Mastering penmanship is not merely about writing; it's about shaping the minds and futures of our young learners- LPK Reading Literacy"

Handwriting remains a fundamental skill in literacy development, yet instructional approaches have not always aligned with the cognitive, neurological, and developmental needs of diverse learners. In early childhood education, the debate over the effectiveness of different letter formation styles continues, particularly regarding the widespread use of the Sassoon Infant typeface, which introduces pre-cursive elements at the infant level. However, this does not mean that it has'nt worked for others. While proponents of this typeface argue that it facilitates fluency, research suggests that it may pose significant challenges, especially for neurodivergent learners. This article explores the optimal letter formation approach, advocating for a structured transition from pattern recognition to traditional and mild modern letter formations before introducing pre-cursive beyond age seven. By aligning handwriting instruction with developmental milestones, this approach minimizes cognitive overload, enhances letter recognition, and supports diverse learners, structurally encouraging both literacy and motor skills effectively.

Introduction

Handwriting instruction is an essential butoften overlooked component of early childhood literacy. Despite advancements in digital literacy, research consistently highlights the role of handwriting in cognitive development, spelling proficiency, and reading fluency (James & Engelhardt, 2012; Graham, Harris & Fink, 2000). However, the choice of letter formation style can significantly impact learning outcomes, particularly in neurodivergent children who may struggle with motor coordination, spatial awareness, and cognitive processing (Feder & Majnemer, 2007; Overvelde & Hulstijn, 2011).

A contentious issue in early childhood handwriting instruction is the premature introduction of pre-cursive elements, as seen in the Sassoon Infant typeface. While designed to facilitate smooth letter connections, research indicates that this approach can confuse early learners, particularly those with dyslexia, dysgraphia, or other neurodivergent profiles (Sumner, Connelly & Barnett, 2013). Instead, a research-backed, developmentally appropriate approach advocates for structured progression: from pattern recognition to traditional and mild modern letter formations at the infant level, with cursive or pre-cursive writing introduced after age seven (Santangelo & Graham, 2016).
This article argues that effective handwriting instruction should align with children’s cognitive and motor development, avoiding undue pressure to adopt cursive-like strokes prematurely. By focusing on the natural progression of motor skills, spatial perception, and reading development, educators can structurally encourage handwriting fluency and overall literacy success, accordingly.

The Developmental Progression from Patterns to Letter Formation

Handwriting instruction should align with the natural developmental trajectory of children’s motor and cognitive growth. Research in early childhood education and neurology highlights the following key phases:

1. Pattern Recognition (Ages 2-3): Before formal letter writing begins, children engage in pre-writing activities involving tracing, scribbling, and pattern formations (Integration to Arts and Craft). These activities build fine motor control, spatial awareness, and grip strength, which are foundational for structured handwriting (Christensen, 2009; Feder & Majnemer, 2007).

2. Basic Letter Formation (Ages 4-6): At this stage, children should be taught print letters using a traditional or mild modern formation, with simple, unembellished strokes that reinforce letter recognition and prevent confusion at all cost. The introduction of letters should not include unnecessary pre-cursive strokes, such as the curved endings that encourage joining letters before it is developmentally appropriate. Research suggests that avoiding such premature cursive elements reduces cognitive overload and allows children to focus on accurate letter formation and recognition (Berninger & Wolf, 2016).

3. Introduction to Cursive (Ages 7+): Neurological and educational research supportsintroducing pre-cursive writing no earlier than age seven. At this point, children have developed sufficient cognitive and motor skills to handle the complexities of connected letter forms without compromising their ability to read and spell. Introducing pre-cursive at this stage has been associated with improved handwriting fluency, spelling retention, and reading comprehension, as children can separate early reading acquisition from the challenges of cursive letter formation (Santangelo & Graham, 2016; James & Engelhardt, 2012). We must consider our learners and all their needs. Even if a student is considered a genius in their own right.

Consequences of Premature Introduction of Pre-Cursive Handwriting

Mild Consequences:

1. Increased Letter Reversal and Confusion: Premature exposure to pre-cursive strokes can lead to letter reversals and confusion, particularly in children who are still developing spatial awareness (Feder & Majnemer, 2007).
2. Reduced Fine Motor Mastery: Introducing complex letter formations before grip strength and control have been adequately developed may slow progress in handwriting fluency (Christensen, 2009).
3. Short-Term Frustration: Children may experience mild frustration and disengagement when faced with an unfamiliar and complex letter formation style too early in their developmental stage (James & Engelhardt, 2012).

