the balance shifts so that fewer and fewer people learn to write (or read) cursive, that opens the door for potential differences in how the words are translated, because there will be fewer people who can go to the source and say, "that's not what that says at all." Like how few people can read The Bible in Aramaic/Hebrew today.

WenGirl42 · ‎07-05-2012

@PenneyT wrote:
@WenGirl42, this old dog is too old to learn the new trick of learning so many languages and quirks within languages! If all I trusted was what I can naturally read, I would have missed out on a world of literature and poetry, philosophy and art, and many ideas of government, religion, etc.

@PenneyT I hear you! I view losing a "language" (or more properly a form of language) as different than not gaining one though. Don't mind me though, I bet Chaucer probably felt the same way about "new" English that I do about this