This is the year of shared sacrifice. The state is facing budget deficits that will impact many agencies and departments including education. But somehow, although legislators know that the train barreling down the track is on a collision course
with preserving the systems that operate this state, they are still offering legislation that is inconsequential and frivolous. I am referring to HB 70 the cursive writing bill requiring all elementary students be taught cursive writing by the end of the fourth grade. Many of the sponsors of the bill claim that research indicates that learning cursive is beneficial to acquiring reading. However, this evidence is far from unimpeachable. No less than a leading neuroscientist, Karin Harman James, who is a leading expert in early brain development as a function of learning experiences cautions that – “the issue is difficult to study because it’s hard to find children whose educational situation differs only in the style of handwriting. What’s more a lot of the ‘evidence’ that does get quoted is rather old and of questionable quality, and some of the findings are contradictory. Simply put, our understanding of how children respond to different writing styles is surprisingly patchy and woefully inadequate.”
Because there is no conclusive research or scientific consensus to show that learning cursive is uniquely beneficial, school policies or laws such as HB 70 are more about culture than research. In a recent NY Times article, Anne Trubek, author of the book “The History and Uncertain Future of Handwriting,” comments that “people talk about the decline of handwriting as if it’s proof of the decline of civilization.” Since the idea of this bill was first introduced, countless people defend the teaching of cursive as an act of patriotism. Many people support the notion that reading the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution in its original form is the only way to truly embrace our democratic legacy. Not true. Democracy is to be practiced not rehearsed. Whether or not you can read it in its original form does not diminish one’s love of country or patriotic duty to vote, to serve on juries, to serve in the military, to testify or to run for political office. Being able to read grandma’s holiday note or birthday wishes while sentimental and nostalgic, is quickly being eclipsed by grandma’s text messages or Instagram pictures. And the notion that certain professions require strictly cursive writing is also addressing a diminishing field because ultimately all professional correspondence is typed and digitalized. Take a look at your desks and think about the last time your boss wrote any of you in cursive discussing a question about policy or reviewing your work performance. And teaching cursive when a child is 9 or 10, and then not exposing the child again to the form for twenty years, is like teaching them Spanish at the same age, without continuing practice, and expecting them to be fluent in twenty years.
Our world is changing, evolving with technology that make our daily lives more convenient and efficient thus impacting our modes of communication. Whether cursive survives the change doesn’t mean that we will lose the ability to dialogue, to create, to think or to connect with others. It just means that it will look different. And I am against HB 70 because as a former educator, I will always put the needs of children above the needs of bureaucratic nostalgia. There is consensus that the educational system has been weakened because of budgetary restraints, an influx of school-aged children, and an emerging complex workplace that demands more higher-level critical thinking skills and technological methodology. We all acknowledge that poverty disables learning, and the violence that some of our children face traumatizes their ability to thrive. Our teachers are continuingly burdened to teach, to reach, and to exceed standards that keep changing with fewer and fewer resources to complement their repertoire of skills. Cursive will not fix any of these issues. Children who come to school hungry, don’t care if they can read cursive. Children who face violence, don’t care if they can write in cursive. And teachers want to teach skills that match the world that make their students competent, confident, and independent. Cursive doesn’t match that world. Passing this bill will further stress a school district’s budget because of materials that need to be purchased to teach the subject; it will further stress a school day schedule that is already crammed with curricula that is necessary to achieve proficiency in a 21st century world, and it will rob teachers and children of time- a commodity that can not be replaced or duplicated. If Delaware is to be competitive and grow its workforce, I ask that legislators seriously reconsider making teaching cursive mandatory, and instead look into legislation that makes education more fair with equal opportunities and ample resources to combat the barriers and obstacles that hold our children back from productive and fulfilling lives.
The givers have sacrificed plenty. Thanks to your tax spend Democrats, the givers will soon be sacrificing more.
Paulette,
It would add that it’s time to retire Shakespeare and “Silas Marner” as well.
Because there is no conclusive research or scientific consensus to show that learning cursive is uniquely beneficial, school policies or laws such as HB 70 are more about culture than research.