Moderate Consequences:

1. Inhibited Reading Progress: The simultaneous demand to learn both letter recognition for reading and complex motor patterns for writing may overwhelm cognitive processing, delaying reading fluency (Berninger, 2012).
2. Handwriting Avoidance: When children struggle with letter formation, they may develop an aversion to writing, impacting their ability to express thoughts clearly and efficiently in academic tasks (Graham et al., 2000).
3. Attention and Processing Struggles: Neurodivergent children, particularly those with dyslexia or ADHD, may struggle to process multiple cognitive tasks at once, resulting in frustration and reduced classroom participation (Dyslexia Institute, 2008).

Severe Consequences:

1. Long-Term Handwriting Deficits: Improperly developed handwriting skills can lead to persistent handwriting difficulties into later academic years, requiring remediation and intervention (Sassoon, 2007).
2. Negative Self-Perception and Academic Anxiety: When children experience repeated failure in handwriting, their self-confidence and motivation in literacy-related subjects can deteriorate, leading to long-term academic disengagement (Berninger & Wolf, 2016).
3. Inequitable Educational Outcomes: Children with neurodivergent conditions may be disproportionately affected by premature pre-cursive instruction, widening the achievement gap and limiting their access to mainstream educational opportunities (Snowling & Hulme, 2012).

The Challenges with Sassoon Infant Typeface at the Infant Level

Sassoon Infant typeface is widely used in early education settings due to its soft, flowing appearance, but there are notable disadvantages, particularly for neurodivergent learners:

NOTE: If the Sassoon Infant Typeface works for your child / students ages 4-6 years of age, then this part of the article is not for you.

Precursive to Cursive Before Readiness: Sassoon Infant typeface incorporates elements of cursive writing at a stage when children are still mastering print letter recognition. This premature introduction can cause confusion between letter forms and hinder early literacy development.

Cognitive Overload for Neurodivergent Learners: Children with dyslexia, ADHD, dyspraxia, and other learning differences often struggle with spatial processing, letter reversals, and fine motor coordination. Sassoon’s looping and slanted strokes can exacerbate these challenges, leading to frustration and reduced writing fluency.

Disruptions in Letter-Word Recognition: Early learners benefit from clear, distinct letterforms that match the print they see in books. Sassoon Infant's approach deviates from standard print, creating a disconnect between reading and writing experiences.

Understanding Neurodivergent Individuals in Educational Settings

Neurodivergent individuals encompass those whose neurological developmentand functioning diverge from societal norms, including conditions such as autism spectrum disorder (ASD), attention-deficit / hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), dyslexia, and other learning disabilities. In contrast, neurotypical individuals develop cognitive and behavioral functions within the conventional expectations of their age group.

Classroom Behaviours and Symptoms: Neurodivergent vs. Neurotypical Students

In educational environments, neurodivergent students may exhibit behaviors distinct from their neurotypical peers:

• Executive Function Challenges: Difficulties with planning, organizing, and managing tasks are common among neurodivergent students, potentially leading to struggles in completing assignments and adhering to classroom routines.
• Sensory Processing Differences: Heightened or diminished sensitivity to sensory stimuli can result in discomfort or distraction in typical classroom settings, affecting concentration and participation.
• Social Interaction Variances: Challenges in interpreting social cues may lead to misunderstandings or difficulties in peer relationships, impacting collaborative learning experiences.
• Behavioral Manifestations: Behaviors such as fidgeting, impulsivity, or inattentiveness are often observed, particularly among students with ADHD, and may be misinterpreted as deliberate misconduct.
  

Global Perspectives on Learning Disabilities

Almost two decades ago, while practicing in a classroom during my teacher training, I had a professional, yet casual conversation with a principal about special needs education. My colleagues and I were preparing to implement measures for the children displaying symptoms of various disabilities, including dysgraphia, and we had sought to assess their needs before designing our lesson plans.

However, the principal appeared overwhelmed and firmly by casually stated,said, "There is no such thing as special needs… children with learning disabilities." Echoing what he had been told by his superiors like the same casual conversation we were having. His remarks reflected a long-standing misconception that denies the existence of learning disabilities, a belief that has silently persisted in some educational circles, not all.

While his response could have been discouraging, my colleagues and I chose to listen respectfully without allowing the discussion to escalate. This experience reinforced the critical need for advocacy and evidence-based practices in supporting neurodivergent learners and learner on a whole.

