Tag Archives: cognition/learning/understanding

Review Essay: Cursive Handwriting, Penmanship, and Learning

[Addendum: Here is an article from 21 January 2025 in Britain’s excellent newspaper The Guardian on the decline and possible disappearance of handwriting, and what consequences it may hold.]

If there has been one constant in my 16 years of service in urban schools (besides the gross institutional dysfunction, I mean), it has been the interest in cursive writing among the students I’ve served. Just to make sure the context for this assertion is solid, I’ve worked with kids in grades six through twelve in five different schools–two in Manhattan, two in The Bronx, and one in Springfield Massachusetts. In all these schools, among the students I’ve served, there has been more or less universal interest in cursive–including among the toughest, most alienated kids.

There is much to recommend that teachers yield to students’ interest in cursive handwriting and penmanship. While it appears that one’s signature need not be in cursive on legal contracts, it is still, according to the informative article under that hyperlink, the best approach when inscribing an identifying mark on a legal document. That said, there is a growing body of research on cursive writing that links it with a variety of skills and understandings that make a powerful case for retaining it as a classroom activity, particularly for younger students.

Generally speaking, one need only search (as I just did) a term like “research on cursive writing and learning” to find a plethora of review essays that cite research on the link between cursive writing and learning–particularly learning for retention. For example, this article from three Italian scholars of education reports on links between early cursive training and the development of literacy skills. It should come as no surprise that cursive helps children develop fine motor skills and hand-eye coordination, as this article from Psychology Today reports. From the pages of my union’s magazine, NEA Today comes this squib on teaching cursive–I particularly recommend scrolling down to the bottom of the article and reading the comments, which are in themselves informative. Finally, a scholar named Karin James at Indiana University, which clearly is a center of this research, has done quite a bit of work on handwriting and learning; indeed, she appears to be the go-to expert on the subject.

If you’re looking, however, for a shortcut to understanding the importance of handwriting and penmanship to learning, then you might want to read this article from Steve Graham, a professor of education at Arizona State University (and formerly the Currey Ingram Professor of Special Education and Literacy at Vanderbilt University) from the Winter 2009-2010 number of the American Federation of Teachers Excellent quarterly, The American EducatorI can’t remember where I grabbed it, because I inadvertently downloaded it while researching this essay (after a period of work, I noticed it on my desktop, having no idea where it originated), but this PDF answers the question “Why Teach Cursive?” quite concisely.

The conspectus in the preceding paragraph represents only the most cursory research on my part into the importance of cursive. I took a quick look in ERIC (the Educational Resources Information Center), which featured 51 abstracts on the efficacy of teaching cursive writing as an adjunct to a variety of other means of building literacy in kids. My point here is quite simple, so I’ll stop belaboring it: there is ample research on handwriting and penmanship to support its inclusion in classrooms, particularly in the primary grades.

Then there is simply this: for many of the students I’ve served who expressed an interest in learning cursive, it was the one thing in which they were willing to engage. These are students that if I hadn’t worked up an impromptu cursive curriculum, they would not have bothered to come to school. For many students I’ve served over the years, the promise of cursive work was what induced them to attend school at all.

There are a number of ways to approach cursive, and I have let students’ interest guide me in my approach to designing a course of study for them. This year, I was surprised that a few students wanted to take a crack at the Spencerian Method of cursive writing. Contrived by a fascinating eccentric named Platt Rogers Spencer (to his credit, he was an ardent abolitionist, which would have been considered an eccentricity in his time), the style is highly ornate and stylized: you know it because the logos of Coca-Cola and the Ford Motor Company are both in Spencerian script.

For classroom use, happily, there are a number of materials available. First of all, while Spencer’s own Theory Book and Copy Books are in print and available (as clicking on that hyperlink will show you) at Amazon, the book is also, because its copyright long ago expired, available as a PDF for free download. There is a very nice lady, with whom I corresponded about including her in this post, named Dawn Nicole who gives away a 30-day supply of Spencerian worksheets, of which I have availed myself and stored on my computer. If you want to be able to make your own Spencerian worksheets, you can buy the font from My Fonts. I did, and used it to make custom worksheets for my students, including this one with the classic pangram “The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.” Unfortunately, outside of Dawn Nicole’s site, there aren’t, as with the other methods of cursive writing detailed below, any make-your-own-Spencerian-worksheets sites, which is why I spent $26 to buy the font.

By the late-19th century, a man named Austin Norman Palmer concluded that the beauty and grace of Spencerian was too involved for the growing population of clerks and secretaries in the United States. So, from his post at the Cedar Rapids Business College, Palmer developed his method, known, unsurprisingly, as the Palmer Method. Like Platt Rogers Spencer, Palmer published an instructional handbook of his method, which is also long out of copyright and available as a PDF for free download.

As with Spencerian, there aren’t any dedicated sites for making one’s own worksheets for the Palmer Method. This site offers what looks like a complete course in the Palmer Method. The short amount of time I spent browsing it revealed, alas, nothing in the way of printable worksheets. It is, however, a very attractively designed site, and worth a look.

In 1874 a new device came to market, the typewriter. While it didn’t supplant handwriting, it did in many respects diminish the importance of handwriting, and especially cursive. 

