to think that teaching joined up writing to 5 years is counter-productive?

[rhetorician]

DD is 5, will be 6 in Jan, and in her second year at primary school. We live in Ireland, so the curriculum is very different - they do two years of (I guess) reception type work, junior and senior infants. So phonics, letter formation, sets, number patterns etc alongside all the other social/PE etc. DD is at a very good school and had a superb teacher last year, and made very good progress (she isn't the keenest of learners). Anyhow, a new Principal arrived january last and decided that all Junior Infants were to learn cursive writing (previously they had done this in first class, so around 7-8). Now, there's a few kids in each of the SI classes for whom this seems fine, but for the vast majority it seems like a complete waste of time. Instead of learning how to express themselves (spelling phonetically etc), all they are really doing is making patterns, tracing letters over and over, copying out words. DD finds it boring, pointless and difficult (and she is not alone in this) and it's totally put her off any kind of writing. I know there is research that suggests that cursive writing is good for the brain, but surely not when most them actually cannot write. DD is even reluctant to write her name now (it is a long name, tricky to write joined up). The teachers, whilst they are tactful, also clearly have serious reservations about this policy. AIBU?

Cursive is good for the brain when you understand what it means.

But to a separate point, with the digital age, cursive is pointless. You no longer need it as a form of communication. It's nice to know, but not an essential life skill any more.

We live in Belgium and children are taught cursive writing as soon as they learn to read and write, at ask five/six. So far my girls haven't had any problems but ds nearly six has dyspraxia and I think he will struggle to have tidy handwriting.

exactly, it's pointless as a skill unconnected to anything else. I'm cross about it, and it just seems to run counter to the whole ethos of the school

kelda - I think that's partly what I'm getting at - it's fine for children for whom it presents no difficulty. I don't particularly care whether DD has tidy writing or not - but I want her to be able to express herself on paper, which she can't. And nor can most of the rest of them!

Ds learnt cursive from the start and that never stopped him actually writing and spelling phonetically etc. his teacher wasn't too fussy about how neat it was and they seem to be focussing on tidying it up in year 3.

I heard it is good for helping spelling.

Dd has just started and isn't doing cursive. She seems to have exactly the same problems ds had with letter formation!

I don't think your problem is cursive writing I think it is that they want it to look nice!

The DCs school has introduced cursive and I felt that this has taken time away from learning, and comprehension to focus on letter formation. I also think that for most of the children it's given them pretty untidy handwriting.

I asked the school about how it had affected learning, and I can tell the teachers have some concerns. However, it's a new head teacher who is very keen on cursive so I think it's here to stay.

I'm against joined up writing. Children need to learn to print before they learn cursive, not jump straight in. I don't care what the "research" says.

Just started this at Ds' school and you can tell even the teachers aren't too thrilled about it from the eyerolls and sighs when they handed it out. Handwriting now looks messy and and some of the letters don't resemble what they've learnt in nursery (z particularly??)
It's knocked Ds' confidence a bit as he struggled being left-handed anyway and now he doesn't understand why what hed already learnt isn't acceptable anymore. Am sure he'll get over it but it is disheartening

We've had it in our school for some years now.

Hasn't caused a problem; they just learn which letters need a 'flick' straight away instead of adding it later.

I'm against joined up writing. Children need to learn to print before they learn cursive, not jump straight in. I don't care what the "research" says.

Why? What is your reasoning?

My son was taught 'joined up' writing from the start, we were told it was to make things easier for them when they got older. Apparently some children never make the transition from printing to joined up writing and are unable to keep up at secondary school level as a result. They have to be able to write quickly in order to take notes in class.
My son is left handed, he did struggle for a few years but his writings fine now. In fact, it's a lot better than mine, and I was taught the old fashioned way (single letters in infants, joined up writing in year 5 or 6).

Ours learnt cursive from nursery age (they start the term after turning 3).

It may be a bit trickier than print, but the eventual outcome is lovely handwriting (it seems to all come together in year 2). I can see that starting over again with different letter formation would be tough so YANBU.

YANBU I remember at primary School we actually had regular 'tests' on our joined up writing if it wasn't up to scratch we had to do it again. A pointless exercise as I haven't joined my writing since.

I'm sure it will be fine in the end, of course, but endless bloody sheets of letters...I'd die of boredom and I can see the point of it (well, kind of).

All of my kids ( the eldest is now almost 13) have learnt cursive writing from the get go. It does look like beetle tracks for the first couple of years but somewhere around Y2, it does become legible and they don't have to worry about changing it later on.
I think it's a good idea.

this article has some references at the bottom that seem to point to peer reviewed work

miaow think you've hit the nail on the head - the issue here is that it's not established practice in the school and the teachers in the infants classes are not used to teaching it!

I hated it when I first came across it being taught, but now I understand the benefits. As they get older, children need to be able to write faster for longer periods. If they've learnt cursive the pen will just flow across the paper meaning they write faster and with less effort. Writing each letter individually takes much longer, and is more tiring.

As for time spent on handwriting practice, in my experience it tends to be for short periods, often used as a settling activity after playtime or lunch. So nothing else is being sacrificed.

I'm sure it will be fine in the end, of course, but endless bloody sheets of letters...I'd die of boredom and I can see the point of it (well, kind of).

They do that whatever the style of writing.

And it also helps with fine motor control.

My issue with it is that it doesn't look like writing in books. Ds is in reception and was making the connection between writing and reading (eg he used to trace a letter with his finger before trying to write it). Not all letters in cursive have a flick - the f for example looks like a drunken s to me in cursive. The z looks odd as well.

But hey ho.

clearly it is now school policy, so we just have to suck it up and get on with it; before they started it though DD would happily have a go at writing a little story, and now she won't because she thinks (probably a lot of this is in her funny little head) that she can't do it

yabu. Mine started cursive in reception. DS took a while to make his writing legible, but managed it by the end of Y1. DD has just started Y1 and can do some nice joined up writing -when the mood takes her.

It baffled me at first but in the long term it's fine. We use the Letts 'Hilarious Handwriting' work books at home.

It's made me improve my handwriting too .

DS2 (now 23) was taught it almost from the start at infants school.
DS1 (now 26) was not taught it until sometime in the junior school (both went to the same schools).
We were sold it with DS2 that it would be a much faster way of writing, ie they wouldn't pause at the end of every letter to start a new letter.
I thought it was a brilliant way to start & then not have to change your writing style a few years later.
My niece who lives in USA and is now 13 still writes in none joined up writing (when she sends us thank you cards) and I just feel a bit sad really seeing that and the fact that our DS2 started cursive writing at 5 and it is quicker. Her writing still looks 'quite young' (probably not the right expression) even though she's in senior school.