I read that article and looked up the original research. The handwriting used in that study was print-writing, not cursive. This hasn't stopped devotees of cursive from misrepresenting the study — intentionally, at times, because some dupporters of cursive have "explained" to me that "describing this study as being about cursive is ethically and intellectually necessary because that way of describing the study is necessary in order to support cursive." ? ! ? !
Legible cursive writing averages no faster than printed handwriting of equal or greater legibility. Further research shows that cursive does NOT objectively improve the reading, spelling, or language of students who have dyslexia or dysgraphia. (Sources for all research are available on request.)
The fastest, clearest handwriters avoid cursive. Highest speed and legibility in handwriting belong to those who join some letters, not all: joining the most easily joined letter-combinations, leaving the rest unjoined, using print-like shapes for letters whose printed and cursive shapes disagree.
Reading cursive still matters — but this is much easier and quicker to master than writing the same way too. Simply reading cursive can be taught in just 30-60 minutes — even to five- or six-year-olds (including those with dyslexia) once they read ordinary print. (There's even an iPad app teaching how. The app — “Read Cursive” — is a free download: appstore.com/readcursive )
Teaching material for more practical handwriting abounds: fluency WITHOUT cursive. Some examples, often with student work: BFHhandwriting.com, handwritingsuccess.com, briem.net, HandwritingThatWorks.com, italic-handwriting.org, studioarts.net/calligraphy/italic/curriculum.html )
Even here in the United States, educated adults are quitting cursive. In 2012, handwriting teachers across North America were surveyed at a conference hosted by Zaner-Bloser, a cursive textbook publisher. Only 37% wrote in cursive; another 8% printed. The majority — 55% — wrote with some elements resembling print-writing, others resembling cursive. When even most handwriting teachers don't use cursive, why exalt it?
Cursive's devotees sometimes claim that cursive justifies anything said or done to promote it. They state (in sworn testimony before school boards and state legislatures) that cursive cures dyslexia or prevents it, that it lets your brain work, that it creates proper grammar and spelling, that it teaches etiquette and patriotism and reasoning, or that it does anything else educationally imaginable. Some invoke research: citing studies that turn out to be misquoted or otherwise misrepresented by the claimant.
That eagerness to misrepresent research has substantial consequences, as the misrepresentations are made — under oath — in testimony to school districts, state legislatures, and other bodies voting on educational measures. Proposals for cursive are, without exception, introduced by legislators or others whose misrepresentations (in their own testimony) are later revealed — though investigative reporting does not always prevent the bill from passing into law, even when discoveries include signs of undue influence on the legislators promoting the cursive bill. (Documentation on request: I'm glad to speak to anyone interested in bringing this serious issue before the public.) By now, you probably wonder: “What about signatures?” Brace yourself: in any nation, cursive signatures have no special legal validity over other kinds. (Hard to believe? Ask any attorney!) Questioned document examiners (specialists in identification of signatures, verification of documents, etc.) tell me that the least forgeable signatures are the plainest. Most cursive signatures are loose scrawls: the rest, if they follow the rules of cursive at all, are fairly complicated: these make a forger's life easy.
All handwriting, not just cursive, is individual — just as all handwriting involves fine motor skills. That is why any first-grade teacher can immediately identify (from the print-writing on unsigned work) which of 25 or 30 students produced it.
Calling for cursive to support handwriting is like calling for top hats and crinolines to support the art of tailoring.
Kate Gladstone — DIRECTOR, the World Handwriting Contest CEO, Handwriting Repair/Handwriting That Works — 518-482-6763 165 North Allen Street Albany, NY 12206-1706 USA
Research shows that the fastest, clearest handwriters avoid cursive. They join some, not all, of the letters -- making just the easiest joins, and skipping the rest -- and use print-like rather than cursive-style forms for those letters that "disagree" between printing and cursive.
Since learning to read cursive takes an hour or less (I've taught five-year-olds to do it), and learning to write cursive takes a year or more, I do recommend that students learn how to read cursive for the sake of those who still write in cursive. But why require students to write in a style that the fastest and clearest handwriters avoid?
Kate Gladstone
handwriting instruction and remediation specialist --
Founder, Handwriting Repair/Handwriting That Works --
Director, the World Handwriting Contest --
http://www.HandwritingThatWorks.com
As a handwriting instruction/improvement/curriculum specialist, I think we need to attend to the research findings (JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, May/June 1998 issue) showing that the fastest and most legible handwriters DO NOT adhere to cursive. (Neither, as it happens, do they really print.) Highest-speed highest-legibility handwriters join some, not all, letters: making the easiest joins and skipping the rest. Also, highest-speed highest-legibility handwriters tend to use print-like shapes for letters that "disagree" between printing and cursive (even when the handwriter joins letters).
