In Israel, and in Arabic countries, is it common for people to hook their hand when writing?

Or do they turn the paper sideways?

I've been teaching Ana cursive, as I've said.

She's taking a break from learning new letters to review the ones she already knows, because we're (just over) halfway through the alphabet. She has a - l and q, t, u, and w.

We're using worksheets from here, although I modified the b so that she curlicues it back instead of just dipping down at the end. It's easier for her. Tomorrow we'll do another bit of review, just the letters she's having trouble with (b, f, k and the ha combination) and move onto the next set of letters - n, m, v, x. And then another week and a half for the last of them and she'll have her lowercase letters down. Then I'm thinking a few more weeks of review before we start on capitals?

As a side effect of all this, my *own* handwriting has improved.

Ana showed one of her worksheets to her teacher (f - and let me tell you that her fs are beautiful, she just has to think too much to make them) and we got a little note going "Well, we're still working on print letters". For crying out loud! If you were an early elementary teacher, or have been an early elementary teacher, and your kid showed you something extra they did on the side, would you be "Well, we're not doing that" or would you stick a sticker on it anyway?

And I'll tell you... I tell Ana that I want her to learn cursive now because it's easier to learn it at 6 than at 8, and that I know it'll be more frustrating for her in two years. And this is true. But the reason I don't tell her is that we only started with cursive learning because after doing print all through kindergarten and September of this year she still had no idea how to hold a pencil properly, nor that it mattered *how* you formed the letters so long as it looked more or less okay. Because you *can* print with your pencil in your fist, and you *can* print if you write your a backwards or if you do a lowercase h and then add the rest of it to make an H. (It took the better part of two weeks to convince her that the tails on letters aren't just decorative, that you can't just do most of the letter and add the tails after the fact!) But you can't print very well or efficiently that way, and it's sure to tire you eventually. Of course, there was no convincing her until she had enough letters in cursive that she could write real words and see and feel the difference doing it right makes.

Ana's teacher has 24 students. I don't know how she teaches penmanship, or if she has time to do so in her day, or if she's able (or willing) to correct things like grip when the kids are writing in class, or... any of this. But if I really felt Ana were being taught to write properly, in a comfortable and efficient way (printing is writing), I would never have ended up doing cursive with her.

(Ana's cursive letters are lovely, btw. Her bs are a bit sloppy, and sometimes her ws or us are a bit looser than I'd like, but she's just learning. If only I could get her to write on the line...! Do you think raised line paper would help?)

This is why I've been googling about cursive a lot, actually.

(And I still want to see more examples - charts, I guess - of how script is taught in other countries. Just because.)

One thing I keep seeing is the statement that up until the 30s or so, cursive was what was taught in the first grade - not print. (And of course some schools changed over sooner than that, and some later - or not at all!) Many of them also say that that's how writing is taught in other countries as well, with the possible exception of Great Britain. Any insight here from people who know what they're talking about would be useful :)

If this is true, all of a sudden that scene in To Kill a Mockingbird makes sense!

See, it was weird enough that Scout's father was criticized for "teaching" her to read when he'd done no such thing (she picked it up on her own), but I never understood the bit about how she was taught to write. It seemed strange to me that they taught her to write in script but not print (and that this was referred to as writing but print wasn't), but stranger that this should be a problem.

But now it makes sense, if teaching print first was somewhat novel - the teacher, new to teaching, felt she'd just had her pedagogy insulted. She's got this idea of how you're nowadays supposed to teach reading and writing, and they did this old-fashioned thing that was ditched to make things easier for kids, this being the newish era of look-say reading as well, I suppose, though technically Scout learned that way anyway. (And it had worked, too!)

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Today, as we walked to the library, I noticed some rosemary in another person's yard, and challenged the kids to find "a plant we can eat" in there. (They did!) I also pointed out that person's impatiens.

Evangeline: Why are they called that?
Me: I don't know.
Evangeline: Maybe they don't have patience?

Now, you all saw that coming, but listen. I don't think we've ever expressed patience as having or not having it. We tell them to BE patient, sure, but not to have patience. I would have expected her to say "Maybe because they're not patient" or even "Maybe because they're impatient" instead.

So now I want to gather up im- words and see what she makes of them. This is probably a bad idea.