Slashdot Mirror
The Case For Mandatory Touch-Typing In High School
Hugh Pickens writes "With the perspective of forty-plus years since my graduation, I would say the single most useful course I took in high school was a business class in touch-typing that gave me a head start for writing and with computers that I have benefited from my entire life. So it was with particular interest that I read Gordon Rayner's essay in the Telegraph proposing that schools add a mandatory course in touch typing to the cornerstones of education: reading, writing and arithmetic. 'Regardless of the career a child takes up when they leave school, a high percentage of them will use a keyboard in their daily work, and all of them are likely to use a keyboard in their leisure time,' writes Rayner. 'Touch-typing would help every child throughout their lives — so why are our schools so blind to this?'"
Touch-typing is a drop in the bucket.
First, we'd have to begin to get rid of the lecture method with all it's crotchety old proponents who over-emphasize the main learning stream while under-emphasizing the alternatives.
Then we'd have to rebuild education metholodogy to suit the 21st century. I'd say we're a few generations behind.
I had mandatory touch-typing in middle school (6th-8th grades) and it was worthless. I didn't learn a thing - I typed slowly and uncomfortably.
Then one day, I decided I wanted to learn to program computers. I taught myself C, and halfway through the project discovered that I had become a pretty good touch typist. Typing is a skill like riding a bike - you'll learn it by doing it. Forcing it on kids (who would rather be taking another, more meaningful course but can't because their schedule is full of crap) is only going to make them resent it.
Just because something is valuable doesn't mean public education has to teach it. As I student, I can say that the room in our schedules is finite, and if it's both useful and easy (like typing) we'll get it on our own, we don't need it taking up scarce time slots.
When I was in elementary school, we went to the computer lab a couple days a week and were forced to use the PAWS typing tutor software on the Apple IIe. Is it really that case that there are still schools that don't teach this? Also, based on my experience, I don't think we should wait until high school to teach people to type. Elementary school seems like the right place, as children are learning to read and write, why not learn to type too?
I'm a software engineer who can't touch type. And I can honestly say that learning wouldn't increase my productivity in any measurable way. I don't spend a majority of my day typing. For every minute spent typing I spend at least 15 thinking, debugging, etc. Even giving it a 25% increase (which is more than it's likely to be) would be negligible.
On top of that touch typing just isn't comfortable for many people. I tried learning back in school. Hurt my wrists horribly to try to type like that. I'm pretty sure that touch typing position is the reason so many people get carpal tunnel. What is useful is learning the layout of the keyboard so you don't have to hunt and peck, but actually touch typing and returning to home row after every keypress is horribly overrated.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
That's not even the issue.
Children will be typing before they can even understand what evolution is or who Jesus is.
High School? Are they kidding? That's like trying to have mandatory sex education classes for 35 year old people. Maybe useful on /. but hardly far too late for the rest of the world.
Typing is merely an interface to some sort of computerized system. Children learn surprisingly quickly. The other day I saw a 4 year old girl log into a Vista machine, start Firefox, and then *TYPE* the address for some website so she could play a game.
Holy shit. Maybe she was exceptional, I don't know since I am not around kids that often. But, if 4 year old girls are doing it right now, then kids should already be typing experts by high school.
I find people who type faster are more likely to document their work because it takes less time to do so. After all, you've spent all that time thinking, what is it to write a half page summary of what that new module does and why it does it, and why it does it the way it does it? If you're hunting and pecking, it could take you longer to write the summary than it did to think of the code. If you can touch type (or at the very least type faster than 40-50WPM by whatever means), then it's no real burden. After all, if you're spending that much time thinking about your work, then you've already worked out pretty much everything you need to say.
I type 80-90WPM from copy myself, thanks to having taking a touch typing course. Granted, I don't follow 100% proper classroom technique, but I do pretty well. Before that, I was a four-finger typer that did pretty good. I managed 35WPM from copy on my first typing test when I started my touch typing course. That was hard won from typing BASIC programs on my TI home computer as well as any other 80s machine I could get time on.