Despite advancements in understanding neurodiversity, some educators and authorities continue to question the legitimacy of learning disabilities,
attributing student challenges to lack of effort or behavioral issues. This
skepticism can lead to inadequate support for affected students. For instance, in Texas, systemic shortcomings have historically hindered appropriate educational interventions for students with dyslexia, underscoring the need for legislative reforms to ensure proper support, (Houston Chronicles 2025).

The Reality of Learning Disabilities

Learning disabilities are neurologically based disorders that affect thebrain's ability to process information, leading to difficulties in reading,
writing, reasoning, or mathematical abilities. Denying their existence not only invalidates the experiences of those affected but also impedes access to necessary educational interventions. As highlighted by the Learning
Disabilities Association of America, dismissing learning disabilities as mere
social constructs overlooks the genuine cognitive processing deficits faced by individuals, thereby denying their identity and unique challenges.

Recognizing and validating the experiences of neurodivergent students is crucial. Educators and policymakers must adopt empathetic approaches, ensuring that skepticism does not hinder the provision of appropriate support.

The Importance of Delayed Cursive Instruction

The early introduction of pre-cursive or cursive handwriting is often basedon outdated pedagogical assumptions rather than research-backed evidence.
Studies in literacy, neurology, and cognitive development highlight several
advantages of delaying cursive instruction until at least age seven. Firstly,
print handwriting is directly aligned with early reading materials, strengthening the connection between letter recognition, phonemic awareness, and word decoding skills (James & Engelhardt, 2012; Graham, Harris & Fink, 2000).

Secondly, delaying cursive reduces cognitive overload, as children by age seven have developed better working memory, enabling them to handle the increased complexity of cursive writing alongside other academic demands (McCarney et al., 2013; Sumner, Connelly & Barnett, 2013).

Furthermore, research indicates that premature exposure to cursive can lead to frustration, writing aversion, and difficulty transitioning between print and cursive styles, especially for neurodivergent learners (The Education Hub, n.d.; Learning Disabilities Association of America, n.d.).

Additionally, early cursive instruction may disrupt motor pattern development, as young children require sufficient time to master basic letter formation before moving to complex stroke sequences (Feder & Majnemer, 2007; Bara & Morin, 2013).

Studies have also revealed that handwriting fluency directly impacts overall written composition skills, with print handwriting encourages greater automaticity in early writing tasks (Jones & Christensen, 1999; Santangelo & Graham, 2016). Ultimately, delaying cursive instruction aligns with evidence-based practices that support literacy development, writing fluency, and the cognitive readiness of young learners, ensuring a more effective and inclusive handwriting curriculum (Christensen, 2009; National Handwriting Association, 2018).

Conclusion

Handwriting instruction is an indispensable yet frequently underestimated pillar of early childhood literacy. As evidenced throughout this research, the structured development of handwriting skills significantly contributes to cognitive growth, reading fluency, and spelling proficiency. The introduction of letter formation must be carefully aligned with children’s motor and cognitive development to ensure optimal learning outcomes. A central finding of this study underscores the importance of a progressive developmental approach, beginning with pattern recognition and traditional letter formations before transitioning to more complex styles, such as cursive. This sequence encourages fine motor control, spatial awareness, and automaticity in writing, which are critical for literacy success.

Premature exposure to pre-cursive elements, such as those found in the Sassoon Infant typeface (4-6 years), can pose unnecessary challenges for early learners, particularly those with neurodivergent profiles, including dyslexia and dysgraphia. Research indicates that these early complexities may hinder handwriting fluency and impede overall literacy development.

The implications of premature pre-cursive instruction extend beyond mere writing mechanics. The research reviewed highlights the cognitive load placed on young learners when they are required to adopt complex strokes before achieving foundational writing automaticity. Studies demonstrate that delaying cursive instruction until after age seven, when children exhibit greater motor coordination and cognitive readiness, can significantly enhance writing efficiency and literacy outcomes.

Understanding the needs of neurodivergent learners is critical to creating inclusive and effective handwriting instruction. Children with diverse learning profiles benefit from structured, explicit, and evidence-based handwriting interventions that accommodate their motor and cognitive processing differences. By prioritizing a research-backed, developmentally appropriate instructional model, educators can better support students in achieving fluency, confidence, and long-term academic success.

