Czech Schools Are Testing A New Style Of Handwriting

For those who follow handwriting developments in other countries --

Schools in the Czech Republic are testing a new style of handwriting (to replace their longstanding cursive-only instruction: we have a Czech member or two who can tell us more about the style they learned).

This link -- to part of the new style's official web-site -- shows how it looks. (It is not so "new" after all ... ). The site (main page here -- comenia.cz) is in Czech, but the pictures need no translation.

The style (an Italic handwriting form) is brand-named Comenia after the Renaissance-era Czech educator Jan Comenius.

And here is an article in English about the new style and the tests in progress.

But, now they won't teach cursive

Thank you for the post Kate. The new style is a one-woman-show if I understand it correctly and it is potentially a very lucrative business for her. She, the inventor of this style, argues that cursive is old fashioned and long obsolete and visually not appealing, and that a single font for handwriting and school books will make every child a better student, and that "bad writers need as simple style as possible", and that foreigners cannot read the Czech style, and that cursive makes one focus on form and not content of written text, etc. It looks like we want the kids to be lazy and not putting any efforts in handwriting these days! I can translate some sections if you are interested. Fortunately, this is an experiment only and there seems to be some opposition against it.

Compare the "old" cursive

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9c/Psac%C3%AD_p%C3%ADsmo.gif

with the new style

http://www.lencova.eu/images/comenia_script_ukazka.jpg

It is actually very much in keeping with the return to a more traditional alphabet that is going on in many nations and languages. Many places (eg. Iceland, Finland, Australia, parts of the UK) have been moving away from "cursive" styles built on simplifying the ornate and austentious swirls and loops of the Victorian era, and returning to a more tradional and humanistic hand based on 15th century cursive Italic forms. While I think these humanistic styles look more elegant with an edged pen, they certainly fulfill the goal of decent and legible communication with the monoline tools (ie ballpoints) of choice today.

The only reason I see for the 18th century-derived forms is for use with a flexible nib. With a flex nib, even the dry Palmer-school styles can sing - and a good copperplate is just magic. But from a ballpoint or a standard fine nib, a cursive Italic is much more pleasing and legible.

I would hope the Czech schools are careful and deliberate in their examination of alternative hands to their traditional style (does it have a name? - I see the English article called it "cursive" but cursive can mean any flowing or partly joined writing), and not adopt something simply because of a one-person crusade. But I also hope they consider the value in returning to a more traditional, humanistic hand.

John

There is nothing new about this script......except for its new name.

IMO it is misleading to claim it as a "new" style of script.

It is simply unjoined italic, written upright. It has remained virtually unchanged since it first appeared centuries ago in Italy.

This example is from 1543.

http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/dd289/caliken_2007/IMG_0001500.jpg

caliken

But, now they won't teach cursive

If the children learn to read it (reading such writing takes less than one hour to teach, which I hope they are doing)

why weep if they do not also learn to write it?

Do you weep because we, today, do not write the "Secretary hand" (cursive blackletter) of Shakespeare's era?

Re:

Thank you for the post Kate. The new style is a one-woman-show if I understand it correctly and it is potentially a very lucrative business for her. She, the inventor of this style, argues that cursive is old fashioned and long obsolete and visually not appealing, and that a single font for handwriting and school books will make every child a better student, and that "bad writers need as simple style as possible", and that foreigners cannot read the Czech style, and that cursive makes one focus on form and not content of written text, etc.

Ah, in every way she's a woman after my own heart! I will have to see if I can get in touch with her. I don't know Czech, but we may have another language in common.

Glaurung, you seem disapproving when you write "one-woman show."

What do you find so wrong with one person (woman or man) having an idea and bringing it to other people?

Must absolutely everything always come from a collective?

Re:

It looks like we want the kids to be lazy and not putting any efforts ...

That is exactly what teachers said when mathematics in Roman numerals gave way to mathematics in Arabic numerals.

I suspect that the teachers of hieroglyphs and cuneiform used the same reasoning to denounce the introduction of that drastic simplification, the alphabet.

So if you oppose simple processes because you think of them as "lazy" -- logically you should call for a return to hieroglyphs (or at least a return to Roman numerals). And of course you should write that message in hieroglyphs to show that you are not lazy ...

:roflmho:

Re:

I can translate some sections if you are interested. Fortunately, this is an experiment only and there seems to be some opposition against it.

Yes, I would very much like to see some sections translated -- I would also very much like to see translations of the opposing position that you mention.