Perhaps. But what is known is that the traditional, “old fashioned” technique of learning by rote (including cursive writing) produced the strongest economy, highest standard of living, most educated, productive and innovative society in the world.
What is also known is that “experts” and “research” have created a disaster in the public schools, as manifest by mediocre international test scores and the high rate of remedial coursework necessary for college freshmen to reach a level of basic proficiency.
Luckily, the future is with home, computer based education, with a curriculum chosen by parents and the student. The days of the classroom as indoctrination center is ending.
“Luckily, the future is with home, computer based education, with a curriculum chosen by parents and the student.” – rick
That’s as likely as “home, computer based” dentistry, with teeth cleaned, filled and pulled by parents and the patient.
Well Paulette, I have to say, I agree with you on this about 95%, and the other 5% is about your touchy, feely sentimental parts, but we can get past that.
I have had this discussion many times with others, and I always point out, that throughout history man has changed many times his way of communicating and recording his thoughts. If we never changed the form of communication, we would still be chiseling hieroglyphics on our walls.
Creeper seems to be on your side, but can’t resist taking a shot. I assume they wish to spend less, and if they would read with an open mind, they might see that forcing cursive to be taught would only add to the cost of education, which you pointed out.
Not sure what Delacrat is saying, but there is no need to retire what is read, only how it is written, and I don’t believe any school teaches Shakespeare in a handwritten cursive form.
And good old Rick says, ” But what is known is that the traditional, “old fashioned” technique of learning by rote (including cursive writing) produced the strongest economy, highest standard of living, most educated, productive and innovative society in the world.”
Well Rick, you are talking about how a subject is taught, “by rote”, maybe a good crack across the knuckles to boot, Paulette is talking about what is taught.
It really comes down to this for me, and I am not surprised my good friend Paulette missed this considering her political leanings. Local control. We do not need the state telling the local districts they must teach cursive, as far as I know it is not yet a part of the state testing requirements. If a local district choses to make it a part of the curriculum then so be it. Let the voters in that district hold those making the decision accountable.
But if we are going to require cursive, then I move that we also teach Mayan glyphs, after all we have a lot of their decedents living here.
Handwriting matters — does cursive? Research shows that legible cursive writing averages no faster than printed handwriting of equal or greater legibility. (Sources for all research are available on request.)
Further research shows that the fastest, clearest handwriters avoid cursive. They join only the most easily joined letter-combinations, leaving others unjoined, using print-like shapes for letters whose printed and cursive shapes disagree. (Many people who think that they “print” actually write in this practical way without realizing that they do so. The handwriting of many teachers – comes close: even though, often, those teachers have never noticed that they are not at all writing in the same print or cursive that they demand that their students should write.)
Teaching material for such practical handwriting abounds — especially in much of the UK and Europe, where such practical handwriting is taught at least as often as the accident-prone cursive that too many North American educators venerate. (Again, sources are available on request.)
For what it’s worth, there are some parts of various countries (parts of the UK, for instance, despite their mostly sensible handwriting ) where governmental mandates for 100% joined cursive handwriting have been increasingly enforced, without regard for handwriting practicality and handwriting research, In those parts of the world, there are rapidly growing concerns on the increasingly observed harmful educational/literacy effects (including bad effects on handwriting quality) seen when 100% joined cursive requirements are complied with:
http://morrellshandwriting.co.uk/blog/
Reading cursive, of course, remains important —and this is much easier and quicker to master than writing cursive. Reading cursive can be mastered in just 30 to 60 minutes, even by kids who print.
Given the importance of reading cursive, why not teach it explicitly and quickly, once children can read print, instead of leaving this vital skill to depend upon learning to write in cursive?
Educated adults increasingly quit cursive. In 2012, handwriting teachers were surveyed at a conference hosted by cursive textbook publisher Zaner-Bloser.. Only 37% wrote in cursive; another 8% printed. Most — 55% — wrote with some elements resembling print-writing, others resembling cursive.
When even most handwriting teachers do not follow cursive, why glorify it?
