Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Education United States

Florida Bill Would Require Cursive Instruction in Elementary Schools (nbcmiami.com) 245

An anonymous reader shares a report: Elementary-school students would have to learn how to write in cursive, under a bill set to be vetted by a House committee next week. Sen. Erin Grall, R-Vero Beach, filed a similar proposal (SB 444) on Monday. The House Student Academic Success Subcommittee is set to review the measure (HB 127) on Nov. 18.

Sponsored by Rep. Toby Overdorf, R-Palm City, the bill would require cursive instruction in second through fifth grades. The proposal, filed for consideration for the legislative session that begins Jan. 13, also would require students to demonstrate proficiency in cursive by the end of fifth grade.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Florida Bill Would Require Cursive Instruction in Elementary Schools

Comments Filter:
  • by Mr. Dollar Ton ( 5495648 ) on Monday November 17, 2025 @09:42AM (#65800197)

    Let them also learn the most often-used 500 Chinese characters while they are at it.

  • Re: (Score:5, Insightful)

    by kurkosdr ( 2378710 ) on Monday November 17, 2025 @09:48AM (#65800215)
    This reeks of "I was put through this crap when I was young, so today's youth should also be put through this crap".
    • by Bert64 ( 520050 )

      Pretty much this...

      I had to learn cursive in school, and i've never used it since leaving school.
      About the only time i ever write anything by hand is official forms, and for those you are expected to write legibly and often in uppercase.

      It's also extremely annoying when someone else writes things by hand and you're expected to read them, it's often extremely difficult to read and leads to errors.

      • I can no longer write in cursive. I'm 45 years old. I can read it if it's like an old document such as the constitution, but I can't read any modern cursive without a lot of effort. I find it pointless.

      • The only time I ever use cursive is on forms. It's called my signature. I can't imagine closing on a house without being able to at least write my name in cursive. For everything else, I hand print non-cursive. I'm slow with either, so it's of no benefit.

        • by Bert64 ( 520050 )

          A "signature" is just an arbitrary mark, and is in itself extremely archaic. Many people simply make some random swipes, doing it differently every time and noone cares.

          • by sconeu ( 64226 )

            Because it's impossible to write your signature legibly, while using your finger instead of a pen or stylus, on a phone sized device.

  • I think pupils should learn to hand-write. It's a useful skill to have. What I think should be done away with is torturing children with dictations and other non-sense that are basically speed-writing contests _without_ teaching them to type and giving them the option to chose typing over hand-writing.

    • by MBGMorden ( 803437 ) on Monday November 17, 2025 @09:58AM (#65800241)

      Hand-writing is fine. Cursive itself is pointless. Print is just as fast in modern times and is FAR more legible.

      If you look at cursive writing from like an 1800's census or something, half of it is virtually impossible to read. Cursive was invented for use with QUILLS. Even if you're writing by hand now you're using a pencil or an ink pen, not a quill.

      • by bsolar ( 1176767 )

        Cursive was invented for use with QUILLS.

        I thought cursive was invented to write faster, which might still be relevant in some contexts, e.g. handwritten note-taking.

      • Cursive itself is pointless. Print is just as fast in modern times and is FAR more legible.

        Print is faster than cursive? Nope.

        Modern print is faster than "old" print? How so? Unless you're implying gothic print, I don;t see how there could be any performance increase in hand written print in the last few hundred years.

        Cursive is literally less movement, and less removal and application of the instrument tip. It has to be faster, if you know how to write it.

        • I don't mean "modern print" as opposed to "old print" - I mean print with modern writing instruments as opposed to the instruments of the time when cursive was invented. They didn't exactly have ball point pens back in the days of yore.

          Cursive is not generally less movement in the 2d plane of the paper - it is just less movement up and down in the 3d space so that you are removing the pen from the paper less. The thing is, we can move in 2 directions at once. The tip of a pen can come off the paper as it

        • I don;t see how there could be any performance increase in hand written print in the last few hundred years.

          It's called the ballpoint pen. It's a vastly superior writing instrument to the quills in use before that, and overcomes many of the issues cursive writing was designed to solve (mainly splattering of ink, which happens with any dip pen when you lift off the page). Proficient cursive is still faster than print (in theory, at least) but it's also technically more challenging, so in practice cursive will end up being slower unless you hand write a lot. It's also way easier to read bad print than it is bad cur

  • by TomTraynor ( 82129 ) <thomas.traynor@gmail.com> on Monday November 17, 2025 @09:54AM (#65800229)
    I wonder how many of the teachers even know how to write in cursive.
  • by RobinH ( 124750 ) on Monday November 17, 2025 @09:57AM (#65800239) Homepage

    There was an educational movement just after 2000 where for some reason teachers decided that rote learning was bad, so the activists within the ranks of teachers went through and got rid of everything that was strictly memorization and practice-based. This included everything from phonics to flash cards and of course cursive. In fact I think keyboarding was also a victim. My kids didn't take any of these things in school (we're in Ontario, Canada). Their handwriting is awful.

