While perfecting my ability to read upside down, I made some very simple discoveries. I, too, made reversals in reading. I read saw for was and was for saw. Once I even read spider for rapids.

But it wasn’t until I taught myself to write upside down that I was really humbled and really began to learn something about the learning-to-write process. I too printed d’s for b’s and p’s for q’s and my s’s were sometimes backwards as well.

I preached the gospel of D’Nealian® to teachers. I convinced many that it would help prevent reading and spelling problems. Yet, when it came time to teach myself, I didn’t use D’Nealian®. Why? Well, I guess I just have to admit that I’m naturally lazy. To learn Don’s method, I would have had to spend a little time with his chart in front of me. And heavens to Betsy, I might have to practice the strokes! With stick-ball, there’s nothing to practice. Just put the stick to the left of the ball and you have a b. Put the stick to the right and you have a d. Uh, huh. Reversing that to write upside is no problem. Right? Are you kidding? Try it.

Not long ago, my first grandson, my pride and joy, was in kindergarten. He had tested out as gifted. Was I ever proud. But then, by January the school informed his parents that he would have to repeat kindergarten because he hadn’t learned his alphabet well enough!

Something was wrong. A "gifted" child unable to learn! If he was a behavioral problem, we might have understood. But he wasn’t. According to his teacher, he was a model student. Naturally, his parents took him to an ophthalmologist to have his eyes examined. No problem there. They had him tested for learning disabilities. No problem was uncovered. Finally, they brought him to his grandpa.

But to make sure, I created lists of letters written in all sizes and styles of type. Sure enough, grandpa was right. The only letters he couldn’t correctly identify 100% of the time were the stick-ball letters.

What his teacher did with the information I provided, I don’t know. At any rate, he didn’t make sufficient progress from January to June. The last day of school a special individual educational planning committee meeting was held for my grandson. The recommendation was for retention. I was asked to attend by his mother who couldn’t believe that one more year of the same instruction would benefit her son.

After hearing my testimony, the committee reluctantly changed its mind. He wouldn’t have to repeat kindergarten if his mother promised to teach him at home during the summer.

Traditionally children get locked into printing manuscript during the first two or three years of school. But they see people writing cursive. They want to write, but teacher says no. We must learn printing first. Wait until you get to the 3rd or 4th grade (as the case may be).

By the time cursive is introduced, many of the students have lost their initial enthusiasm. Still others have become so comfortable with their printing, they resist change.

Common sense says that this confrontation need not be. It would not be if both manuscript and at least the reading of cursive are taught at the same time!

The last part of this section is missing because the fonts used in it will not be properly viewed by most browers.

No matter what style of manuscript or cursive is utilized, grading is almost always based upon how close to perfect a child’s handwriting is to the model being taught. But should it be? I think we give too much lip service to the concept of individuality and not enough true assistance.

There are many acceptable ways of printing (manuscript) and writing (cursive) just as there are many different styles of print that are used in magazines and newspapers. Students have to learn to read these different styles. So, why can’t we help students learn to read other styles of handwriting? As long as a letter is made in such a manner that it cannot be confused with another letter, and as long as anyone who reads that letter can read it quickly and correctly as the intended letter, why bother marking a student down for not properly following the model being taught?

What is unacceptable? Any writing that causes deciphering problems to a reader who is not familiar with the person’s handwriting is unacceptable. For example, I am positive it was the sloppy handwriting of a doctor (or nurse) that gave a very unique spelling to a very common name. Years ago, at a national PTA convention I met a woman whose first name on her convention badge was :

Legibility. Legibility. Legibility. Make letters that people can read. Individuality is fine as long as everybody can read it. Teachers should not accept the following arguments in defense of illegibility.

l Well, that’s the way I’ve always done it.