Cursive’s cheerleaders allege that cursive has benefits justifying absolutely anything said or done to promote it. Cheerleaders for cursive repeatedly allege research support — repeatedly citing studies that were misquoted or otherwise misrepresented by the claimant or by some other, earlier misrepresenter whom the claimant innocently trusts.
What about cursive and signatures? Brace yourself: in state and federal law, cursive signatures have no special legal validity over any other kind. (Hard to believe? Ask any attorney!)
Questioned document examiners (specialists in the identification of signatures, verification of documents, etc.) find that the least forgeable signatures are plainest. Most cursive signatures are loose scrawls: the rest, if following cursive’s rules at all, are fairly complicated: easing forgery.
All handwriting, not just cursive, is individual. That is how any first-grade teacher immediately discerns (from print-writing on unsigned work) which child produced it.
Mandating cursive to save handwriting resembles mandating stovepipe hats and crinolines to save clothing.
Kate Gladstone
DIRECTOR, the World Handwriting Contest
CEO, Handwriting Repair/Handwriting That Works
Sorry Frank. The “decedents’ aren’t living anywhere-unless you believe in the undead
US News & World Report has just released it rankings of high schools. And Sussex doesn’t fare well at all in terms of college readiness:
Sussex Tech 23.9%
Cape Henlopen 17%
Indian River 13.5%
Delmar High 12.2%
Sussex Central 11.5%
Laurel Senior High 9.0%
Cape and IR you’ll recall were preoccupied not long ago with censoring reading lists and reciting the Lord’s Prayer. Local rule does us proud.
What confuses me is that some of the same people who preach “local control” and complain about the overreach of the state and federal government also seem to be the same ones defending the need for this law. Isn’t this the type of decision that school boards are elected to make? Why should the state legislature be involved in micro-managing curriculum and policy for the school districts? On a somewhat related note, the state legislature should not give school boards the ability to raise taxes without referendums. School boards are not elected to decide tax policy.
That’s as likely as “home, computer based” dentistry, with teeth cleaned, filled and pulled by parents and the patient.
Why are “progressives” so stuck in the past?
As schools become more dangerous and ineffective, parents will look for alternatives. A computer based “classroom,” with a curriculum taught by experts in their field (rather than “teachers” with “education” degrees) will draw both inner-city students from mediocre, dangerous schools and suburban students who want to be educated rather than brainwashed. It is the future.
Having said that, I’m not saying that the school system will evaporate. There are always parents who don’t care about their child’s future, and who use the public school system as a babysitter.Those kids will be our future janitors, car wash attendants, criminals and so on.
And your “analogy,” vis-a-vis education and dentistry, is absurd. Is reading a book analogous to drilling and filling your own cavity? Further, does a high IQ student really need a low IQ “teacher?’
Could be that the legislature insinuates itself in all sorts of matters precisely everything in Delaware IS local–a function of its smallish population* and geographic size.
*Excluding decedents of course.
Rick – Perhaps. But what is known is that the traditional, “old fashioned” technique of learning by rote (including cursive writing) produced the strongest economy, highest standard of living, most educated, productive and innovative society in the world.
The world of yesteryear did not have computer, cell phones, cable TV, or the Internet. The world of today does, and our children are exposed to and are expected to integrate the type of skills that will make them productive citizens. Rote learning is inadequate and won’t give our children the right tools to master complex learning experiences. In fact, rote learning is one of the lowest forms of learning and it only accomplishes linear thinking. Critical thinking involves understanding abstract concepts, synthesizing those concepts to form a new concept, and evaluating to make sure those concepts truly work.
Paulette: The bill’s synopsis offers as the SOLE rationale that cursive writing “is still an imperative skill in many professions.”
As for myself, I can’t think of a one. And which Republicans are sponsoring this bill?
Brian Pettyjohn, Ruth Briggs King, Rich Collins, Dave Wilson, Dave Lawson, Colin Bonini, Deborah Hudson, William Outten, Daniel Short, Gerald Hocker, Bryant Richardson
The world of yesteryear did not have computer, cell phones, cable TV, or the Internet. The world of today does, and our children are exposed to and are expected to integrate the type of skills that will make them productive citizens….
