How often do you handwrite and for what purpose? Perhaps you’ll write a birthday card, notes or a shopping list. No matter the context, is there a need for handwriting to be perfect? In English primary schools, there remains an obsessive focus on the art of handwriting, outlined and underlined by the National Curriculum (DfE, 2014) which many teachers have condemned as ‘ideological’ or ‘political’ as it fails to consider the modern world (Ward, 2015). Change has already begun internationally, with the US removing cursive handwriting from core standards in 2013 and Finland replacing handwriting with typing (Hosie, 2017).

My research explored teachers’ perceptions of prescriptive handwriting lessons. ‘Prescriptive handwriting’ means dedicated handwriting lessons, teaching letter formation. The research was conducted through teacher questionnaires and follow-up interviews. Inspired by Postman’s polemic ‘The Politics of Reading’ (1970, in Winkeljohann, 1973), my research – though rather more tentatively – proposed this ‘unthinkable’: that handwriting may not have a future, or, perhaps, in a changing world, we have not kept up with what writing is. When teaching writing, children learn to transcribe and compose, neither skill requiring immaculate handwriting. In the questionnaire, teachers were asked about the drawbacks of prescriptive handwriting. One teacher remarked:

‘Children are expected to write in a specific way, there is not as much focus on personal styles of handwriting.’

While intriguingly, another responded:

‘Writing shifts from an essential skill to an art. I can draw, but I don’t have a painting in an art gallery.’

Using technology to teach transcription and composition is surely a more relevant way of learning.

I asked teachers, ‘What is the purpose of writing?’ and all responses mentioned creativity or communication. As one respondent suggested:

‘To communicate information. Writing can also provide children with the opportunity to be creative.’

This was interesting as the same might easily be said of ‘typing’. Data from 43 million job postings revealed that 92 per cent required digital skills (Edinger, 2023), yet, concerningly, 60 per cent of my respondents said they ‘never’ teach keyboard skills. This was eye-opening, partly because it revealed a significant gap in what our education system is providing as ‘the necessary skills for success’. Even the programme of study for computing, does not require teaching pupils to touch-type (DfE, 2014), despite findings from a review of international research on writing (DFE, 2012) recommending that children should be taught to touch-type fluently and compose digitally.

‘Communication today is largely digital, implicitly challenging the necessity of prescriptive handwriting.’

Communication today is largely digital, implicitly challenging the necessity of prescriptive handwriting. Teachers were asked to rate the importance of handwriting lessons in relation to children’s overall learning in primary schools, from 1 (not important) to 10 (highly important) producing an average rating of 6.6. Some teachers felt that handwriting would always have a place, despite the need to prepare for a digital future. These teachers generally had longer service, suggesting perhaps an ingrained conformity and some sentimental value attached to a skill that has ‘always’ been imperative. But, as one teacher remarked:

‘Handwriting is not essential – how often do we handwrite beyond education at 18+?’

Disappointingly, the biggest perceived barrier to teaching children to write digitally is funding, rather than a lack of imagination or intent.

This small-scale research uncovered neglected issues and under-researched realties. I am not suggesting that we stop teaching children to write or to take pride in their work, but perhaps that we should refresh our thinking. To equip children with the relevant skills for an inevitably digital future, more digital writing opportunities need to be available within the curriculum, along with amending handwriting standards focusing on legibility and stamina to make them more inclusive and achievable for all. Though remodeling the National Curriculum in this way may not be imminent, a change of mindset is both feasible and necessary.

References

Department for Education [DfE]. (2012). What is the research evidence on writing? Research Report DFE-RR238. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7b1474ed915d429748cadf/DFE-RR238.pdf

Department for Education [DfE]. (2014). Computing programmes of study: Key stages 1 and 2. National Curriculum in England. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7c576be5274a1b00423213/PRIMARY_national_curriculum_-_Computing.pdf

Department for Education [DfE]. (2014). National Curriculum in England: English Programmes of Study. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-english-programmes-of-study/national-curriculum-in-england-english-programmes-of-study#years-3-and-4-programme-of-study

Edinger, J. (2023, February 6). The majority of jobs now require digital skills, study finds. Government Technology. https://www.govtech.com/workforce/the-majority-of-jobs-now-require-digital-skills-study-finds

Hosie, E. (2017, November 8). The uncertain future of handwriting. BBC Future. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20171108-the-uncertain-future-of-handwriting

Winkeljohann, S. R. (1973). The politics of reading: Point counterpoint. Institute of Education.