Reason #2,103 to mock America's education system

[grumbler]

Still I don't think it should be abandoned, if only to build up fine motor skills.

I wonder if keyboarding doesn't develop those same skills to more use, though.

I am not saying it is true, just noting the possibility.

[DGuller]

Probably not the same skill.  Cursive would develop dexterity, I would think.  I'm not sure what motor skill typing develops, but it's probably not dexterity.

[syk]

Still I don't think it should be abandoned, if only to build up fine motor skills.

I wonder if keyboarding doesn't develop those same skills to more use, though.

I am not saying it is true, just noting the possibility.

Could be, depending on the task. I was thinking of using a scalpel as I cut a lot of stencils. Maybe typing helps with things like playing piano.

[CountDeMoney]

So I guess I'm with Seedy.

At least someone else here has a little taste. 

Hey, I thought it was clear from my post that I was with you too.

You're English.  I expected you guys to be pro-cursive.

[grumbler]

Probably not the same skill.  Cursive would develop dexterity, I would think.  I'm not sure what motor skill typing develops, but it's probably not dexterity.

From my experience teaching fine motor skills and keyboarding, I am not so sure.  Keyboarding requires dexterity, for sure.  Not necessarily the same dexterity as penmanship (I think of it as more "digital" than the "analog" of penmanship), but I certainly don't think we should base our conclusions on some innate belief that others should do well what we do well.  In teaching, it is always a temptation to teach to the past of the educator, not the future of the student.  Teaching cursive has that vibe to me.

[DGuller]

Probably not the same skill.  Cursive would develop dexterity, I would think.  I'm not sure what motor skill typing develops, but it's probably not dexterity.

From my experience teaching fine motor skills and keyboarding, I am not so sure.  Keyboarding requires dexterity, for sure.  Not necessarily the same dexterity as penmanship (I think of it as more "digital" than the "analog" of penmanship), but I certainly don't think we should base our conclusions on some innate belief that others should do well what we do well.  In teaching, it is always a temptation to teach to the past of the educator, not the future of the student.  Teaching cursive has that vibe to me.

You can probably compare the issue of cursive with the issue of calculators in math.  It really is a waste to keep hammering manual computation as if calculators weren't invented, since you can learn so much more math when calculator is an integral tool.  At the same time, there still has to be a basic proficiency with doing math on your own, and that can never be completely replaced by technology.

[garbon]

Probably not the same skill.  Cursive would develop dexterity, I would think.  I'm not sure what motor skill typing develops, but it's probably not dexterity.

From my experience teaching fine motor skills and keyboarding, I am not so sure.  Keyboarding requires dexterity, for sure.  Not necessarily the same dexterity as penmanship (I think of it as more "digital" than the "analog" of penmanship), but I certainly don't think we should base our conclusions on some innate belief that others should do well what we do well.  In teaching, it is always a temptation to teach to the past of the educator, not the future of the student.  Teaching cursive has that vibe to me.

You can probably compare the issue of cursive with the issue of calculators in math.  It really is a waste to keep hammering manual computation as if calculators weren't invented, since you can learn so much more math when calculator is an integral tool.  At the same time, there still has to be a basic proficiency with doing math on your own, and that can never be completely replaced by technology.

But you don't really need cursive as you can rely on block letters.

[Berkut]

Probably not the same skill.  Cursive would develop dexterity, I would think.  I'm not sure what motor skill typing develops, but it's probably not dexterity.

From my experience teaching fine motor skills and keyboarding, I am not so sure.  Keyboarding requires dexterity, for sure.  Not necessarily the same dexterity as penmanship (I think of it as more "digital" than the "analog" of penmanship), but I certainly don't think we should base our conclusions on some innate belief that others should do well what we do well.  In teaching, it is always a temptation to teach to the past of the educator, not the future of the student.  Teaching cursive has that vibe to me.

You can probably compare the issue of cursive with the issue of calculators in math.  It really is a waste to keep hammering manual computation as if calculators weren't invented, since you can learn so much more math when calculator is an integral tool.  At the same time, there still has to be a basic proficiency with doing math on your own, and that can never be completely replaced by technology.

I don't think they compare at all though.

Someone who cannot do the basic computations needed for math cannot succeed at math. Someone who never once writes a thing in cursive will be limited in nothing at all.

It is a dead skill, like teaching Latin. It is done for nostalgia's sake, and nothing else.

Even if one wanted to teach "manual dexterity" (whatever that means) I bet you could accomplish that ten times as well in the same amount of time if you just went and created a program to teach it specifically, rather than teaching cursive with the hope that maybe people will pick up "manual dexterity" along the way.

[jimmy olsen]

It is a dead skill, like teaching Latin. It is done for nostalgia's sake, and nothing else.

Learning to read Latin is useful for historians, as is cursive.

[Tonitrus]

Russian handwriting is mostly in their form of cursive, and learning it totally fucked up my English cursive.

My credit card signature is pretty much just a memorized, mechanical art form at this point.

[grumbler]

You can probably compare the issue of cursive with the issue of calculators in math.  It really is a waste to keep hammering manual computation as if calculators weren't invented, since you can learn so much more math when calculator is an integral tool.  At the same time, there still has to be a basic proficiency with doing math on your own, and that can never be completely replaced by technology.

This may seem like a good comparison if you don't know anything about learning, but is incorrect.  Google "chunking" and I think you will understand why the difference exists.

[grumbler]

Someone who cannot do the basic computations needed for math cannot succeed at math. Someone who never once writes a thing in cursive will be limited in nothing at all.

It is a dead skill, like teaching Latin. It is done for nostalgia's sake, and nothing else.

I am not convinced that this is true.  Further, teaching Latin is actually extremely useful for students who want to succeed in things like the SAT; Latin tells you where the language comes from, and allows one to successfully guess at word meanings one is encountering for the first time. That may be a fault of the SATs, but it still is a fact.

Even if one wanted to teach "manual dexterity" (whatever that means) I bet you could accomplish that ten times as well in the same amount of time if you just went and created a program to teach it specifically, rather than teaching cursive with the hope that maybe people will pick up "manual dexterity" along the way.

I think this is true.

[DGuller]

You can probably compare the issue of cursive with the issue of calculators in math.  It really is a waste to keep hammering manual computation as if calculators weren't invented, since you can learn so much more math when calculator is an integral tool.  At the same time, there still has to be a basic proficiency with doing math on your own, and that can never be completely replaced by technology.

This may seem like a good comparison if you don't know anything about learning, but is incorrect.  Google "chunking" and I think you will understand why the difference exists.

Well, you'd be wrong, I do not understand why the different exists.  I did Google chunking, but I don't see how that applies to anything here.  Perhaps you can point me in a direction?