I enjoy the freedom that touch typing gives me. In the same amount of time I can write much clearer and more complete documentation, clearer, more complete emails, and generally get communication done with and out of the way much more fluidly. I can type almost as fast as I can think. When I was pecking away at 35WPM, I was thinking way faster than I wrote, and so I wrote only the minimum, and ended up with cryptic crud.
*shrug*
Program Intellivision!
You'd be surprised. Touch-typing doesn't just teach "how to type fast and accurately", it also teaches "how to type with minimum strain on your hands/wrists".
If this hasn't affected you, you're lucky. If this has, you know exactly what I mean.
I'm a software engineer who can't touch type. And I can honestly say that learning wouldn't increase my productivity in any measurable way.
I'm a software engineer who can touch type. And I can honestly say that not knowing how to touch type would decrease my productivity in a measurable way.
That's anecdotal evidence, by the way.
Let's look at the larger picture here. You're correct that the "typing" part only makes up part of what a software engineer does. I'd say about 25-50% of my time is spent typing (not only code, also documentation, e-mails, blog posts on the internal company blog, wiki updates, etc.). Wikipedia says:
An average professional typist reaches 50 to 70 wpm, while some positions can require 80 to 95 (usually the minimum required for dispatch positions and other time-sensitive typing jobs), and some advanced typists work at speeds above 120.
Two-finger typists, sometimes also referred to as "hunt and peck" typists, commonly reach sustained speeds of about 37 wpm for memorized text, and 27 wpm when copying text but in bursts may be able to reach up to 60 to 70 wpm.
So let's say it's 60 wpm for touch typing (I know I'm quite a bit faster than that, but we want to go with averages) and 37 wpm for two-finger typing.
So, considering all this data: We probably spend about a third of our work time typing, and touch typing is on average roughly 1.6 times as fast as two-finger typing. For an 8-hour work day, that results in 2.7 hours of typing, of which roughly one hour is "wasted" for two-finger typers.
I'd say one hour each day is a measurable increase (or decrease) in productivity.
On top of that touch typing just isn't comfortable for many people.
Then many people learned it wrongly.
Hurt my wrists horribly to try to type like that.
Then your position is incorrect. You really should have learned how to touch type properly :-)
Touch typing is just being able to type without looking at the keyboard. If you don't use the "standard" techniques, that's fine. But being able to put thoughts down with the keyboard quickly is essential when writing. Rather than focusing on HOW you're writing, you're able to focus on WHAT you're writing. I'm all for having children just have a minimum "40wpm" limit or something like that.
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
Touch-typing is a drop in the bucket.
Agreed. Since most people can't write, there's no point in having them touch type.
May contain traces of nut.
Made from the freshest electrons.
Wasn't in the curriculum 30 years ago?
Nonsense. Was too.
It was an optional class in my high school, and it was full of girls, so I took it so I could sit next to HER.
The touch typing is still with me to this day, but I haven't thought about HER for 29 years, until just now.
It was the single most valuable class I took in High School.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
I started out as kids do, performing simple hunt'n'peck maneuvers. By the time I hit high-school it was well ingrained. At age 19, I wrote a novel of over 1,000,000 characters over a 1.5 year period, averaging four hours a day of just typing. That burned the keyboard layout into me (I would -never- go DVORAK).
Even now, I don't even have to look at the keyboard to type near perfectly, long as my wrists remain still on the rest I don't lose my place. I can even type just as perfectly with my eyes closed or in a dark room by centering on the F and J keys to start. My style is now a mastered form of hunt'n'peck, hunt'n'peck taken to the Nth degree, massively improved through perfect memorization of the keyboard layout and ingrained muscle-memory, such that I can type now about 80 words per minute. It's simply 'think and the words are typed' at this point, as natural as speaking or writing with a pen.
There came a time once that I thought I should improve my typing speed by learning to do real touch-typing the way professional typists must learn. So, I picked up a 'teach me typing' program, and diligently went through the courses for quite some time. I think it was 'Mario Teaches Typing' :P It had which finger you were supposed to use and all that jazz, and I did what it asked to the letter. Used the proper fingers, and arranged my hands as asked.
