Tech-Writer.net > Pens > Penmanship > Why Jeanie’s Penmanship is Awful

Why JeanieÕs Penmanship is Awful

In many classrooms today , traditional cursive script handwriting instruction is on its way out. Why ? ÒSo many students have trouble with it that teachers are increasingly adopting a simpler style known as Italic or Ôprint cursiveÕ."

ItÕs not that an italic ÒhandÓ or print script (cursive) is anything new or less appropriate, itÕs the rationale suggested. Three decades ago, ScotlandÕs doyen of calligraphy and grand old man of handwriting, proposed adoption of what he called a ÒHandwriting for Today,Ó a handwriting offering clarity, fluidity, increase writing speed, and pleasant to the eye. The hand was neither script nor pure italic, but drew from both. ^¹ At the time, of course, PCs and keyboarding were not an alternative to good handwriting, nor are they today, but speed and legibility were important considerations and GourdieÕs proposed style was excellent at both.

So what has brought us to where we are ? Why do we see such deplorable, illegible handwriting from so many people ? Why is little JeanieÕs penmanship so awful ? A few key considerations:

Decreased emphasis on handwriting competence from decade-to-decade: Average instruction time is around 5-10 minutes a week; with usually no instruction/presentation after grades 3-4 (at just the point in education when one must write more - faster- in order to keep up with the work, even minimal instruction in how to do so is phased out).
Teachers cannot teach what they do not know: Teacher training in most US states no longer requires instruction in the teaching of handwriting. From the 1930s to the 1950s, handwriting vanished from more and more teachersÕ college course-lists. By now, training in how to teach handwriting is no longer even offered - let alone required - in most of the top teachersÕ colleges. Consequently, teachersÕ college graduates no longer have to demonstrate competence in teaching handwriting. In fact, they do not even need to write legibly themselves to gain the credentials that will let them teach your child.
What does this mean ? Today's teachers got their own final lessons in handwriting at about age seven or eight and they got those lessons from teachers who themselves received their own final training and evaluation in handwriting at that age. Would you let your child learn any other subject/skill - math, science, history, or spelling - from someone whose teaching skills and subject-matter knowledge were entirely grounded on what s/he remembered from the 2nd or 3rd grade?

Good handwriting is not a black art. ItÕs a matter of teaching and practice Ð nothing more or less. The increasing use of PCs in no way obviates the need for a clear, legible handwriting. In fact, it may be exactly the opposite. Suggesting that Jeanie is having trouble learning script handwriting, itÕs too demanding, so we need to adopt a Òsimpler styleÓ is ludicrous. Perhaps this same mentality believes we should just ignore the problem, continue to allow the chicken scratching we too often see today, or dumb-down another element in our childrenÕs education. The need for handwriting is not going away merely because there are PCs and other technologies available.

The idea of adopting the print script (cursive) handwriting style is hardly new think. In fact, we can see variants of this general style taught in up-scale, private Òfinishing schoolsÓ as far back as the early 1900s, a time when much more elaborate and difficult to master handwriting styles were being taught too. There are many variants of the print script hand evident in the calligraphic arts, evidenced by the work of none other than Edward Johnson and Tom Gourdie (among others). It requires no less instruction and practice than other rapid hands. So doesnÕt this beg the question: Why so much difficulty today ? Perhaps it amounts to perceptions about what is important in the curriculum, where classroom time is committed, or even the attitude and approach conveyed by the educators. In any case, my objection is not to the adoption of the print script handwriting, it is to the stated rationale for taking this step.

I believe thereÕs long been another issue in handwriting instruction, that is we are taught printing letters first, then, later, are asked to change to the entirely different script or cursive style. So, as one person has observed, does this mean we should teach math in Roman numerals then, say in the third grade, change to modern Arabic numerals. Even better, letÕs teach English by starting off in RussianÉ

ItÕs absurd to think Jeanie will do better with print script than with more traditional cursive hands if sheÕs not given adequate instruction and time for practical application. Good penmanship arrives from:

A good understanding of the writing instruments (tools),
Instruction in the letters themselves, then
Practice, practice, practice ! There is no substitute for practice.

1 Handwriting for Today, Taplinger Pub Co (June 1, 1976) ISBN: 0800838122