Re:

 

Compare the "old" cursive

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9c/Psac%C3%AD_p%C3%ADsmo.gif

 

with the new style

http://www.lencova.eu/images/comenia_script_ukazka.jpg

I am comparing them both, and I like the new style much better. Of course, this newly introduced style is in fact older than what you call the "old" cursive -- because the new style revives (with slight alterations) a well-known Renaissance style (which I also use for my own handwrtiting, teach to others, and advocate to others -- because I find it easier, more rapid, and more attractive than the cursive you advocate.)

Thanks, Johnny Appleseed, for your observation:

It is actually very much in keeping with the return to a more traditional alphabet that is going on in many nations and languages. Many places (eg. Iceland, Finland, Australia, parts of the UK) have been moving away from "cursive" styles built on simplifying the ornate and austentious swirls and loops of the Victorian era, and returning to a more tradi[ti]onal and humanistic hand based on 15th century cursive Italic forms.

 

For more about this, you may want to download one German typographer's recent presentation on the past, present, and probable future of school handwriting styles in those countries that use the Latin alphabet. That presentation, with a lot of other info on a wide variety of school styles including Comenia (the new Czech style undergoing tests), inhabits this web-site [mostly in English] which is well worth exploring: http://florian.hardwig.com/manuscribe/

Those particularly interested in Italic -- which, Johmny correctly notes, is a more traditional alphabet than what we, today, call "cursive" and sometimes imagine is ancient -- may also want to visit the web-site of the Society for Italic Handwriting: http://www.italic-handwriting.org .

And if Glaurung thinks that they are wrong, he can contact them through that web-site, as it provides an e-mail address. If he tells them his views, I would very much like him to send a copy of his letter (and any response they may make) to the Fountain Pen Network.

It reminds me of HWT (Handwriting Without Tears); I suppose because the concept behind the hands are similar.

Re:

It reminds me of HWT (Handwriting Without Tears); I suppose because the concept behind the hands are similar.

HWTears is something that a lot of my students have cried over -- I re-teach a lot of HWTears washouts, and have as many concerns with the company's ethics as with their handwriting itself.

I don't see why Eilu finds HWTears similar in concept to Comenia -- let's look at the differences. (After this message, I will post some samples from both programs, to allow objective comparison. I also recommend you look at the illustrated analysis of HWTears -- along with illustrated analyses of other handwriting programs, including one similar to Comenia -- in my comparative article on handwriting styles, titled "What Did You Learn In School Today?" that appeared in the PENNANT for Spring 2007)

/1/ Number and Form of the Styles Required

HWTEARS is a two-tier system (by this I mean that it requires learning two styles in quick succession -- one absolutely unjoined and the other absolutely always joined -- with the letters made very differently in each style). Not only the form of the letters changes drastically between HWTears print and HWTears cursive, but literally every letter in HWTEARS changes its starting-point when the program changes the required style. (In the program's first tier, letters begin at the top or -- for "d" and "e" -- the middle of the letter. In the second tier, letters all begin on the baseline instead.)

COMENIA, like other Italic programs, is a one-tier system: letter-changes are few and minor when letters join -- not all letters join -- and joining does not alter the letters' starting-point. (Wherever a Comenia letter begins when unjoined, it will begin when joined.)

/2/ Basic Shapes of Letters

HWTEARS makes its letters from ellipses and verticals. Usually one side of the ellipse is interrupted by the vertical stem of the letter, slicing through what would have been the remainder of the ellipse (e.g., in such letters as "a")

COMENIA, like other Italic programs, uses ovals rather than ellipses (these are different shapes. Ovals -- egg shapes -- are wide at one end, narrower than the other, and better fit the motions produced by a hand rapidly writing. Ellipses, required by HWTears, are mechanically symmetrical and do not fit the natural motions of a rapidly writing hand). When an oval co-exists with the stem of the letter (as in "a" or similar letters), that stem is positioned so that it can be made as a natural movement from the oval (e.g., in "a" or other letters where the stem follows the oval) or into the oval (as in "b" where the stem begins the letter and thus precedes the oval). It is a very different shape from the HWTears way of doing it -- and it is a very much more efficient means than the HWTears means of doing it.

Iwill admit that Comenia, unlike most other Italic programs today, has an absolutely vertical slant (which is one -- small -- point of similarity with HWTears, and is the only problem I see with Comenia: not everyone can manage a vertical style, so in my view Comenia could improve by allowing the writer to use either vertical or slightly slanted writing, as most other Italic programs do).

/3/ Method of Joining

HWTEARS joins all its letters by long horizontal strokes: along the baseline where possible -- for example, to join the letters "an" in HwTears, one goes horizontally from the bottom of the "a" several millimeters rightward to the place where one will write the "n" -- then, keeping pen on paper, one begins the "n" which (like all HWTears letters) starts at the base-line when it is joined. This is done because the founder of HWTEARS (whom I have met) believes that most children cannot perceive diagonal lines.

