Cursive Should Not Be Taught In Elementary Schools

THESIS: Even though many value the skill as important for efficiency and brain development, cursive should not be taught in elementary schools or above, because print develops the brain with similar efficiency, cursive is no longer necessary for most jobs, and learning cursive wastes time which could be spent learning more valuable skills such as keyboarding or computer programming.
The Declaration of Independence, U.S. Constitution, and the U.S. Bill of Rights were all written in cursive. These documents proved to be of pivotal importance in the history of the United States. Yet, the format they were written in is slowly being phased out of public education. Why is this handwriting style being phased out of schools? Many leaders of the

When we had downtime, we either had to spend time working in cursive workbooks or reading. After learning how to make the letters of my name in cursive, I spent most of my precious downtime reading. Due to this, I only learned how to make half of the letters of the cursive alphabet. After third grade, I never had to do cursive for school again. Since that time, many older people in my life have asked me “How do you get by without doing cursive?” I usually inform them that it is not necessary for me to know cursive in school, because I can print just as fast as they can write in cursive, and I can type faster than I can write. Although I was taught an unnecessary skill in school, a skill that would have been valuable for me to learn in third grade is computer programming. In today’s job market, many jobs can be secured just by knowing how to program. I am interested in the debate over teaching cursive in schools because I earnestly believe that the defense of cursive comes mainly from nostalgia, not logic. I believe that we need to make education more efficient, and doing so requires replacing outdated skills, such as

Despite this, Kate Gladstone, director of the World Handwriting Contest, argues, “The fastest, clearest handwriters join only some letters: making the easiest joins, skipping others, using print-like forms of letters whose cursive and printed forms disagree” (Web). Cursive was developed before technologies such as speech to text or computers. Speech to test, computers, and originally keyboarding, made it easier for someone who was not fluent in cursive to find success in the world. These technologies develop more everyday, causing fear that we will become lazy or less intellectual, due to the changing forms of writing. This fear has some standing. As Robert Rosenberger, from The Atlantic, says, “Writing technologies appear to incline certain styles, disincline others, lean authors toward more or less reflectivity, and supply both conveniences and inconveniences” (Web). This fear stemming from the phasing out of cursive is the most substantial fear being offered. If cursive really makes writing better overall, it of course should still be taught to young students in some format. In addition to these advantages it provided, cursive has also made official documents look more aesthetically appealing, which improved their reception amongst the general public and made them more long-lasting. Lastly, cursive is being taught less and less in public schools. An article from The Washington Post states that, “Since 2010, 45 states