MaggieMae
Reality bits
- Apr 3, 2009
- 24,043
- 1,635
- 48
The "Palmer" method is beautiful. It's hard to tell if a man or a woman is doing the writing.
This is an example of why, while I'm not necessarily opposed to teaching cursive writing, I am not a fan of it's use. I find printing much easier to read, it has far fewer legibility issues. With this simple Palmer image I found myself having to consciously differentiate some of the letters rather than simply reading the word. Certainly there's an issue of familiarity, as the printed word, whether typed or hand-written, is far more common than cursive. Still, cursive writing seems to suffer more from people giving it their own personal touches. People seem more able to write with a uniform look in print than cursive.
Cursive is the 'prettier' writing. I consider it a decorative form of writing, whereas printing is functional. So, if teaching cursive is helpful in childrens' learning, I am all for it; however, it should not be taught because it is useful in day-to-day life.
Printing is easier to read, but for me, printing instead of writing is just the opposite. As I said, if I'm printing, I find I'm thinking of each letter, while if I'm writing, the letters flow automatically into a word.
