• Encrypt-Keeper
    link
    fedilink
    English
    11 year ago

    Any historically significant document has been / will be transcribed so it’s not so much “useful” as it is a niche “novelty.” That would certainly make it a fun learn for history geeks who want to read historical documents in their original form, however that doesn’t make it a very practical skill to teach the majority of school students across the country.

    • @Tavarin@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      Being able to read my not-transcribed great-grandmothers letters to my mom is a nice perk of being able to read cursive. And it’s really not hard to learn, and takes little class time.

      • Encrypt-Keeper
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I don’t think it’d be prudent to add cursive to standard curriculums across the nation so that the nations children can read your great-grandmothers letters to your mom. That’s a good case for an extracurricular lesson or two perhaps, for you personally.

        • @Tavarin@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          Yeah, cause I’m the only person out there with ancestors.

          Are you being purposefully dumb?

          • Encrypt-Keeper
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Of all the challenges our education system needs to improve on, from basic financial literacy to appropriate and sex and health education, your suggestion is to take up valuable classroom time that’s in short supply as it is to teach kids across the nation to be able to read their great grand parents love notes that may or may not exist? If we’re throwing the word dumb around…

            Maybe if you personally have a treasure trove of ancient ancestor love notes that you need to be able to read so badly, you could engage in extracurricular cursive learning? And save our nations children’s valuable class time for something that’s more applicable to their daily life than one niche use case?

            • @Tavarin@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              You are massively overestimation how much time it takes to learn cursive.

              Also I learned cursive in first grade, when classes on basic financial literacy and sex education are entirely useless.

              You really are just being dumb. Learning cursive is a useful skill, and takes almost no class time at an age when advanced subjects will just be forgotten or not at all understood.

              • Encrypt-Keeper
                link
                fedilink
                English
                11 year ago

                You are massively overestimating how useful of a skill cursive is. The only use case you could come up with was “reading ancient family letters” as if that warrants literally any time in the US education system.

                What you don’t seem to understand is that we used to teach cursive in school. It was determined that reading great grand dad’s love letter to great grand mom was not useful enough to continue teaching it. We have adults today who never learned cursive and objectively speaking absolutely nothing of value was lost. So if you want to make the case that it’s worth teaching again you’re going to have to come up with a whole host of much better reasons. There are many things that take varying levels of time and effort to teach in schools of all grade levels, and I don’t think cursive can beat out any of them. American society as a whole disagrees with your entire premise and I’m inclined to agree with them.

                • @Tavarin@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  11 year ago

                  And what other skills can we effectively teach six year olds that we aren’t already teaching them at that age? Skills they can actually understand and remember.

                  And it’s being able to read any historical documents, family letters are just one example I gave. And being able to read documents yourself means you either transcribe it yourself, or verify others transcriptions. If no one can read cursive, you can;t trust the accuracy of previous transcriptions.

                  So yeah, it’s still somewhat useful, and a lot more useful than most things we can get 6 year olds to remember.

                  Man, you are dying on dumb hill here.

                  • Encrypt-Keeper
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    11 year ago

                    We are currently teaching six year olds skills they need, without cursive. I don’t think any of them are good candidates for removal. And if we were to add more, cursive would certainly be at the bottom of the list.

                    And we’ve already gone over historical documents, they’ve been transcribed. Some irrational fear of transcription isn’t a good reason to teach cursive. There are far more historical documents that exist in other languages, than there are in modern English cursive, so in your scenario we’d have to teach every kid to read and write in every single language that currently exists or used to exist just so that every single person in the country can verify the authenticity of every transcription ever made? If you can’t trust ANY historian or educator to relay information accurately then what are we supposed to do, abolish the school system entirely? Nobody can learn anything from anybody else because nobody can trust anyone but themselves? Ok bud you keep your tinfoil hat on?

                    It’s unlikely I’m on the dumb hill since I’m on the hill that has already prevailed. I stand on this hill with the rest of American society and educators who seem to be doing just fine… you can die alone on your hill I guess.