Ultimately, effective handwriting instruction should be grounded in empirical research and pedagogical best practices, ensuring that children progress naturally through the stages of handwriting mastery.

Policymakers, educators, and curriculum developers must recognize the profound impact of structured handwriting instruction and advocate for approaches that align with children’s developmental trajectories. By fostering handwriting proficiency in an age-appropriate manner, we can lay a solid foundation for literacy, academic achievement, and lifelong learning.

References

• Bara, F.& Morin, M.F. (2013) 'Does the handwriting style learned in first grade determine the style used in the fourth and fifth grades?', Human MovementScience, 32(5), pp. 1074–1087.
• Berninger,V.W. & Wolf, B.J. (2016) Teaching Students with Dyslexia and Dysgraphia:Lessons from Teaching and Science. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.
• British Dyslexia Association (2021) Dyslexia and Handwriting: Guidance forEducators. Available at: https://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk (Accessed:2 March 2025).
• Christensen,C.A. (2009) 'The critical role handwriting plays in the ability to produce high-quality written text', British Journal of Educational Psychology,79(4), pp. 613–628.
• Feder, K.P.& Majnemer, A. (2007) 'Handwriting development, competency, and intervention', Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 49(4), pp.312–317.
• Graham, S.,Harris, K.R. & Fink, B. (2000) 'Is handwriting causally related to learning to write? Treatment of handwriting problems in beginning writers', Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), pp. 620–633.
• James, K.H.& Engelhardt, L. (2012) 'The effects of handwriting experience on functional brain development in pre-literate children', Trends inNeuroscience and Education, 1(1), pp. 32–42.
• Jones, D.& Christensen, C.A. (1999) 'Relationships between automaticity in handwriting and students' ability to generate written text', Journal ofEducational Psychology, 91(1), pp. 44–49.
• Karlsdottir,R. & Stefansson, T. (2002) 'Development of children’s perceptual and motor skills: A study of normal primary school children', Scandinavian Journal ofEducational Research, 46(1), pp. 69–85.
• Knights,L.P. (2020) Penmanship for a New Trinidad and Tobago: Primary School: Series. Caribbean Tutorial Publishing Company.
• Learning Disabilities Association of America (n.d.) Learning Disabilities Are Not aSocial Construct: Perspective from a Mom Who Knows. Available at: https://ldaamerica.org (Accessed:2 March 2025).
• Mangen, A.& Velay, J.L. (2010) 'Digitizing literacy: Reflections on the haptics of writing', Advances in Haptics, 5, pp. 385–401.
• McCarney,D., Peters, L., Jackson, S., Thomas, M. & Kirby, A. (2013) 'The development of handwriting speed and legibility in primary school-aged children', BritishJournal of Occupational Therapy, 76(9), pp. 428–436.
• National Handwriting Association (2018) The Role of Handwriting in LiteracyDevelopment. Available at: https://www.nha-handwriting.org.uk (Accessed:2 March 2025).
• Overvelde,A. & Hulstijn, W. (2011) 'Handwriting development in grade 2 and grade 3 primary school children with normal, at risk, or dysgraphic characteristics', Researchin Developmental Disabilities, 32(2), pp. 540–548.
• Santangelo,T. & Graham, S. (2016) 'A comprehensive meta-analysis of handwriting instruction', Educational Psychology Review, 28(2), pp. 225–265.
• Sumner, E.,Connelly, V. & Barnett, A.L. (2013) 'Children with dyslexia are slow writers because they pause more often and not because they are slow at handwriting execution', Reading and Writing, 26(6), pp. 991–1008.
• The Education Hub (n.d.) Key Challenges for Neurodivergent Students in SchoolSettings and How to Help. Available at: https://theeducationhub.org.nz (Accessed:2 March 2025).
• The International Dyslexia Association (2019) Dyslexia and Dysgraphia: WhatTeachers Need to Know. Available at: https://www.dyslexiaida.org (Accessed:2 March 2025).
  

Further Reading

• Child Mind Institute (n.d.) How Schools Can Support Neurodiverse Students. Available at: https://childmind.org (Accessed:2 March 2025).
• The Education Hub (n.d.) Supporting Students with Dyslexia: Best Practices in theClassroom. Available at: https://theeducationhub.org.nz (Accessed:2 March 2025).
• World Literacy Foundation (2022) The State of Global Literacy: Barriers andSolutions. Available at: https://www.worldliteracyfoundation.org (Accessed:2 March 2025).