寫？還是不寫？

Reporter： We just heard a few arguments there in favor of cursive writing. Here’s another one you may hear， that learning cursive helps young brains grow more than basic printing does. So we thought we’d take a few minutes to look inside the brain.

（soundbite from an educational video）

Man A： It is the swift and easy movement of impulses throughout the 2）cerebrum that enables us to think. But this must be established through learning and reinforced through practice.

Reporter： That’s an old 3）filmstrip from the 1950s and that bit about learning and practice， well， motor 4）neuroscientists say it’s true of cursive writing.

Amy Bastian： From my perspective， from a motor neuroscientist’s perspective.

Reporter： Professor Amy Bastian works at the Kennedy Krieger Institute on the campus of Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. She’s dedicated her career to studying how the brain talks to the body.

Amy： I feel like the more variety of things you do in the 5）fine motor 6）domain， the more variety of hand movements you make， will improve your 7）dexterity. Reporter： Which sounded to me like the way a motor neuroscientist would say： Handwriting is awesome. But when I asked is cursive better for a child’s development than printing...

Amy： I’ll tell you honestly， I don’t know.

Steve Graham： It really doesn’t matter if it’s 8）manuscript or cursive.

Reporter： That’s Steve Graham. He’s a professor of education at Arizona State University and he studies children’s writing.

Steve： It is kind of silly in a way that you have state 9）legislatures getting all tied up in this.

Reporter： Other researchers agreed， that cursive is good but there’s no hard evidence that it’s better than printing. As long as children are writing in school， it doesn’t really matter if the letters curl and connect. So problem solved. Or is it？

（soundbite from a promotional video）

Man B： Imagine a world without handwriting. It’s not as far-fetched as it sounds.

Reporter： This is a promo for a conference a few years back of researchers and educators， called “Handwriting in the 21st Century？” —there’s a question mark there at the end.

（soundbite from a promotional video）

Man B： Handwriting instruction is in danger of becoming increasingly 10）marginalized. What would be lost if handwriting was no longer taught at our schools？ Plenty.

Reporter： It turns out， the real fear among those who—like Steve Graham—study kids and handwriting is not that our schools will stop teaching cursive.

Steve： We don’t see much writing going on at all across the school day.

Reporter： So what are kids doing if they’re not writing？ Steve： Filling in blanks on worksheets， one sentence responses to questions， maybe in a short response summarizing information.

Reporter： In other words， not enough essays and too much this， that or all of the above. Now， some of the people who are fighting to keep cursive in schools argue that computers are the enemy. Instead of writing， kids are typing on the keyboard. But there are two problems with that argument. One： the researchers I spoke with all said that learning to type is actually a good thing for kids. And problem two... Virginia Berninger： Schools are not teaching keyboarding.

Reporter： Virginia Berninger， a professor of educational psychology at the University of Washington， is a big 11）champion of handwriting and typing. And she’s worried that both have been 12）nudged to the side by crowded 13）state standards. If new standards are going to change that， teachers have to be allowed to make time.

Scott Beers teaches education at Seattle Pacific University.

Scott Beers： If we expect kids to develop mastery in anything and develop fluency in anything， they have to be doing it on a regular basis.

Reporter： Experts say focus on handwriting early and often—print or cursive or both. And then， as kids’ brains develop， gently lay the groundwork for typing. It’s not either/or. It’s all of the above. The good kind.

記者：我們最近聽到一些支持連字體的論調(diào)。你或許也聽過以下這種說法：學(xué)習(xí)連字體會(huì)比一般的印刷體更利于青少年的大腦發(fā)育。讓我們花一點(diǎn)時(shí)間來了解一下大腦內(nèi)部。

（教學(xué)視頻片段）

男人甲：正是神經(jīng)脈沖在大腦中這種簡(jiǎn)單迅速的傳遞讓我們有了思考能力。但這種傳遞性必須通過學(xué)習(xí)來掌握，還要不斷練習(xí)才能強(qiáng)化。

記者：這是一段上世紀(jì)50年代的老幻燈片，而這里提到的“學(xué)習(xí)與練習(xí)”，運(yùn)動(dòng)神經(jīng)學(xué)家們都認(rèn)為這一點(diǎn)對(duì)連字體來說確實(shí)適用。

艾米·巴斯琴：在我看來，從一個(gè)運(yùn)動(dòng)神經(jīng)學(xué)家的角度來說，是這樣。

記者：艾米·巴斯琴教授任職于肯尼迪·克里格研究所，該研究所設(shè)在位于（美國(guó)）巴爾的摩市的約翰霍普金斯大學(xué)校內(nèi)。她一直致力于研究大腦如何對(duì)身體發(fā)出指令。

