Talk:D'Nealian

	Writing portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The funny thing is that i always write my lower-case k's with the cursive loop thanks to this system, and nobody can understand why.

Why would this article not be merged with the 'D'Nealian script' article? It seems like they are basically the same article, just didn't names. -Agerard 22:24, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since both entries are stubs, I, too, don't see why they shouldn't be combined.

Yes, merge, please.

Not that it's particularly relevant, but I absolutely REFUSED to learn this crap when i was in second grade-- i thought it was pointless when i was already leanring to write normal cursive. Years later i just print anyway :) --Matt

The picture

I don't think the picture labeled as "D'Nealian Script" is actually D'Nealian Script. It's the same image used for the cursive entry... D'nealian is a middle-stage and looks like the results of the script at [[1]] Xous 22:12, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Misc Notes

"The system was designed as a method to alleviate the problems with teaching children the standard Zaner-Bloser Script method and the subsequent difficulty in transition to cursive writing. D'Nealian manuscript form has many similarities to the cursive version."

This is written sort of backwards and implicitly. What were the problems; why were there difficulties? Presumably because Zaner-Bloser script and cursive are too different, requiring the student to learn two completely distinct things with different motor skills. Presumably D'Nealian print and cursive are more similar and it only takes a subtle modification to transition from one to the other.

Incidentally, "Zaner-Bloser" needs at least a stub.

The Penmanship article says both this and Getty-Dubay were published in 1976; this article says D'Nealian was published in 1978. I suspect the other article is correct, at least regarding D'Nealian.

"Moreover, a common issue is that D'Nealian is taught extremely early, to first and second grade students, many of whom are still learning the rudiments of print-style writing. This has seriously hindered the penmanship of many students in districts that have changed styles amidships, and the students are arbitrarily failed due to their penmanship no longer being correct where it had been before."

This has nothing whatsoever to do with D'Nealian script - it relates only to school districts.

Also, it might bear pointing out that the reference to the other criticism (regarding the "tails" in D'Nealian print) seems to come from a competitor rather than an objective study. The competitor claims to have objective studies, but doesn't cite them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.162.158.148 (talk) 22:59, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately (last time I checked) wikipedia doesn't care whether it's unbiased or not. What matters is whether or not you can cite it. Even if it's a biased source it's OK to include. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.115.60.37 (talk) 04:49, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article is out of date, there have been a couple changes to the cursive version in recent years. They changed the cursive capitol "Q" for example, it no longer looks like an uppercase "L"- it's drawn almost identical to the Manuscript Q they just let the 'tail' flow into the next letter instead of breaking it. I know this is still being presented as "D'Nealian", but I don't know if that's fully accurate or not. I think they changed the lower case 'g' or 'z' a little bit as well. The age at which this is taught varies by district. Most schools don't start teaching the cursive script until around 2nd or 3rd grade. As far as I'm aware, the only real controversy came when public districts began standardizing on D'Nealian and moving away from Italic cursive. The alleged benefit of the 'tails' is that the cursive flows without having to raise the pen, the idea being that it's faster and easier to write (which is of course debatable). I have also heard that the older style of Italic cursive was more useful when you had to dip the pen into an inkwell every few letters, and that D'Nealian was adopted once steady-flow ink pens became cheap and common (since you don't have to pick them up or worry about blotting). I don't have any good citations right now, I'll have to check with my nephew and see if their book has an ISBN on it or not. Otherwise I'll see if the teacher has some kind of official manual or guide which I can reference. If someone has kids in school, they can verify this and post an ISBN I'd appreciate it as it'll be a few weeks before I can verify myself. 69.145.252.26 (talk) 12:43, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Time-line

I seriously doubt the time-line "introduced in 1978". I was taught to write, in primary school, using this script in about 1945. Petergans (talk) 06:38, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]