<p>
Check out the recent “Much Ado About Nothing” from Joss Whedon.</p>
<p>gouf, I’ve taken 3 different courses that focus heavily on Shakespeare. I’ve been in performances (both on stage and off) and did workshops with a troupe from Stratford. I’ve been to more performances I can count. </p>
<p>Still not my taste. It’s whatever. I didn’t ask anyone to agree with me and I didn’t say it shouldn’t be taught. I just said it’s not comparable to cursive.</p>
<p>I wish I had learned shorthand as my mother did in school! She could take notes incredibly fast. She would also use it when she wanted to write notes about things she didn’t want the kids to know about (such as Christmas presents). So if taking notes is important, shorthand would be much more useful than cursive.</p>
<p>Since my dad was an engineering prof, he would bring engineering lettering books home when I was a kid, and I loved practicing it. All capital letters CAN look much better than small and caps, if they’re drawn with straight edges. I needed to use engineering lettering as late as the early 90s on old-fashioned paper drawings. I kind of miss that. Young engineers will never have that pleasure!</p>
<p>I’m a fast printer because I use printing at work. I can still write fast in cursive. I used to be the world’s slowest typist, but the fact is that if you practice, typing will win every time. And it’s still going to be easier to read than even the best handwriting. I think it’s silly to argue that cursive is faster - it’s only faster if you don’t learn to type properly. If schools stop teaching cursive presumably they can take some time to teach kids to touch type. My older son taught himself to use the Dvorak keyboard layout and he now types even faster than me.</p>
<p>I still use engineering/architectural letters, but only because I am a dinosaur. I don’t like this guy’s font much, but he’s got the right idea: [How</a> to write like an architect - YouTube](<a href=“How to write like an architect - YouTube”>How to write like an architect - YouTube)</p>
<p>Frank Lloyd Wright had terrible handwriting [ASPG</a> - Resources - [Analysis Frank Llyod Wright]](<a href=“http://www.aspghandwriting.org/main/ASPGAnalysis_FWright.html]ASPG”>http://www.aspghandwriting.org/main/ASPGAnalysis_FWright.html) even though his plans had nice lettering (well this one has a mix): <a href=“http://www.curatedobject.us/.a/6a00e54f9f8f8c88340148c74e87eb970c-pi[/url]”>Loading...;
<p>I haven’t been reading any of the other posts on this thread, but why not learn cursive? In some schools down south, to my knowledge, they still have classes on the etiquette of eating. Not everything you learn is necessarily meant to be practical or useful in everyday life. And really, are kids so dumb that they really can’t tack on learning something as simple as cursive in elementary school? I remember learning cursive in second grade (I’m 19 now) and I still remember it to this day.</p>
<p>Well, etiquette in eating still seems pretty practical to me! You do it every day, so do it right so you don’t get “the look”. And no, kids aren’t dumb–they pick up stuff pretty fast–we should be filling their heads with GOOD stuff to know rather than most of the stuff they are being exposed to. Just most things could be taught faster–it doesn’t take a specific “block” of time to teach anything. Just cram whatever you can in the time period.</p>
<p>Roman–no, Shakespeare is not comparable to cursive. I’ll let you go. You tried (but still try a MOVIE…)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Bold. I like it.</p>
<p>Since I’ve read a lot of your other posts I know you’re not a random anti-humanities ■■■■■. So I think you probably have some interesting reasons to say this. If you have a spare moment would you mind elaborating?</p>
<p>I learned cursive writing in third grade. I remember my fifth grade teacher forced us to write in cursive and told us that we would be required to in middle school. This was not the case, and I have written in print ever since. Print is easier to read in most cases, and honestly, everything now a days is typed. Learning to write in cursive seems to me to be a complete waste of time that could be focused on actual learning.</p>
<p>If CC had existed a generation or two ago, there would have been a similar discussion about schools dropping the requirement to study Latin. And before somebody responds that Latin can be useful, do you believe that everybody ought to learn it?</p>
<p>Sorry, didn’t see your comment last night, naval. I’ll pm you later instead of hijacking the thread lol. No, not anti-humanities in the least. Heck, my degree is called Arts & Humanities.</p>
<p>George Bernard Shaw didn’t think Shakespeare was all that great, either.</p>
<p>Out of curiosity, do they still teach cursive in the UK or Western European countries? (thinking of countries that use our alphabet, versus countries in which they use a Cyrillic or other alphabet)</p>
<p>Let me preface this by saying I’m 18, not some nostalgic old man.</p>
<p>I found it absolutely hilarious during each and every standardized test when we came to the honor statement. I finished in seconds while 90% of the people spent 15 minutes trying to write 3 sentences.