    We sat in the evenings teaching them how to read (sounding words out), doing adding, subtracting, and multiplying flashcards with them, and I bought a typing tutor program and repeatedly encouraged them to use it. The Ontario government brought back mandatory cursive teaching to classrooms just after my kids left elementary school. I would say, of all these things, learning your times tables is way more important than cursive. There was a lot of research in recent years showing that both "learning to understand" *and* rote learning are important for a child's education, but it seems like the school boards won't admit their mistakes until the people who made those mistakes retire.

    Just as my kids entered high school, the provincial government, worried that certain minority groups weren't doing well on tests and were over-represented in basic classes (vs. academic level) decided to de-stream both grade 9 and grade 10, and remove all exams from grades 9 and 10 as well. You don't have to write an exam in Ontario until you reach grade 11. Let's be clear... the data showed that kids from minority groups weren't doing as well, and their solution was to stop collecting data. It's absurd.

    I really do feel like the education system was unethically experimenting on my kids this whole time. The worst part is that they were basing their decision on pop-psychology teacher-memes instead of hard and fast evidence-based research. The cost of these mistakes will be paid by the generation of kids who are only now moving on to university and the workforce. The whole saga sickens me.

    • There was an educational movement just after 2000 where for some reason teachers decided that rote learning was bad, so the activists within the ranks of teachers went through and got rid of everything that was strictly memorization and practice-based. This included everything from phonics to flash cards and of course cursive. In fact I think keyboarding was also a victim. My kids didn't take any of these things in school (we're in Ontario, Canada). Their handwriting is awful.

      The best schools always included a mix of techniques in teaching. You had "drill 'till it kills" in math, THEN you had logic and reasoning exercises. You had memorization of names and dates, THEN you had deep discussions of historical events. A good education includes both rote and discussion, and always has.

    • They took a nugget of truth and ran with it. Rote learning is bad if it replaces understanding. But I wouldn't survive adulthood if I didn't rote memorize addition and times tables.

    • by narcc ( 412956 )

      There was an educational movement just after 2000 where for some reason teachers decided that rote learning was bad, so the activists within the ranks of teachers went through and got rid of everything that was strictly memorization and practice-based.

      This is pretend history. The anti-phonics things was much earlier (early 20th century, search for Horace Mann) and only hung around because of idiots who refuse to let go of terrible ideas. This is how we got "balanced literacy" in the 1990's, which combined phonetics with Mann's "whole language" nonsense. (If your kids were taught "sight words", this is probably why.) In the 2000's, the emphasis should have been on these five concepts: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension

  • by hyades1 ( 1149581 ) on Monday November 17, 2025 @10:03AM (#65800261)

    At first blush, this bill looks like just another Republican attempt to appeal to the base while at the same time distracting people from the real reasons why the US education system doesn't stack up well internationally. This is probably true, but there's something far more important at stake. Teaching children cursive writing at a young age develops fine motor skills, and that's something that can pay big benefits down the road.

  • by Tony Isaac ( 1301187 ) on Monday November 17, 2025 @10:10AM (#65800281) Homepage

    When I was in school in the 1980s, typing was a popular subject with high schoolers, especially those who were going into office work. Then, as computers took over the world, schools ironically started to *drop* typing from their curricula. Why on earth? If anything, younger students should be taught how to type. Knowing how to touch-type saves me probably an hour or more every single day.

    • I think that the science shows that kids today are born knowing how to type with their thumbs. So, there's no need to teach them how to type on antiquated keyboards.

    • I learned how to type, in the early 90s, on a typewriter, by watching the Alemdia method tape one single time. And I still remember the jingle.

      But I *perfected* my typing on Sierra On-Line games and the like.

    • Well, here's my anecdote. I have been typing continuously since the 80s, making a living coding, writing business and management docs, creating software manuals and training materials... my whole adult life had a keyboard in front of it. But I never learned to type "properly". To this day it's a hodge podge process of controlled, high speed chaos.

      Several of my aunts were in administration. They all knew how to type properly, and they were slightly faster on the keyboard than I.

      They all got repetitive motion

    • by dskoll ( 99328 )

      I never took a typing course, but it was trivial to learn to touch-type once I got a computer and started programming. I don't know anyone who has had a computer for more than a few months who can't touch-type.

  • This one at least doesn't require students to take a class that half the parents will find offensive. So as debates over school curricula go, this one seems pretty tame. Whichever way it goes, it's not going to cause harm.

  • by insolent_gnome ( 10392635 ) on Monday November 17, 2025 @10:18AM (#65800307)
    As I wrote out a medication schedule for my dad after he got out of surgery this weekend, my parents were very happy about how legible my writing was. We were just talking about how one of the most useful, long term skills I picked up in school was my architectural drafting class in high school where they drilled us on perfect print. There is an art to our language that is being lost, and I see it in every meeting where people are incapable of writing legibly on a whiteboard. And no matter how fast you can type, research shows again and again that you retain information differently when you hand write vs type.
    • Yup, I got really good at writing text due to my drafting/architecture/engineering courses through high school and college. Of course, that was before schools had really gone CAD, I was right on the edge of that. Started by hand, ended in AutoCAD. I can still break out the fine print when needed, but my quick note handwriting is chicken scratch that only I can read.