COMENIA, like other Italic programs (and like the better sort of non-Italic cursive program), joins its letters with short diagonals for most letter-combinations (e.g., "an") or short horizontals for those letters that join *above* the baseline.

I could go on -- but, before I do, I want to hear from Eilu why s/he considers the two programs so similar. Also, of course, I want to see whatever Glaurung can translate into English about the Comenia program, so that I can compare the two programs' teaching methods/philosophies as well as their letter forms.

An interesting side story: The Hand of the Baskervilles

http://www.stormtype.com/people.php?id=3

Here are two graphics of Comenia and then some graphics of HWTears. Can someone help me understand why anyone would regard the programs as similar in concept or otherwise similar?

Comenia --

HWTears --

I weep because I love cursive, but, italic isn't a bad thing either

The Handwriting without Tears is the UGLIEST form of writing I have EVER seen in my life!

The two questions based on traditional conservatism and its Darwinian association would be:

1) Does it work?

Obvious, printing has always worked. So the promoters would be safe of the first point.

2) Is it an improvement over existing cursive writing?

Printing is slower than cursive for almost everyone which is why we all went to cursive. A negative.

Prining is more ledgeable than cursive. A positive.

Will it decrease efficiency and increase economic costs. Open on that one.

Conclusion from my soap box:

Considering the historical push (pre PC)toward cursive over printing, this doesn't look like it will be a winner. It certainly isn't a slam dunk either way.

<snip>

The Handwriting without Tears is the UGLIEST form of writing I have EVER seen in my life!

I think that's how I feel about it, too....it's hideous.

I have evolved a sort-of 'chicken scratch cursive italic' which seems to work for me, and is not too different from (badly-written) Comenia ....(with a bit of a right-slant, as Kate suggests).

I weep because I love cursive, but, italic isn't a bad thing either

The Handwriting without Tears is the UGLIEST form of writing I have EVER seen in my life!

Yes -- by the way, the program's founder claims to have spent seven years in art school. She says that this proves her letters (and her program's other similarly graceless illustrations) are beautiful -- but she also says that this cannot matter, as (in her view) beauty should not matter for handwriting, and neither should speed.

Her textbooks for children and teachers (and the training-workshops that she and her staff give, to certify teachers and others as "certified handwriting specialists" who may guide others in using the books) also require learning odd notions of handwriting history. One is taught, for example (in the books and in the workshops) that absolutely all handwriting was vertical until the 17th century when [she says] the invention of the quill pen made it physically impossible to produce vertical letters! [!!!???!!!?!?!?!?]

When I speak with individuals or groups that have had HWTears training -- or with children coming to me after failure with that program -- I always specifically correct this matter, and show them evidence to the contrary: slanted writing done before the quill-pen era, and vertical writing done with quill pens. The children hate that they've obviously been lied to -- the adults hate me for pointing out the lie: and I have literally been told by HWTears-using teachers: "How DARE this [evidence I bring] be right?!" or "It can't have existed, because this is not what my training course said." (Ask me sometime what the HWTears founder said, when I confronted her on the matter.)

HWTears is an increasingly promoted program that a lot of schools/districts/teachers/occupational therapists in the USA are buying into -- as one result, there have been schools that /a/ asked me to give my handwriting class (often after disappointment with HWTears or other programs), that /b/ offered large sums, BUT that cautioned me that during my presentation I must not say, do, or recommend anything that would conflict with their previous or still-existing program (very often it was HWTears) on the grounds that many/most/all of their teachers and occupational therapists [OTs] had previously taken HWTears certification training, and that I therefore "needed to be supportive of this" because those teachers and OTs were very proud of their certification and needed to "feel validated" and "not to have their sensitivities hurt." I do not, of course, accept job-offers (or money) from such folks, no matter how hard they beg. Why can't the fountain pen community start its *own* outreach to teachers, for programs which do not lie and which are not ugly? (Note that I say "programs" -- because more styles than just my own personal favorite deserve a place in this effort. I would like to see the pen community out there teaching, and "certifying" if need be, in more than one *competently* designed and *accurately* taught mode of writing. Does the pen community really have so few expert handwriters and teachers -- certainly better handwriters and better-informed teachers than the designer of HWTears -- that we cannot get good handwriting taught in whatever form? (HWTears started as a one-woman organization, too. Can't we get one or two people to start our own handwriting crusade, perhaps with an Italic wing and a cursive wing headed by devotees of the respective forms of writing?)