Regarding signatures: The legal sources (extensively researched by me and by my legal counsel) DO NOT justify the common assumption that signatures require cursive. The following material legally defining signatures and writing comes from definitions in BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY (eighth edition) and from definitions in the revised Uniform Commercial Code (law in all fifty USA states).
From the BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY [ ] entry for "Signature" -
"A signature may be written by hand, printed, stamped, typewritten, engraved, photographed, or cut from one instrument and attached to another, and a signature lithographed on an instrument by a party is sufficient for the purpose of signing it, it being immaterial with what kind of instrument a signature is made. ... whatever mark, symbol, or device one may choose to employ as a representative of himself is sufficient ... The name or mark of a person, written by that person at his or her direction. In commercial law, any name, word, or mark used with the intention to authenticate a writing constitutes a signature. UCC 1-201(39), 3-401(2). A signature is made by use of any name, including any trade or assumed name, upon an instrument, or by any word or mark used in lieu of a written signature."
From the BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY definition for "Writing" -
"The expression of ideas by letters visible to the eye."
Articles 1-201 (39) and 1-201 (46) of the revised Uniform Commercial Code :
(39) "Signed" includes any symbol executed or adopted by a party with present intention to authenticate a writing.
(46) "Written" or "Writing" includes printing, typewriting, or any other intentional reduction to tangible form.
Neither source mentions cursive as a requirement for signatures or for handwriting.
For more information/resources on the above issues (and on other handwriting instruction/performance issues), visit my web-site at http://www.learn.to/handwrite . You can also contact me via e-mail at handwritingrepair@gmail.com or via phone at 518/482-6763. By the way ... teaching kids to read cursive (whether or not they write it) takes an hour or less if done properly. I have taught five- and six-year-olds to read cursive, if they could read print.
Among the hospitals that call me in to prevent medication errors (by
giving handwriting classes to the doctors), a fairly high percentage
claim to have "computerized everything" 1 or 2 or 5 or more years ago
… yet they still have handwriting problems, because of a crucial 1% to 5% of handwritten documentation that just won't go away.
Doctors in "totally computerized" hospitals still scribble Post-Its to
slap onto the walls of the nurse's station, still scrawl notes on the
cuffs of their scrubs during impromptu elevator/corridor conferences
with colleagues … and, most of all, doctors with computer systems
often have the ward clerks operate the computers, use the Net, or
whatever: working, of course, from the doctors' illegible handwriting.
Bad doctor handwriting, incorrectly deciphered by ward clerks using the computer for any purpose, thereby enters the computerized medical record.
And what happens when disasters knock out a hospital's network? More than one hospital, during Hurricane Katrina, lost its generator, its electric power — and therefore its computer system — for the duration.
Even the computer-savviest staffers in the disaster zone had to use pens. Let's hope they wrote legibly.
Kate Gladstone - Handwriting Repair - http://learn.to/handwrite
Actually, according to the research, writers who mix the best elements of printing and cursive (all of us hybrid types) write *faster* (as well as more legibly) than the folks who write "pure" cursive or "pure" printing.
See more about this (and related info) at http://learn.to/handwrite
Actually, the law does *not* require cursive signatures, and never has required them. (Yes, your teacher lied to you — probably because HER teacher long, long ago lied to HER.)
For documentation that cursive signatures have no legal superiority to printed (or other non-cursive) signatures, visit the Frequently Asked Questions page of my Handwriting Repair [tm] web-site at http://learn.to/handwrite — then spread the word!
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Kate Gladstone.
Re: Re: Oh my! Whatever will we do!
What is “link script”?
Re: Don't be too quick
I read that article and looked up the original research. The handwriting used in that study was print-writing, not cursive. This hasn't stopped devotees of cursive from misrepresenting the study — intentionally, at times, because some dupporters of cursive have "explained" to me that "describing this study as being about cursive is ethically and intellectually necessary because that way of describing the study is necessary in order to support cursive."
?
!
?
!
Re: Re: Cursive
For those interested in "the clarity of print with the speed promised [but seldom legibly attained!] by cursive," here are resources:
BFHhandwriting.com, handwritingsuccess.com, briem.net, HandwritingThatWorks.com, italic-handwriting.org, studioarts.net/calligraphy/italic/curriculum.html
Handwriting matters ... but does cursive matter?
