For over a decade, educators, journalists, and social critics have worried about the decline of handwriting. In 2009, the Wall Street Journal published an article stating “Penmanship skills are being slowly erased in a typing and texting age.” In the years since, numerous other articles have emerged expressing the same anxiety, and the arguments are certainly well-founded. After all, when was the last time you wrote something by hand? If you want to make a quick note of something, there’s an app for that only a few finger swipes away. For longer pieces, word processors are the way forward. In lieu of letters, we send emails, and in lieu of birthday cards, WhatsApp messages abound. Writing by hand is becoming more and more a personal choice than a necessity.

The great transition to typing has been observed in the education sector for just as long. With the release of the Common Core Standards Initiative across the United States in 2010, schools were told to ensure that all students could demonstrate sufficient command of keyboarding skills by fourth grade, but were only required to teach students cursive handwriting in kindergarten and first grade. In Finland, “typing lessons” have replaced cursive handwriting classes since 2016 in a move to reflect up-to-date digital modes of communication. These changes have occurred despite various studies supporting the multifarious benefits of handwriting, from boosting brain development and reducing stress to improving memory, retention, and creativity in the classroom.

"Writing by hand is becoming more and more a personal choice than a necessity"

In 2024, Cambridge took the same leap to typing by using Inspera, a digital examination and assessment platform adopted for some exams. But, handwritten exams should remain the default examination method. Further to the cognitive benefits of handwriting, handwritten exams make it easier to prevent cheating via the use of AI, avoid systems issues, and help to tackle the growing handwriting crisis.

In May 2024, Inspera sparked controversy when issues with the software meant that dozens of second-year English students were unable to complete their exams. The Faculty have now reverted to handwritten exams. The Inspera controversy showed that technical issues are always a possibility with any kind of software or digital platform, but the consequences extend beyond this logistical risk. Exams are stressful in the best of conditions, and technical malfunctions like these add unnecessary anxiety to the ordeal and risk hindering student performance.

 When it does work, the Inspera platform operates on a locked computer which prevents candidates from accessing other applications or websites during the exam or assessment. While such preventative measures are strictly enforced, it’s possible to find ways to circumvent these protocols to cheat on exams.

"Handwritten exams make it easier to prevent cheating via the use of AI, avoid systems issues, and help to tackle the growing handwriting crisis"

Schools and universities across the country have already seen a massive rise in the use of generative AI for essays, coursework, and open-book exams, as teachers, professors, and examiners find it increasingly difficult to both prevent and identify the use of AI in student work. For now, using AI to cheat in traditional exams remains a difficult task because of rigorous invigilation and preventative measures like proctoring software and locked computers. However, a complete transition to online or digital-only examinations increases the susceptibility of assessment environments to these technologies, worsening the risk of cheating. For example, in June 2024, a Turkish student was arrested for cheating during a university entrance exam by using a makeshift device linked to artificial intelligence software to answer questions. Sticking to handwritten exams at least makes it harder to use AI to cheat.

Finally, handwritten exams may help to tackle the growing handwriting crisis. The National Literacy Trust’s Annual Literacy Survey found that, in 2024, fewer than 3 in 10 (28.7%) children and young people aged 8 to 18 said that they enjoy writing in their free time, a decrease of 18.1% since 2010, when the survey began. Additionally, just 1 in 9 (11.1%) children and young people said that they wrote something daily in their free time. The shift away from handwriting may have been aggravated by the Covid-19 lockdowns and shift to online learning, which has led to the deterioration of students’ handwriting. Handwritten exams give young students a reason to practice the legibility of their handwriting.

Ultimately, whether handwriting is a crucial skill which should be maintained remains in debate. There are some, like Anne Trubek, who argue that typing lessons improve automaticity skills more than cursive writing lessons, and that typed text has better longevity (think of how many historical texts have been lost because of illegible handwriting, lost manuscripts, or poor preservation). Yet, others disagree, espousing the cognitive and creative benefits of handwriting.

A return to handwritten exams may not be the panacea needed to halt or reverse the decline in handwriting and transition to typing, but it may allow handwriting skills to retain some of their value, and in the process create better environments for examination and assessment.