I appreciate the respectful counterpoint. I don't mean disrespect for the other side of the debate either. It's hyperbole -- so I don't understand why I'm being downvoted for bringing a legitimate point.
I think you and the other commenter are missing my point. Like all languages that use the Roman alphabet, English has a printed form and a scripted form. It seems they're going to only teach one of the two, and for what? Typing? Typing is only useful if you use a computer, and writing is part of basic literacy.
Don't get me wrong -- I am happy I know how to type. But I'm also happy I know how to write cursive. I don't understand what they're adding to the curriculum that's so important that they are dropping cursive.
Perhaps you had a hard time reading the cursive papers, and that's understandable. But if their papers were that messy, then it seems to me that the solution is to spend more time on perfecting their cursive -- not throwing up our hands and eliminating script entirely from the curriculum.
I think you and the other commenter are missing my point. Like all languages that use the Roman alphabet, English has a printed form and a scripted form. It seems they're going to only teach one of the two, and for what? Typing? Typing is only useful if you use a computer, and writing is part of basic literacy.
Don't get me wrong -- I am happy I know how to type. But I'm also happy I know how to write cursive. I don't understand what they're adding to the curriculum that's so important that they are dropping cursive.
Perhaps you had a hard time reading the cursive papers, and that's understandable. But if their papers were that messy, then it seems to me that the solution is to spend more time on perfecting their cursive -- not throwing up our hands and eliminating script entirely from the curriculum.