Handwriting matters — but does cursive matter?
Legible cursive writing averages no faster than printed handwriting of equal or greater legibility.
Further research shows that cursive does NOT objectively improve the reading, spelling, or language of students who have dyslexia or dysgraphia.
(Sources for all research are available on request.)
The fastest, clearest handwriters avoid cursive. Highest speed and legibility in handwriting belong to those who join some letters, not all: joining the most easily joined letter-combinations, leaving the rest unjoined, using print-like shapes for letters whose printed and cursive shapes disagree.
Reading cursive still matters — but this is much easier and quicker to master than writing the same way too. Simply reading cursive can be taught in just 30-60 minutes — even to five- or six-year-olds (including those with dyslexia) once they read ordinary print. (There's even an iPad app teaching how. The app — “Read Cursive” — is a free download: appstore.com/readcursive )
Teaching material for more practical handwriting abounds: fluency WITHOUT cursive.
Some examples, often with student work: BFHhandwriting.com, handwritingsuccess.com, briem.net, HandwritingThatWorks.com, italic-handwriting.org, studioarts.net/calligraphy/italic/curriculum.html )
Even here in the United States, educated adults are quitting cursive. In 2012, handwriting teachers across North America were surveyed at a conference hosted by Zaner-Bloser, a cursive textbook publisher. Only 37% wrote in cursive; another 8% printed. The majority — 55% — wrote with some elements resembling print-writing, others resembling cursive.
When even most handwriting teachers don't use cursive, why exalt it?
Cursive's devotees sometimes claim that cursive justifies anything said or done to promote it. They state (in sworn testimony before school boards and state legislatures) that cursive cures dyslexia or prevents it, that it lets your brain work, that it creates proper grammar and spelling, that it teaches etiquette and patriotism and reasoning, or that it does anything else educationally imaginable. Some invoke research: citing studies that turn out to be misquoted or otherwise misrepresented by the claimant.
That eagerness to misrepresent research has substantial consequences, as the misrepresentations are made — under oath — in testimony to school districts, state legislatures, and other bodies voting on educational measures. Proposals for cursive are, without exception, introduced by legislators or others whose misrepresentations (in their own testimony) are later revealed — though investigative reporting does not always prevent the bill from passing into law, even when discoveries include signs of undue influence on the legislators promoting the cursive bill. (Documentation on request: I'm glad to speak to anyone interested in bringing this serious issue before the public.)
By now, you probably wonder: “What about signatures?” Brace yourself: in any nation, cursive signatures have no special legal validity over other kinds. (Hard to believe? Ask any attorney!)
Questioned document examiners (specialists in identification of signatures, verification of documents, etc.) tell me that the least forgeable signatures are the plainest. Most cursive signatures are loose scrawls: the rest, if they follow the rules of cursive at all, are fairly complicated: these make a forger's life easy.
All handwriting, not just cursive, is individual — just as all handwriting involves fine motor skills. That is why any first-grade teacher can immediately identify (from the print-writing on unsigned work) which of 25 or 30 students produced it.
Calling for cursive to support handwriting is like calling for top hats and crinolines to support the art of tailoring.
Kate Gladstone —
DIRECTOR, the World Handwriting Contest
CEO, Handwriting Repair/Handwriting That Works — 518-482-6763
165 North Allen Street
Albany, NY 12206-1706 USA
http://www.HandwritingThatWorks.com
handwritingrepair@gmail.com
Re: Cursive handwriting
Our books reflect a slightly different early handwriting style from the one that ended up (centuries later) being taugh to small children.
Re: Cursive Writing Affects Cognitive Development?
I looked up the study that was referenced in the article you linked to. The handwriting used in that study was print-writing, not cursive.
what cursive teachers don't want you to know about handwriting
Research shows that the fastest, clearest handwriters avoid cursive. They join some, not all, of the letters -- making just the easiest joins, and skipping the rest -- and use print-like rather than cursive-style forms for those letters that "disagree" between printing and cursive.
Since learning to read cursive takes an hour or less (I've taught five-year-olds to do it), and learning to write cursive takes a year or more, I do recommend that students learn how to read cursive for the sake of those who still write in cursive. But why require students to write in a style that the fastest and clearest handwriters avoid?