Cursive–proper writing–is not simply some archaic nonsense skill. Its acrobatics for the fingers! The inability to write in cursive is a reflection of the overall lack of fine motor skills in most younger people. keyboards have increasingly dumbed down our fingers and hands. They have relegated us to a world of predefined figures devoid of any natural, fluid character. </p>
<p>I like writing in cursive. I use it for everything, even calculus and physics. It just looks awesome. People wonder why I can draw and design things well. Its because my fingers have experience putting every detail of a thought on paper. </p>
<p>Writing in cursive is good for you.</p>
<p>^^^ A man after my own heart. :)</p>
<p>Everyone keep mentioning the honor statement on standardized tests. Why are the students required to write the honor statement in cursive? Cursive is just a different font. Why is a statement in one font any more valid than a statement in another?</p>
<p>Throughout this thread, a trope keeps repeating: **I don’t see what the big deal is. **</p>
<p>We didn’t realize it was a big deal to learn, until S-1 in 4th Grade was struggling to write classroom short answers, essays and such. He spoke so fluently. The writing inability, or sluggishness, made no sense to anyone, especially his teachers. His frustration was huge. </p>
<p>A psychologist observed him and immediately demanded of the Principal that he be excused from cursive requirement on every school writing assignment from that day forward. He was in a Congregated Gifted classroom, so no problems with his brain working or developing well. He simply could not write as quickly as he could think. Since Canada classifies giftedness under Special Education laws, this became part of his IEP (Individual Education Plan). No curriculum change was needed for others for whom this was “no big deal” to learn.</p>
<p>She explained to me that the number of strokes necessary to create each letter and connect them significantly complexified the fine motor requirement of writing. Compare, for example, lower case “L” including the connecting strokes close to the bottom line. Then imagine 2 connecting letters such as lowercase o-r that requires rewriting the start of the r. Count the number of tiny thoughts to cursive-write the word “above” versus speed-printing it. </p>
<p>While we might extol that as a valuable exercise in 3rd Grade, embraced by some, it becomes a large obstacle to others whose fine motor/brain connections work differently. So, if it’s an obstacle by 4th or 5th Grade, get it off the plate, said the Psychologist. Allow him to submit “slant print” lettering, and done.</p>
<p>You can’t imagine the floodgate that opened after that. This child became a wonderful writer in class, almost overnight. He was not slowed down by the mechanics. He’d had ample time to learn the mechanics, but it was a fail. Let it go.</p>
<p>Later, I taught 1st and 2nd grades in a poor rural school. I noticed that kids were excited to begin cursive in 3rd grade, as “big kid writing.” It had status, but so do sneakers.</p>
<p>ETA: I think my kid would have learned to read cursive, no sweat.</p>
<p>That’s an unusual case, but we can’t set standards based on such a situation otherwise no-one would learn anything simply because it could be hard for someone else. Personally, I had trouble learning to type in high school. The finger co-ordination required was dreadfully frustrating. I suppose my parents could have found some so-called expert to explain away my issues but that would never have occurred to them. Guess what? I’m typing.</p>
<p>I never suggested setting standards according to my one kid. I was using the anecdote to illustrate why it is “a big deal” since many posters had posted that, to them, it was no big deal.</p>
<p>I have no real dog in this fight, but as someone who enjoys fine calligraphy, has dabbled in it and would love to really immerse in it someday, I wonder what this all means for that skill. Does it become even more “niche-y” and will people not be able to read it?</p>
<p>paying3tuitions, exactly “what” isn’t a big deal? And what was the driving point of your anecdote? Are you saying learning cursive isn’t a “big deal”? Are you saying that everyone not being able to do cursive isn’t a “big deal”?</p>
<p>From what I took home, your son did not have developed fine motor skills to handle cursive.</p>