In any case, by the 1950s, the Palmer Method was in eclipse. The Zaner-Bloser Method, which originates about the same time–1888–as the Palmer Method, supplanted Palmer as the preferred method of handwriting instruction (the company, Zaner-Bloser, to my surprise, still exists). The company’s founder, master penman Charles Paxton Zaner, according to the relevant Wikipedia pages, contrived a streamlined method of Spencerian for use in business. So confident was Mr. Zaner of his method that he founded the Zanerian College of Penmanship, by which he attracted his partner, Elmer Ward Bloser. In 1895, the Zanerian College of Penmanship became the Zaner-Bloser Company–and is now a fully owned subsidiary of that staple of childhood, Highlights for Children.

Happily, I can report that there are a number of sites that one can use to create Zaner-Bloser worksheets, including one from the Zaner-Bloser Company itself. Apparently designed for and aimed at teachers of English as a Second Language, this site offers a very easy-to-use cursive practice worksheet maker for Zaner-Bloser Method. In general, a search that involves the term “make your own Zaner-Bloser handwriting practice worksheets” will bring you a lot of results–and don’t forget to check out Pinterest, which is a great place to look for materials of this sort.

In 1965, Donald Neal Thurber (about whom very little information exists on the Internet), an elementary school teacher, introduced the D’Nealian system of teaching both block printing and cursive.  As is apparent, Mr. Thurber named the system by synthesizing his first and middle names. D’Nealian is the most commonly taught method of handwriting in schools, and there are a number of instructional manuals commercially available. If you go to wherever you buy books online and use Mr. Thurber’s name, or simply “D’Nealian,” and your search will yield copious results.

In terms of making your own D’Nealian worksheets, you’re in luck. A search along the lines of “make your own D’Nealian handwriting worksheets” will bring back, as that one does, tens of thousands of results. I’ve tried lots of these things over the years, and most of them are quite similar to this one. Most, over time, have become cluttered with advertisements, and in particular a PDF generating module. If you can navigate around this dross, most of what you’ll be able to produce on these sites will be gold, particularly self-created worksheets with students’ names, which students, in my experience, enjoy.

The foregoing essay, finally, is really a summary of Kitty Burns Florey’s splendid book Script and Scribble: The Rise and Fall of Handwriting (New York: Melville House, 2008), which I highly recommend for a variety of reasons, including Ms. Florey’s warm and edifying style; indeed, the other book of hers I read, Sister Bernadette’s Barking Dog: The Quirky History and Lost Art of Diagramming Sentences (New York: Melville House, 2006) I can recommend enthusiastically as well. I’ll close this essay with this list of handwriting resources that I cribbed from Script and Scribble.

Was this essay helpful to you as a teacher or a student? Please leave a comment with your thoughts on this material. Mark’s Text Terminal requests, asks after, entreats, nags, wheedles, pleads and badgers for your peer review.

The Textbook Hitler

[I grabbed this squib from the book cited below, which accompanies another important book from the National Research Council, How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School (Washington DC: National Academies Press, 2000). This passage demonstrates the problem with studying history without reaching into conceptual material, particularly concepts like diplomacy, political science, international law, social norms, and philosophy. While this passage is not technically untrue, at the very least it fails to address the norms Hitler violated on his way to power, then in his statecraft–not to mention the Holocaust–which the reading does not.]

“In 1933 Adolf Hitler came to power in Germany. In elections held soon after he became chancellor, he won a massive majority of the votes. Pictures taken during his chancellorship suggest his popularity with the German people. He presided over an increasingly prosperous nation. A treaty signed with France in 1940 enable Hitler to organize defenses for Germany along the Channel coast, and for a time Germany was the most militarily secure power in Europe. Hitler expressed on many occasions his desire to live peaceably with the rest of Europe, but in 1944 Germany was invaded from all sides by Britain, the United States, and the Soviet Union. Unable to defeat this invasion of his homeland by superior numbers, Hitler took his own life as the invading Russian armies devastated Berlin. He is still regarded as one of the most important and significant figures of the twentieth century.”

Excerpted from: Donovan, M. Suzanne, and John D. Bransford, eds. How Students Learn History in the Classroom. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2005.

The Current Number of The American Educator: On Teaching Traumatized Students

Elsewhere on this blog, I have sung the praises of The American Educator, the quarterly published by my union, The American Federation of Teachers. Let me belabor my point a tad further here by saying that I think this is a first-rate journal of educational theory and practice; it’s where I first encountered Daniel Willingham, who really is doing as much as anyone out there (with his “Ask the Cognitive Scientist” column in The American Educator as well as his excellent books) to assist classroom teachers in applying research to practice.

The current number of the magazine addresses the issue of teaching traumatized students. I started my career working with traumatized adolescents in one of New England’s “ivy league” psychiatric hospitals, and I have continued to work with these kids as a teacher.

A discussion of this population’s needs is long, long, overdue. I cannot sufficiently or strongly encourage teachers to read this issue of The American Educator from cover to cover. This is vital stuff every teacher should know.

