The debate about whether schools should continue teaching skills that can easily be done by technology was a tough one. It felt like both sides were actually advocating for a similar goal, just from different angles. Neither side was pushing to eliminate cursive writing, multiplication tables, or spelling entirely, but rather to move away from rote memorization of these skills. With technology becoming more integrated into classrooms, I understand the value in shifting our approach, since students may not need the same type of instruction as before. Still, I strongly believe these foundational skills play an important role in students’ development throughout their education.
The pro side made strong points: these traditional skills support reading and writing development (which is confirmed in the following article), are part of the human experience, and relying solely on technology could create inequities for students who lack access. I agree with these arguments, especially since I see the benefits of writing by hand every day in my own teaching. Like I mentioned during the debate, writing helps me focus and retain information because it’s a personal, active process. Of course, not everyone learns the same way, which is where challenges can arise.
The opposing side also raised thoughtful points that made me reflect. They highlighted how students who struggle with traditional methods can build discipline through coding, music, and creative outlets, which I absolutely love. They also encouraged us to consider the future and to be brave enough to let go of outdated tools when they no longer serve students’ needs. As someone who often falls into familiar routines, this was a great reminder to be open to change. I appreciated the article they shared from “My Cursive”. It outlined both the pros and cons of cursive writing, showing that there isn’t a clear right or wrong answer, just valid arguments on both sides. I also found this short video which describes the clash between tradition and modernity in education. Even though people are trying to keep cursive writing in schools because they care about history and reading skills, technology and new ways of learning are making cursive less important in today’s classrooms.
Photo by cocoparisienne on Pixabay
In the end, I do see value in teaching spelling, cursive, and multiplication, but in moderation. I don’t think technology should replace these skills entirely, but I also believe we need to be mindful of how much time we spend on them, especially if they’re not helping students in meaningful ways. With so many learning styles in one classroom, we need a balanced approach. Combining technology with traditional tools can help us reach more students and support diverse ways of learning.
Great work debaters!
Hi Danielle,
You brought up some really important points, especially about how access still is not equal in remote and Indigenous communities. That is absolutely true, and it is something we need to keep working on. But I think it is important to remember that the debate was not about achieving perfect equality. It was about whether technology has helped create more equity than before. And honestly, it has, in many ways.
Technology is a tool. It is created by humans and it does not work on its own. It needs support, investment, and the right environment to make a real impact. That is why government involvement in education, infrastructure, and digital access is so important. Without that, even the best technology cannot reach the people who need it most.
I have actually seen places where there are no proper roads, where it takes five days of walking just to reach the nearest town. But somehow, technology has still made its way there. People are using mobile phones to connect with others, access health information, and even take online classes. That is a powerful example of how technology can help bridge gaps.
And this is what equity truly means. It is not about giving everyone the exact same thing. It is about making sure that those who have been left behind are finally included and supported. In that sense, technology has played an important role in creating more fairness in society.
Thanks again for your thoughtful post. These kinds of discussions help all of us look deeper and understand the issue from different sides.
Hey Dani
It sounds like you are neither fully for nor against the topic but leaning more toward the pro side?. The debate did a great job of showing the importance of keeping certain traditional methods, like writing, while also recognizing the value of integrating new tools, especially for students who need adaptations. Technology can be powerful when used to support individual needs. For example, if a student has a disability that affects fine motor skills and makes writing difficult, how amazing is it that they can use talk to text to communicate and learn effectively….that’s a win in my books😊 That is a great example of why we should not force an old method and need to use both as your stating. I love the idea that children with learning challenges can use certain technology to keep up with classmates even if it looks different then traditional methods. So yes, I will agree there needs to be a mix of both.