Same ‘ol bs, aka excuse.
Technology changes. People don’t. A cursory examination of Pope, Shakespeare or even the Bible demonstrates that.
You can’t be an electrical, aerospace or mechanical engineer without a thorough grounding in mathematics. You can’t be a physician without a thorough grounding in biology and chemistry. And so on..
The “old” system worked just fine, just as the educational fads de jour are a proven failure.Of course, learning by rote is hard. All learning is, and it gets harder as you advance. That’s a fact of life.
As an aside, my 26-year-old son is Senior Cybersecurity Response Coordinator for a multinational corporation with 60,000 employees- and never took one computer/technology course in four years at GWU. But with a well rounded education, he adapted.
Your son didn’t get that education in Sussex County now did he? But he did go to K-12 public schools
Okay, okay, I misspelled descendants, I get it.
Trey, I agree with your point about local control as I said in my previous comment.
I also agree that school boards should not be allowed to collect taxes for the state.
There is talk of the state cutting funding to districts, and the districts would then be able in certain areas, such as transportation, to raise taxes to make up the difference. While this does give a certain amount of local control, it puts the boards in the position of tax collectors, and does nothing to reduce the tax burden to the citizens.
Rick, again you are focused on how to teach, Paulette’s post is about what to teach.
Warning Paulette, this is a typical tactic of Rick’s to deflect away from an issue he can’t defend his position on.
Rick, Frank and Paulette,
I understand that we are talking about subjects to teach but as long as we continue to teach the leaders of tommorrow ‘What” to think instead of ‘How’ to think we will continue to produce the product that contributes to the decline of our communities.
Keep wagging the dog folks, June 30th is coming fast and the budget gap is still HUGE. Last I checked with my State Senator we still have not engages in the debate of which breed of dog will represent Delaware for the next 12 months. I know it’s foggy out but I am having a great deal of trouble seeing but I can only hope that the light at the end of the tunnel is NOT a truck heading right at me.
So here is where we are with HB 70:
1. A bunch of Republican legislators, including many from Sussex, think that cursive handwriting is needed in many professions (but they are wrong) and so they are supporting a requirement that it be taught in every school in the state.
2. These same Republicans think that government should not be meddling in local affairs, except when they don’t.
3. One name is conspicuous by its absence: Ernie Lopez. You know, the only legislator who has a doctorate in education.
4. HB 70 is yet another instance of a state mandate that is unfunded. Materials for teaching cursive handwriting are not free, so the schools will have to ante up the moolah.
5. The legislature is mucking about in matters they know nothing about. Meanwhile, the real and imminent problem of closing a budget shortfall of $400 million remains.
The education delema can be distilled into one simple statement; we have replaced what worked with what doesn’t work.
Why? Because we’ve finally succumbed to Dewey’s plan for using schools as indoctrination centers.
As the socialist/racist/eugenicist Woodrow Wilson, a disciple of Dewey, once said “our goal is to make our students as unlike their fathers as possible (paraphrase).”
Brilliant.
A bunch of Republican legislators, including many from Sussex, think that cursive handwriting is needed in many professions (but they are wrong) and so they are supporting a requirement that it be taught in every school in the state.
Bennett, Henry, Walsh, Williams, Keeley, Mitchell – all sponsors of the bill – all Democrats.
This bill is about as bi-partisan as it gets in Dover. BTW Lopez – with his doctorate in education, is not on the Senate Education Committee. Fancy that.
To me this article smells exactly like Paulette Rappa trying to find herself some Sussex County street cred so she can run against Ruth Briggs King again. Unfortunately even in Sussex you need some cred to get cred, and you ain’t got s*it Paulette.
@ Rick: The education “delema”, huh? That’s slang for tension between two alpha males.
I rush. Spellcheck failed me. Or I failed spellcheck. Big deal.
I repeat. We replaced what worked with what fails.
I guess I shouldn’t say “we.” I mean the teachers unions and politicians.