Wednesday, October 11, 2006
Pics from the Weinstein Event
Thanks to everyone who came out for the conversation with Prof. Weinstein! Our very own Lloyd Beers graciously provided his digital camera for documentation of the event. A pic is above, and will hopefully be put on the main SAM page sooner rather than later. (On a personal note, it is very encouraging that unlike last year's photo, I am NOT the only male in the group.)
P.S. If you appear in this photo, please respond to this post so that I or Courtney can update it with names. Thanks!
Interesting article in the Washington Post on Handwriting
The Handwriting is on the Wall: Researchers see a downside as keyboards replace pens in schools
This article has two premises, one of which I don't accept and one of which I'm unsure on. The first, that failure to teach cursive has some sort of negative impact on the cognitive abilities of students, seems foolish to me. I learned cursive in school, but because I am left-handed I never really learned it properly, and when it became obvious to me that longhand was seen as an inferior substitute to something that is actually legible, I abandoned it altogether. Pretty much the only time I write longhand is when I am signing my name. I certainly don't consider myself at a cognitive disadvantage for doing that, and among my students I have seen no correlation between use of cursive and superior essay scores on exams. (Admittedly this is anecdotal evidence, but it is 3 semesters of anecdotal evidence).
The second premise, however, is that the gradual extinction of longhand will make historical research more difficult. As typed material replaces written notes, argue the scholars interviewed for this story, it will become more difficult to verify the Jenkinsonian 'authenticity' of a particular manuscript collection. Alternately, they argue, insights into the thought processes of authors or other historical figures will be lost if they do not create the informal sketches and scribblings that handwriting allows.
Like I say, I don't know if I buy this premise either. I don't think that cursive is necessarily a prerequisite for informal scribblings, and I don't believe that it's not possible at all to brainstorm in an electronic or typed format as well. At the same time, handwriting IS a pretty unique identifier of an author's stuff, and the loss of that material does seem like it might have an impact on identifying accessions of tomorrow's important manuscript collection producers. So, I dunno. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts.
For the record, my own handwriting is TERRIBLE. And I PRINT.
This article has two premises, one of which I don't accept and one of which I'm unsure on. The first, that failure to teach cursive has some sort of negative impact on the cognitive abilities of students, seems foolish to me. I learned cursive in school, but because I am left-handed I never really learned it properly, and when it became obvious to me that longhand was seen as an inferior substitute to something that is actually legible, I abandoned it altogether. Pretty much the only time I write longhand is when I am signing my name. I certainly don't consider myself at a cognitive disadvantage for doing that, and among my students I have seen no correlation between use of cursive and superior essay scores on exams. (Admittedly this is anecdotal evidence, but it is 3 semesters of anecdotal evidence).
The second premise, however, is that the gradual extinction of longhand will make historical research more difficult. As typed material replaces written notes, argue the scholars interviewed for this story, it will become more difficult to verify the Jenkinsonian 'authenticity' of a particular manuscript collection. Alternately, they argue, insights into the thought processes of authors or other historical figures will be lost if they do not create the informal sketches and scribblings that handwriting allows.
Like I say, I don't know if I buy this premise either. I don't think that cursive is necessarily a prerequisite for informal scribblings, and I don't believe that it's not possible at all to brainstorm in an electronic or typed format as well. At the same time, handwriting IS a pretty unique identifier of an author's stuff, and the loss of that material does seem like it might have an impact on identifying accessions of tomorrow's important manuscript collection producers. So, I dunno. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts.
For the record, my own handwriting is TERRIBLE. And I PRINT.
