Twelve-year-old Sandi Chandee wants to be a doctor when she grows up. But that’s not why she memorized one of the longest medical terms in the English language:

Pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis.

In Sherisse Kenerson’s after-school classroom, Sandi takes out a piece of paper and fills up a whole line to spell the word that describes a type of lung disease. The word allows her to practice cursive — her new favorite method of writing.

When she becomes a doctor, Sandi, who signs her cursive autograph with a heart above the i, is determined to have a perfect signature.

Twelve-year-old Halle O’Brien, Sandi’s cursive partner-in-crime, agrees.

“I prefer writing in cursive,” Halle said.

The pair are proud members of the Holmes Middle School cursive club in Virginia. Cursive has been on the upswing for years now. More than two dozen states now require cursive instruction in schools after the 2010 Common Core standards omitted the skill.

Kenerson, a multilingual teacher at Holmes, started the middle school club when students couldn’t read her writing on the board. They just stared at her blankly, she said.

Conrad Thompson writes during cursive club.

Anna Rose Layden for NPR

hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Anna Rose Layden for NPR

“I realized they didn’t know how to write or read in cursive,” Kenerson said. For an educator who firmly believes that quotes deserve to be written in cursive, and has a new one on her board each month, Kenerson wanted to give students a chance to understand the magic of the loopy writing.

The club exploded in popularity this past winter, with local news stations and the Washington Post crediting it for “keeping cursive alive.” Since then, Kenerson has been racking her brain trying to figure out why it has drawn so much attention.

She has received fan mail from retirees and teachers (written in cursive, of course). She has heard from people in Idaho, Pennsylvania and Florida. She has even had Zoom calls with educators in Oklahoma and Maryland to explain how she runs the club.

“I’m flabbergasted,” Kenerson said. “I’m just going along with the ride.”

She decided that cursive is a way to hold on to the past, and many people are not ready to let it go.

Teacher Sherisse Kenerson has received fan mail from retirees and teachers for starting the club.

Anna Rose Layden for NPR

hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Anna Rose Layden for NPR

Kenerson’s after-school club is a local example of a nationwide trend — cursive handwriting is back in many classrooms across the country. Teachers and legislators credit the resurgence to nostalgia and some evidence of educational benefits. But surprisingly, the curves and swoops are contentious among experts, and some argue that cursive does not add any real value for students, especially in the age of artificial intelligence.

“I have seen no evidence that cursive brings any particular cognitive or learning benefit beyond that brought by hand printing,” wrote Mark Warschauer, a professor of education at the University of California, Irvine, in an email to NPR. He noted that the cognitive benefits of young students writing by hand in general are already well established.

Warschauer, who founded the UC Irvine Digital Learning Lab, opposes teaching cursive in schools because of the “waste of time and effort” when print handwriting, voice-to-text applications, and keyboards are easily accessible to students.

Much of the cursive debate centers around time in the classroom. Should educators spend precious minutes teaching another way to write on paper when technology is so prevalent?

Shawn Datchuk, a professor of special education at the University of Iowa, said the answer does not have to be one or the other. In his college classroom, he sees students increasingly using tablets and a stylus to take notes.

“What that means is that as a country, we likely need to help our students become multi-modal,” Datchuk said. They need to not only be able to handwrite using print, but also use cursive, type, and interact with technology, he said.

Top left: Kenerson demonstrates writing cursive letters on the whiteboard. Right: Kenerson helps a student with their worksheet. Bottom: Sandi Chandee (right) and Halle O’Brien practice their writing during cursive club.

Anna Rose Layden for NPR

Advertisement

hide caption

toggle caption

Anna Rose Layden for NPR

Advertisement

Technology is not a fix-all for students, though, he said.

“One of the dirty secrets behind spell checker and artificial intelligence is that you still need to be able to spell in order to use those well,” Datchuk said.

He and a team of researchers compiled the known studies on cursive teaching. Some studies used antiquated technology like ink wells and quill tips, so they were cut. A few of the others were missing details on how the instruction was implemented. With those caveats, Datchuk said, preliminary evidence shows cursive writing could improve spelling.