    • research shows again and again that you retain information differently when you hand write vs type.

      As someone who has illegible handwriting, it's what saved me in college. I could remember what I wrote but I couldn't go back and study from it.

      • As someone who has illegible handwriting, it's what saved me in college.

        I hope you never turned in a handwritten essay.

        I used to grade such things. Any paper with bad handwriting was an absolute horror. It did not save the author from a poor grade.

        I could remember what I wrote but I couldn't go back and study from it.

        At the very least, you should be able to read your own handwriting. If not, you are a Lost Boy.

    • by dskoll ( 99328 )

      Yes, I had a couple of drafting courses when I studied Engineering and the prof was an absolute stickler for perfectly-formed letters. I resented it at the time, but now find it very useful to be able to write legibly.

    • research shows again and again that you retain information differently when you hand write vs type

      True, but keep in mind that this is not universal. For me, and for two of my children, writing by hand reduces learning and retention. We have some sort of dyslexia-adjacent disability that prevents us from "automating" writing the way most people do. When kids learn to write, they learn to draw the letter shapes out line by line and curve by curve, but for most people the shape-drawing quickly becomes automatic. Not so for me, or my kids. Writing takes focus and attention, not on the text being writte

    • We were just talking about how one of the most useful, long term skills I picked up in school was my architectural drafting class in high school where they drilled us on perfect print.

      Sure, but that's print. As other have pointed out, most of the advantages of cursive have gone away since the introduction of the ballpoint pen. Some of the simplified letterforms (e.g. the lowercase 'a') are useful, but looping and joining aren't. Cursive is long obsolete as a writing form. At best it's more aesthetically

    • by sconeu ( 64226 )

      And no matter how fast you can type, research shows again and again that you retain information differently when you hand write vs type

      Yeah, I noticed this when I went back to school at age 60. Everyone else in the class was using their laptops. I had brought mine, but it wasn't worth it. I needed to have the info go through my brain to my arm and hand to help me retain the info.

  • still practices school corporal punishment.

    Figures.

  • They don't spend much time teaching how to write in print form and go straight to cursive. Mostly because Cyrillic is slow to write out compared to the simplified Latin script like the single stroke forms we teach children to use in the West.

    • by narcc ( 412956 )

      Have you seen Russian [wikipedia.org] cursive [wikipedia.org]? If what you're saying is true, it would completely explain the fall of the Soviet Union, the collapse of the Russian economy in 1998, Rocky IV, etc. without the need to consider any other external factors.

  • Every child should take penmanship courses, and be taught to write in Spencerian Script. I would expand the requirement and teach kids to write with proper pens and ink.
  • teach them to write using fountain pens, apply sealing wax to the envelopes they'll use to send checks they've written to the phone company, and how to dial rotary phones. Oh, and to read ticker tapes coming off stock machines showing the current prices of PanAm airlines, Westinghouse manufacturing, and Sear-Roebuck department store.

  • Everyone gets out of joint about specifics of the different practice-based skills we no longer teach. Something also lost is that practice skills can be mastered using ... practice. We have replaced it with a lot of more wooly teaching which I think is intended to teach the ability to properly consider the problem and search for the core concepts. The issue with this is that we have very little evidence that humans can actually learn that level of discrimination en masse, and we also don't really underst

  • ... to write in cursive when I was a kid. Problem is: nobody can read my handwriting*. On the other hand, I learned to print in drafting classes. And my neat printing adorns numerous sets of construction blueprints in my city.

    *I probably should have gone to medical school. [blogspot.com]

  • The kids who are not idiots will pick it up easily. The ones who don't, it's not like learning cursive is the problem.
  • I guess we should also teach kids how to shoe horses, repair steam locomotives, and use telegraphs and Morse code.
  • Political figures need to stop clinging to their childhood an let some old ideas go.
  • Why, though? (Score:4, Informative)

    by dskoll ( 99328 ) on Monday November 17, 2025 @12:19PM (#65800651) Homepage

    I'm old enough (almost 60) to have learned cursive in school, and it really wasn't a big deal and I certainly never suffered from it. But other than my signature, I don't think I've written anything in cursive in 3 decades or so. Almost everything I write is typed on a computer, and the small amount of handwriting I do is done using non-cursive printing because it usually involves filling in a form.

    If you are studying history or classics or whatever and need to read old manuscripts, then sure... you need cursive. But almost nobody else does nowadays.

    The only exception I can think of is if you want to hand-write notes in class, which I found made them stick in my memory much better than typing them. In that case, you need cursive to be able to write at a decent speed.

  • I was forced to learn cursive
    I hated it and sucked at it
    As soon as I was able, I stopped using it
    The only value in learning cursive is for calligraphy or reading historical documents
    It's a dinosaur that deserves to go extinct

    • Until you try to read old documents (genealogy/family records, journals, government records, etc.). It's hard to believe, but many people born in this last generation cannot read the "English variant" of cursive - at all.

Enzymes are things invented by biologists that explain things which otherwise require harder thinking. -- Jerome Lettvin

Working...