• Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s not a matter of difficulty, it’s a matter of benefit vs the cost of resources. You can’t eliminate the teaching of print handwriting, so if you want to teach cursive you have to do that in addition to teaching print handwriting. There is limited space in a school’s curriculum, and though there would be some personal benefit to teach cursive, there isn’t enough practical benefit to include it over other subjects.

    You have to remember that school is compulsory in the U.S. and so public schools need to choose subject matter that will best prepare the average student for adult life. Cursive is more useful as an art form than as a practical skill, and there are better art forms to teach in school as well that allow for more creative expression.

    Cursive writing might be personally enlightening for students that enjoy it, but it’s not something that needs to be or should be taught as part of the required curriculum.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I suppose it shows the lack of cursive education that y’all are calling cursive an art for . Definitely not. You want calligraphy. Cursive is connected writing with modifications to make it smoother and more efficient to write

      • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        We have connected writing with modifications to make it smoother and more efficient to write. This is often taught in school and is very commonly used. “Cursive” to an American however refers to a very specific type of script which is much closer to calligraphy than it is regular handwriting and it’s this type of script that the post is referring to.