Datchuk said the “special sauce” for cursive is that students have to pay closer attention to how letters connect when they write.

Kenerson, the cursive club’s founder, said she’s seen anecdotal evidence that cursive helps students with dyslexia. Sharon Quirk-Silva, a California assemblymember who introduced the cursive bill in the state, said she’s also heard anecdotal evidence that cursive can be therapeutic for students with special needs.

Since Quirk-Silva’s 2023 cursive mandate, she said the reception from constituents has been overwhelmingly positive.

Datchuk, the University of Iowa professor, said he receives a constant stream of emails from people asking about cursive, but his reason for studying the technique was personal — his 8-year-old son, who is reading Harry Potter, still passes his grandmother’s birthday cards to his dad to read.

“That brings up the larger generational divide that’s probably happened not only with my sons, but with kids and young adults across the United States who just never received instruction in cursive,” Datchuk, a former elementary school teacher, said.

Antonio Benavides, an 11-year-old in Kenerson’s cursive club, is an example of that divide. His dad heard about the club and immediately sent Antonio.

Antonio Benavides says his penmanship has improved since joining cursive club.

Anna Rose Layden for NPR

hide caption

toggle caption

Anna Rose Layden for NPR

Advertisement

Now, he sticks his tongue out and stares intently at the loops in front of him. He enjoys practicing the curves, and he said his normally sprawling print penmanship has improved.

“I’m like, ‘Are you kidding me, cursive club, what do I need that for?’” Benavides remembered telling his dad. But now, “Yeah, I like it,” he said.

When there’s a moment of silence as the students practice their i’s and t’s, Antonio whispers, “I love that sound.”

“The sound of a pencil when it’s silent is just so nice,” he explained.

Steve Graham, the Regents Professor at Arizona State University’s College for Teaching and Learning Innovation, argues that despite the media attention, cursive never really went anywhere. Graham, who has authored numerous books about writing, said he has been hearing about the “death of handwriting or the death of cursive” for about 50 years. At one point, his responses to questions from reporters became “snarky,” he said.

“I’d say, ‘Well, damn, I didn’t hear it was buried,’” Graham said. “Can you tell me where? I’d like to visit the grave.”

Graham is ambivalent about whether cursive or print is a more effective tool for students. He said he thinks the fixation on cursive is an adult phenomenon.

Kenerson started the club after she realized students could not read her cursive handwriting on the board.

Anna Rose Layden for NPR

hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Anna Rose Layden for NPR

“I’m often amazed at how much attention it gets,” Graham said. With more studies, Graham said he thinks the differences in benefits between the two types of handwriting will be insignificant. He said what’s more important is spending the time to teach kids to write.

Back in Kenerson’s cursive club, 11-year-old Conrad Thompson said she’s the only student in her history class who can read her teacher’s huge Declaration of Independence printout. It makes her proud.

Conrad Thompson is proud of her cursive skills.

Anna Rose Layden for NPR

hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Anna Rose Layden for NPR

“Hopefully, one day, me and my family will get to go see it in person,” Conrad said.

As for Sandi and Halle, the pair have no doubts about their newfound skill.

“Will you be back next week?” Halle asked Sandi about the after-school club.

“Of course I will,” Sandi responded.

Washington — The Senate defeated a war powers resolution on Wednesday that aimed to block President Trump from ramping up the war with Iran, as the operation approaches a fourth week. 

In a 53 to 47 vote, a Democrat-led effort to restrict Mr. Trump from taking military action in Iran fell short for a third time. Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania was the sole Democrat to vote against advancing the resolution. GOP Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky supported it. 

The resolution, led by Democratic Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey, would have directed the president to “remove the United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Iran, unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or a specific authorization for use of military force.” Congress has not authorized military force against Iran. 

The vote came as Republicans are holding an unusual and lengthy debate on elections legislation amid pressure by Mr. Trump, who has threatened to withhold his signature from other bills that reach his desk until the measure passes. Democrats were able to force the war powers vote despite the floor takeover because the resolution is privileged.  