I weep because I love cursive, but, italic isn't a bad thing either

The Handwriting without Tears is the UGLIEST form of writing I have EVER seen in my life!

 

Yes -- by the way, the program's founder claims to have spent seven years in art school. She says that this proves her letters (and her program's other similarly graceless illustrations) are beautiful -- but she also says that this cannot matter, as (in her view) beauty should not matter for handwriting, and neither should speed.

 

Her textbooks for children and teachers (and the training-workshops that she and her staff give, to certify teachers and others as "certified handwriting specialists" who may guide others in using the books) also require learning odd notions of handwriting history. One is taught, for example (in the books and in the workshops) that absolutely all handwriting was vertical until the 17th century when [she says] the invention of the quill pen made it physically impossible to produce vertical letters! [!!!???!!!?!?!?!?]

 

When I speak with individuals or groups that have had HWTears training -- or with children coming to me after failure with that program -- I always specifically correct this matter, and show them evidence to the contrary: slanted writing done before the quill-pen era, and vertical writing done with quill pens. The children hate that they've obviously been lied to -- the adults hate me for pointing out the lie: and I have literally been told by HWTears-using teachers: "How DARE this [evidence I bring] be right?!" or "It can't have existed, because this is not what my training course said." (Ask me sometime what the HWTears founder said, when I confronted her on the matter.)

 

HWTears is an increasingly promoted program that a lot of schools/districts/teachers/occupational therapists in the USA are buying into -- as one result, there have been schools that /a/ asked me to give my handwriting class (often after disappointment with HWTears or other programs), that /b/ offered large sums, BUT that cautioned me that during my presentation I must not say, do, or recommend anything that would conflict with their previous or still-existing program (very often it was HWTears) on the grounds that many/most/all of their teachers and occupational therapists [OTs] had previously taken HWTears certification training, and that I therefore "needed to be supportive of this" because those teachers and OTs were very proud of their certification and needed to "feel validated" and "not to have their sensitivities hurt." I do not, of course, accept job-offers (or money) from such folks, no matter how hard they beg. Why can't the fountain pen community start its *own* outreach to teachers, for programs which do not lie and which are not ugly? (Note that I say "programs" -- because more styles than just my own personal favorite deserve a place in this effort. I would like to see the pen community out there teaching, and "certifying" if need be, in more than one *competently* designed and *accurately* taught mode of writing. Does the pen community really have so few expert handwriters and teachers -- certainly better handwriters and better-informed teachers than the designer of HWTears -- that we cannot get good handwriting taught in whatever form? (HWTears started as a one-woman organization, too. Can't we get one or two people to start our own handwriting crusade, perhaps with an Italic wing and a cursive wing headed by devotees of the respective forms of writing?)

You MUST be a wonderful handwriting repair-lady I agree with you 110%! The crusade with and Italic wing and a Cursive wing sounds perfect! Cursive and Ialic fit hand-in-hand.

This alphabet was written in the 1970s by Tom Gourdie. He was invited to introduce his methods to Scandinavian schools and to lecture in Sweden, Norway and the USA and to advise education authorities on handwriting.

http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/dd289/caliken_2007/Gourdiealphabet9.jpg

As you can see, this is the same style of lettering as the "new" Comenia script. Both derive directly from 15th century italic handwriting with one major difference. Gourdie did not maintain that he had "created" a new handwriting style, but fully and openly acknowledged its origin. In fact, this style of writing is advocated in many handwriting guides, and I've used it myself, for many years.

I personally support and advocate Italic as probably the best model for everyday handwriting as it is the least likely to deteriorate when written at speed. My objection is to the strong inference in this article, that something new has been created here.

caliken

Re:

As you can see, this is the same style of lettering as the "new" Comenia script. ...

The same overall style, with slight differences (most of them less than the ordinary differences between two writers of one style).

Re:

You MUST be a wonderful handwriting repair-lady

Thanks for the praise -- but you shouldn't give such praise without evidence. The three links in my signature will show whether I deserve your compliments.

Re:

I agree with you 110%! The crusade with and Italic wing and a Cursive wing sounds perfect! Cursive and I[t]alic fit hand-in-hand.

Thanks -- I've tried for at least a decade to get pen-folks interested in making this happen. So many, down the years, have chorused: "We agree, we agree, we agree" -- but it never got farther than that admittedly pleasing chorus. Royal Pen -- if you're really interested and can/will work with me to make this happen, give me a call and let's discuss *practical* ways and means to make it come about. (You'll find my phone number on the top right corner of my web-site's front page.)