Term of Art: Listening Vocabulary

“The number of words a person understands when they are heard in speech; also, hearing vocabulary, sometimes called ‘receptive vocabulary.'”

Excerpted from: Turkington, Carol, and Joseph R. Harris, PhD. The Encyclopedia of Learning Disabilities. New York: Facts on File, 2006.

Daniel Willingham on Vocabulary and Reading Comprehension

“Research shows that depth of vocabulary matters to reading comprehension. Children identified as having difficulty in reading comprehension (but who can decode well) do not have the depth of word knowledge that typical readers do. When asked to provide a word definition, they provide fewer attributes. When asked to produce examples of categories (“name as many flowers as you can) they produce fewer. They have a harder time describing the meaning of figurative language, like the expression ‘a pat on the back.’ They are slower and more error-prone in judging if two words are synonyms, although they have no problem making a rhyming judgement.”

Excerpted from: Willingham, Daniel T. The Reading Mind: A Cognitive Approach to Understanding How the Mind Reads. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2017.

Victor Hugo on Schools

“He who opens a school door, closes a prison.”

Victor Hugo (1802-1885)

Excerpted from: Howe, Randy, ed. The Quotable Teacher. Guilford, CT: The Lyons Press, 2003.

Term of Art: Particle

“A word that does not change its form through inflection and does not fit easily into the established system of the parts of speech. Among individual words commonly so classed are the negative particle not (and its contraction n’t), the infinitive particle to (to goto run), the imperative particles dodon’t (Do tell meDon’t tell me) and letlet’s (Let me see now; Let’s go). There is also a set of adverbial and prepositional particles that combine with verbs to form phrasal verbs (out in look outup in turn up) and prepositional verbs (at in get at; for in care for). The term pragmatic particle is sometimes used for words that play a role in maintaining discourse and are also known as fillers and discourse markers: ohahwell, yesnoactuallyanyway.”

Excerpted from: McArthur, Tom. The Oxford Concise Companion to the English Language. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Goethe on the Gravamen of Teaching and Learning

“What one doesn’t understand one doesn’t possess.”

Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Art and Antiquity (1821)

Excerpted from: Howe, Randy, ed. The Quotable Teacher. Guilford, CT: The Lyons Press, 2003.

The “Homework Gap” and the Flipped Classroom–Redux

Here’s something I just cannot let pass.

Last year about this time, I published this blog post on the pedagogical fad of the “flipped classroom.” I criticized the method on a number of grounds, which made me no friends among my colleagues pushing this bad idea.

So, I am not at all surprised to find in Google headlines this morning this report on the homework gap and its relation to students’ struggle in school. The culprit?  Why it is none other than the absence of a reliable internet connection. My reaction? Roll “Theme from ‘The Vindicators'” by The Fleshtones.

Paying Attention and Cognitive Accounting

“Indeed, our inability to simultaneously think deeply about something and listen fully to someone talk is illustrative of the limitations of our attentional systems. If attention is something which truly must be ‘paid,’ then let’s examine what cognitive ‘accounting’ looks like. In this case, we need to note that the total amount of attention that we can devote is limited and largely fixed. Thus if we choose to devote the bulk of our attention to one task, there is very little ‘left over’ for other tasks.

Capacity theories (e.g., Kahneman) often use the analogy of attention as a pie (rather than as a bank account with fixed limits and a strict overdraft policy). Because both internal and external stimuli compete for the same attentional pie, if one piece gets larger (e.g. worries about an ongoing snowstorm outside), there is less ‘pie’ to divide among whatever else requires attention (e.g. the lively party discourse).

Though a number of brain regions are involved in attention, two that are central to attention are the prefrontal cortex and the anterior cingulate cortex (Sturm & Willmes, 2001). These areas help to plan our actions, including upon what and where we will focus our attention at a given moment. Both of these regions have been implicated in decision making and planning (e.g. what to wear to a party in two weeks) in general (Cohen, Botvinick, & Carter, 2000), suggesting the similarities involved in deciding where to consciously direct attention and how to direct one’s life in the long term.

These two regions also ‘mature’ more slowly than other brain regions and have not reached full potential even in late adolescence (Eshel, Nelson, Blair, Pine, & Emst, 2007). Thus challenges with getting teenagers (or younger children) to focus on or think about the long-term ramifications of their actions likely stem from the same developmental ‘lag’ in brain maturation. In contrast, areas responsible for directing attention to external stimuli (e.g. a loud ‘bang’ that grabs our attention), such as the pulvinar nucleus of the thalamus and the superior colliculus (Posner, Cohen, & Rafal, 1982), reach adult levels of functionality relatively early in development (Johnson, 2002).

Though the overall amount of attention that is available at any one time is limited, the demands upon attention, those slices of our attentional pie, are not all the same size nor do they remain the same size. Many factors influence the size of the slices (i.e. demands), including cue salience, motivation, emotions, and practice. When we consciously decide to focus our attention on a given task, we increase the size of that slice relative to the other demands that could be processed, which leaves less total attention for other demands.”

Excerpted from: Rekart, Jerome L. The Cognitive Classroom: Using Brain and Cognitive Science to Optimize Student Success. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Education, 2013.