艾米：我的看法是，你在精細(xì)動(dòng)作方面的動(dòng)作種類越繁復(fù)，你的手部動(dòng)作就會(huì)越多樣化，也就會(huì)提高你的靈活性。

記者：在我聽來，這就像是運(yùn)動(dòng)神經(jīng)學(xué)家想說“手寫太棒了”時(shí)所說的話。不過，當(dāng)我問到連字體是否比印刷體更利于兒童發(fā)育時(shí)……

艾米：老實(shí)告訴你吧，我也不知道。

史蒂夫·格雷厄姆：是手稿，還是用連字體寫的，其實(shí)真的不重要。

記者：這位是史蒂夫·格雷厄姆。他是亞利桑那州立大學(xué)的教育學(xué)教授，以幼兒書寫為研究方向。

史蒂夫：各州的立法機(jī)關(guān)都在這個(gè)問題上攪和折騰，在某種意義上，這實(shí)在有點(diǎn)傻。

記者：別的研究人員也同意這個(gè)說法——連字體確實(shí)不錯(cuò)，但并沒有確切證據(jù)顯示寫連字體比寫印刷體更有益處。只要孩子們?cè)趯W(xué)校里經(jīng)常寫字，字體是哪種，筆畫能不能連起來，其實(shí)沒多大關(guān)系。問題解決了——但真的解決了嗎？

（宣傳片片段）

男人乙：想象，一個(gè)沒有手寫字的世界。聽起來似乎遙遠(yuǎn)，其實(shí)不然。

記者：這是幾年前一個(gè)研討會(huì)的宣傳片，眾多研究人員和教育者出席了這個(gè)名為“21世紀(jì)還寫字嗎？”的大會(huì)——其名稱以問號(hào)結(jié)尾。

（宣傳片片段）

男人乙：書法教學(xué)正面臨著日漸邊緣化的危機(jī)。假若學(xué)校不再教寫字，我們會(huì)有什么損失呢？我們會(huì)失去很多東西。

記者：事實(shí)上，像史蒂夫·格雷厄姆這樣的兒童與書法研究者，他們真正擔(dān)憂的并不是學(xué)校將不再教寫連字體。

史蒂夫：我們發(fā)現(xiàn)孩子上一天學(xué)，根本就沒寫多少東西。

記者：如果不寫東西，孩子們又在忙什么呢？

史蒂夫：他們會(huì)在答題紙上填空，用一個(gè)句子回答問題，又或是用幾句話寫個(gè)摘要。

記者：換句話說，文章寫得不夠多，太多的這種那種作業(yè)，又或者都是像上面那種選擇、填空類的作業(yè)。有些力圖讓學(xué)校保留連字體的人士認(rèn)為電腦是（學(xué)習(xí)的）敵人?，F(xiàn)在的小孩不愿意寫字，總是在鍵盤上敲敲打打。但這一論調(diào)有兩個(gè)問題。首先，我所采訪的研究者們都認(rèn)為，對(duì)兒童來說，學(xué)習(xí)打字其實(shí)大有裨益。第二個(gè)問題是——弗吉尼亞·貝爾寧格：學(xué)校里并不教打字。

記者：弗吉尼亞·貝爾寧格是華盛頓大學(xué)的教育心理學(xué)教授，一直大力提倡手寫與打字。她很擔(dān)心這兩者已經(jīng)被滿滿當(dāng)當(dāng)?shù)闹萘⒔虒W(xué)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)擠到了一邊。如果新標(biāo)準(zhǔn)要改變這一現(xiàn)狀，（學(xué)校）得讓老師們能夠騰出時(shí)間來。

斯科特·貝爾斯是西雅圖太平洋大學(xué)的教育學(xué)老師。

斯科特·貝爾斯：假如我們希望孩子們逐漸掌握什么東西，能夠流暢地完成什么事情，他們就得經(jīng)常接觸到這件事。

記者：專家們認(rèn)為應(yīng)該將手寫作為早期（教育）的重心，要經(jīng)常練習(xí)——印刷體也行，連字體也行，兩者兼用也沒問題。然后，隨著兒童大腦逐步發(fā)育，再慢慢地為打字奠定基礎(chǔ)。不是要么手寫，要么打字，而是上述全部——以一種良性的方式。