The Senate had previously defeated an Iran war powers resolution introduced by Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia on March 4. It was the second time in less than a year that the upper chamber had voted down an effort to rein in Mr. Trump’s ability to strike Iran, following a similar vote after last June’s U.S. airstrikes on Iranian nuclear sites.

But as the Iran war approaches the one-month mark, Mr. Trump has yet to make clear an exit strategy and has not ruled out sending ground forces into the country. The president has said he expects the war to end “soon,” but hasn’t specified a timeline.

After the early March defeat, a group of Democratic senators vowed to keep pressing the issue if Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth did not testify in public about the war. The Democratic senators behind the war powers push indicated in a letter to Senate Majority Leader John Thune, a South Dakota Republican, that they would abandon votes on a handful of resolutions if the Trump officials testified at public hearings.  

“We’re going to use every lever that we have to stop business as usual and force the Senate [to do] what it should have done already,” Booker told reporters earlier this month. 

Sen. Chris Murphy, a Connecticut Democrat, accused the Trump administration of dodging public hearings on Iran out of fear of losing any public support for the war. 

“I don’t think they can defend this war,” Murphy told reporters earlier this month. “I think they’ll lose votes in the Senate if they actually have to go in front of the American public and explain why gas prices are so high, explain whether we’re engaged in regime change or whether we’re not, explain how they’re going to get the nuclear weapons and the nuclear material without the ground invasion.” 

The Trump administration’s top intelligence officials testified Wednesday to the Senate Intelligence Committee in a hearing that was pegged to the release of the annual worldwide threats assessment, though questions largely focused on Iran. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard deferred to Mr. Trump when pressed on the president’s claims that Iran posed an “imminent” threat to the United States.

The administration and most congressional Republicans have argued that Mr. Trump acted within his legal authority when ordering strikes on Iran. In a letter to Congress in early March, the president said the strikes were necessary to eliminate threats.

“Despite my Administration’s repeated efforts to achieve a diplomatic solution to Iran’s malign behavior, the threat to the United States and its allies and partners became untenable,” the president wrote. He acknowledged that “it is not possible at this time to know the full scope and duration of military operations that may be necessary.”

EXCELSIOR
PLURIBUS UNUM

March 5, 2026

The Honorable Kathy Hochul Governor of New York State NY State Capitol Building Albany, NY 12224

Re: Upholding New York’s Leadership in the Fight Against Climate Change

Dear Governor Hochul,

At a time when the Trump Administration is doing everything possible to tear down decades of progress in the fight against climate change, it is incumbent on states like New York to reject this new wave of climate denial and put forward bold policies that will save New Yorkers money, reduce pollution, and protect a livable climate for our constituents and our children and grandchildren.

That is why we, the undersigned senators, categorically oppose any effort to rollback New York’s nation-leading climate law, the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act, and urge you to stand strong in the face of misinformation that seeks to blame the CLCPA for the energy affordability crisis that fossil fuels have created.

Climate change remains one of the greatest threats that our constituents – and societies across the globe – have ever faced. New Yorkers are already living through extreme weather events that run the gamut from searing heat waves to Arctic cold snaps, and they are already paying the price¹, with their dollars, their homes, their health, and even their lives. The climate crisis is driving up the cost of home insurance, of health care, of groceries, and of countless other daily necessities², and every delay in taking action will only drive those costs even higher. Confronting this crisis is a generational task and a legacy issue for every elected official, and it is inseparable from any credible effort to address the high cost of living.

At the same time, there is no question that we must address energy affordability, capacity, and reliability. But while President Trump and the fossil fuel industry want New Yorkers to believe that we must choose between those needs and climate action, nothing could be further from the truth. The recent three-page memo from NYSERDA purporting to show unacceptable costs of implementing CLCPA erroneously conflates CLCPA with a Cap & Invest program, treating them as one and the same when they are two entirely separate issues. Further, the memo is based on a specific Cap & Invest program design that has not been shared with the public and clearly does

1 https://heatmap.news/economy/climate-costs-insurance

2 https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2026-01-14/a-stealth-heat-tax-has-already-cost-americans-1-trillion