Kate Gladstone
handwriting instruction and remediation specialist --
Founder, Handwriting Repair/Handwriting That Works --
Director, the World Handwriting Contest --
http://www.HandwritingThatWorks.com
some facts on handwriting, cursive and otherwise
Actually, research shows that the fastest and most legible handwriters avoid cursive (and avoid "pure" printing, too).
For more information, visit
http://www.HandwritingRepair.info/WritingRebels.html
and
http://www.HandwritingThatWorks.com
Kate Gladstone
founder of Handwriting Repair/Handwriting That Works
director of the World Handwriting Contest
some oft-neglected facts about the matter
As a handwriting instruction/improvement/curriculum specialist, I think we need to attend to the research findings (JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, May/June 1998 issue) showing that the fastest and most legible handwriters DO NOT adhere to cursive. (Neither, as it happens, do they really print.) Highest-speed highest-legibility handwriters join some, not all, letters: making the easiest joins and skipping the rest. Also, highest-speed highest-legibility handwriters tend to use print-like shapes for letters that "disagree" between printing and cursive (even when the handwriter joins letters).
Regarding signatures: The legal sources (extensively researched by me and by my legal counsel) DO NOT justify the common assumption that signatures require cursive. The following material legally defining signatures and writing comes from definitions in BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY (eighth edition) and from definitions in the revised Uniform Commercial Code (law in all fifty USA states).
From the BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY [ ] entry for "Signature" -
"A signature may be written by hand, printed, stamped, typewritten, engraved, photographed, or cut from one instrument and attached to another, and a signature lithographed on an instrument by a party is sufficient for the purpose of signing it, it being immaterial with what kind of instrument a signature is made. ... whatever mark, symbol, or device one may choose to employ as a representative of himself is sufficient ... The name or mark of a person, written by that person at his or her direction. In commercial law, any name, word, or mark used with the intention to authenticate a writing constitutes a signature. UCC 1-201(39), 3-401(2). A signature is made by use of any name, including any trade or assumed name, upon an instrument, or by any word or mark used in lieu of a written signature."
From the BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY definition for "Writing" -
"The expression of ideas by letters visible to the eye."
Articles 1-201 (39) and 1-201 (46) of the revised Uniform Commercial Code :
(39) "Signed" includes any symbol executed or adopted by a party with present intention to authenticate a writing.
(46) "Written" or "Writing" includes printing, typewriting, or any other intentional reduction to tangible form.
Neither source mentions cursive as a requirement for signatures or for handwriting.
For more information/resources on the above issues (and on other handwriting instruction/performance issues), visit my web-site at http://www.learn.to/handwrite . You can also contact me via e-mail at handwritingrepair@gmail.com or via phone at 518/482-6763. By the way ... teaching kids to read cursive (whether or not they write it) takes an hour or less if done properly. I have taught five- and six-year-olds to read cursive, if they could read print.
why electronic records won't eliminate the handwri
Among the hospitals that call me in to prevent medication errors (by giving handwriting classes to the doctors), a fairly high percentage claim to have "computerized everything" 1 or 2 or 5 or more years ago … yet they still have handwriting problems, because of a crucial 1% to 5% of handwritten documentation that just won't go away. Doctors in "totally computerized" hospitals still scribble Post-Its to slap onto the walls of the nurse's station, still scrawl notes on the cuffs of their scrubs during impromptu elevator/corridor conferences with colleagues … and, most of all, doctors with computer systems often have the ward clerks operate the computers, use the Net, or whatever: working, of course, from the doctors' illegible handwriting. Bad doctor handwriting, incorrectly deciphered by ward clerks using the computer for any purpose, thereby enters the computerized medical record. And what happens when disasters knock out a hospital's network? More than one hospital, during Hurricane Katrina, lost its generator, its electric power — and therefore its computer system — for the duration. Even the computer-savviest staffers in the disaster zone had to use pens. Let's hope they wrote legibly. Kate Gladstone - Handwriting Repair - http://learn.to/handwrite
hybrid writers (mixing print & cursive) go faster
Actually, according to the research, writers who mix the best elements of printing and cursive (all of us hybrid types) write *faster* (as well as more legibly) than the folks who write "pure" cursive or "pure" printing.
See more about this (and related info) at http://learn.to/handwrite
your teacher lied to you
Actually, the law does *not* require cursive signatures, and never has required them. (Yes, your teacher lied to you — probably because HER teacher long, long ago lied to HER.)
For documentation that cursive signatures have no legal superiority to printed (or other non-cursive) signatures, visit the Frequently Asked Questions page of my Handwriting Repair [tm] web-site at http://learn.to/handwrite — then spread the word!