Only one hitch: my hands began to hurt, a lot. I noticed there was a large amount of unnatural stretching and contortion compared to my mastered hunt'n'peck method in order to reach the key with the 'proper finger', the one the program demanded I use. Now, I didn't simply give up, I wanted to master this technique, I was committed. But, after a month of daily practice I couldn't take it anymore. I was nearly as fast while touch-typing, but my hands were killing me.
I realized then why typists get carpel-tunnel syndrome and the like. Dogmatic touch-typing it terrible for your hands! You need to be able to relax your hands as your type, not stretch and contort them unnaturally. I went back to my freestyle typing and never looked back.
My typing can realistically be called freestyle because, based on what combination of letters and words I'm typing, it could be any number of fingers that are available at the moment to type that key. The difference is, I know I have to hit that key, and it happens quite naturally. I don't use my pinkies to type at all (well, maybe to hit shift), but I use everything else. That's probably the difference between my speed and a professional typist, since 80 WPM isn't really something to sneeze at but a pro typist can hit 50% faster.
But, now I'm attempting to turn myself into a professional author, and typing has become my primary skill, my devotion, my life. I'm glad I never took the touch-typing route! I'm quite certain that I will never develop carpel tunnel or repetitive strain injuries because my hands are relaxed, my fingers don't contort, and typing is done in perfectly natural motion. No overextended fingers, no awkward combinations. No pain.
That's my experience. That's the wisdom I've gained.
"I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist"
"The system's efficiency is dropping steadily and steeply; teachers are out of touch with current technologies"
Has calculus changed in the last 150 years?
Has English changed (aside from a handful of grammar constructs, a few words, etc.) in the last 50?
Does addition work differently that it did in the 15 century?
Adding new teaching methods is a good idea if they work and help learning. i.e. putting full color 3-D graphs of certain functions in calc. books.
But adding new technology is bad if it isn't used correctly. i.e. putting "smartboards", projectors, etc. in every classroom. No teacher knows how to use them, they are all required to use them, and student learning completely stops. Sitting in class for 20 minutes because the teacher can't get the computer to talk to the projector HARMS learning.
Unfortunately, every time anyone tries to put "technology" into public schools, it fails miserably. Students are much better off taking notes from a lecture written on a chalkboard than watching a presentation bluescreen for the third time this week.
People are very quick to say "TEACHERS ARE OUT OF DATE!", but that's not necessarily a bad thing. The material being taught hasn't changed because IT STILL WORKS LIKE IT DID BACK THEN!
The other argument is that classes are "less relevant" to today's students. This is really just another way of saying "students are lazy and without spinning animations on screen every 5 seconds they start to daydream". Calculus is just as relevant to students now as it was to students 50 years ago (depending on choice of profession, this may be a lot or a little). But putting the fundamental theorem on calculus or on "these new-fangled interwebs" doesn't result in better learning over seeing it on a chalkboard.
-1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
I'm a software engineer who can't touch type. And I can honestly say that learning wouldn't increase my productivity in any measurable way.
Logically the only way this can be true is if you think slower than you type, in which case, sorry, you may not be the best software engineer out there. I easily type 120wpm and it is still far too slow for me, whether it's coding or writing English (documents, slashdot posts, e-mails) I think much faster than I type, typing is *the* primary bottleneck in my work ... if I could type 500 wpm my productivity would go through the roof.
The length of compulsory government education for children has steadily increased since it began as it was always the intention of the creators and maintainers of it to remove the task of raising children from parents to the child rearing "experts" (aka themselves). This in their own words was to ensure that children were moulded to requirements of industry and enlightened society without parents interfering and undoing all their hard work.
That is not in anyway a secret to anyone who has a cursory knowledge of the history of Compulsory Education.
Not to mention most of primary school now is purely social indoctrination and almost no hard academics is taught until fourth grade.
If you believe students are learning more than they did 50 years you're living in an *absolute* fantasy land.
The fourth grade curriculum had children reading and understanding Shakespeare and de-constructing poetry. Being able to do advanced multiplication and division in their heads was compulsory (my mums books from primary school look just like my high school books, my eight year old boys third grade books look like my kindergarten books).
The school system educates children just fine by the way, you just have to understand what exactly it is that they are being taught.
Understanding starts here: http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/toc1.htm