Is Typing a Necessary Skill? 1065
cloudwilliam asks: "The Christian Science Monitor has an interesting article on how many schools have stopped teaching touch-typing as a necessary office skill and are now often saying that basic computer skills are more important. I'd agree with the latter, but what about typing? I learned to type on an IBM Selectric II (and still own one, as a matter of fact) in the mid-1980s, and the last time I was tested, touch-typed at around 60 wpm. Is this an obsolete skill? With handwriting and voice recognition technologies, is using a QWERTY keyboard with nine out of ten fingers something worth knowing anymore?"
YES. End of story. (Score:4, Informative)
Obligatory Dvorak post (Score:4, Informative)
Can someone tie Dvorak into the subject a bit better?
Re:No (Score:2, Informative)
Some online typing tests (Score:5, Informative)
This comment made me realize that I had no idea how fast I could type (never took a course). So, after a quick search here are some free on-line typing tests:
TypingPal.com [typingpal.com]
TypingTest.com [typingtest.com]
Turns out that I'm in the 2nd decile with a respectable 58 wpm (mean is approx. 40, and anyone who claims >100 is either in the 99.8%-ile or is full of BS). A thorough analysis of typing speeds can be found here [fivestarstaff.com].
Yes (Score:5, Informative)
It is not a substitute for computer skills. You need both in any modern office job with an emphasis on writing. I don't think typing should be required (I never took it in school, I taught myself to touch type, it ain't rocket science). But it should be offered.
Stressed (Score:3, Informative)
youcantotallyunderstandmeifijusttypewhatiwanttosay right?
Thedifferencehereisthatinspeech stresshelpstodelimitthemorphemes.
Re:10 years on the net (Score:3, Informative)
Put another way: I read lots of things from people who type as fast as they think. Generally, I wish they had taken longer and thought more.
I'll admit to a bias here: I am an old-fashioned hunt-and-peck typist. I can generally get about 55-60 wpm, which is clearly on the impaired side. But (if you'll forgive the pun) it hasn't slowed me down, because very rarely do I need to put out 100 words in a minute. My thoughts generally simmer longer than that.
Even when I post to slashdot.
Useful, but "teach your children well" (Score:2, Informative)
Touch typing has been an extremely useful skill in my career as a nerd, but I have also had more than my share of tendinitis in my wrists because I learned typing the old-fashioned "right way". In my extremely unscientific survey of my colleagues, those who learned on their own seem to have much healthier wrists than those of us who learned the "right way".
My physical therapist taught me some tricks that have helped a lot:
Unfortunately they still teach the old contorted wrist, contorted fingers "right way", at least in my kids' middle school. Because of computers, typing is much more a part of life now than it was when I was a kid. We still need to teach typing, but we need to bring typing instruction in line with what is known about ergonomics or else many of today's kids will be crippled in a few decades.
it is at least partially dvorak (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Good touch typing tutor for Linux? (Score:3, Informative)
I still can't touch type. The problem is that in the beginning when learning touch typing, I type much slower than my homebrew hunt-and-peck system. I don't seem to have the discipline (yet) to continue to use my touch typing skills until I can reach an acceptable speed.
Still, give Ktouch a try. No matter what, you will become a faster typist, even if you don't bother to master touch typing.
Also should have added... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Vastly important (Score:3, Informative)
On formal typing tests I usually hit around 35 wpm. It as blocked me from a few jobs. But take a look at every formal typing test you've ever taken. They all consist of measuring your ability to read from one document and type what you've read into the test program.
Now try just freestyle typing. When copying a document I have a hard time exceeding 40wpm on a great day. But free style I type well in excess of 60wpm.
Most coders I know don't code word for word from a document in front of them. They know what they want the code to do, they know how to phrase the code to do it, and they just type it, and at a greater speed than any formal test would indicate they could do.
Same goes for writers.
As well with my dead-end customer support job. I don't transcribe text, I make notes based on my conversation with the people yelling at me.
Re:Some online typing tests (Score:5, Informative)
ending a sentence with a period - since the source text has only one space between sentences, that extra space was a "mistake". Also, sometimes it wrapped the cursor to the start of the next line as soon as you hit the end of a previous line. Other times it did not. Thus you had to watch where the cursor went or end up with an "error" from hitting return when you weren't supposed to.
Also, the tendency of the interface to not do what my reflexes expected it to do was a source of cognative dissonance that added more errors - like when backspace didn't visually do anything, I'd hit the key again several more times by reflex before my brain caught up and stopped me, and this results in losing precious seconds to stop and think.
Typing is a reflex action - but these tests ruin this by turning it into a congative one by making the interface not work as you'd expect it to, so you have to always stop and not be "in the groove" where you type unthinkingly.
My speed with the test was - 62 words per minute, with 17 errors (really only about 4 errors, but each error resulted in three or four others being counted since I keep on typing the rest of the word before I notice the cursor isn't advancing and so the stupid test thinks I'm trying (and failling) to finally get that letter right when really I'm just typing the rest of the word.)
I guess that a more real-world test would put my speed at about 65 WPM after errors are accounted for (probably about 80 WPM raw, with 15 WPM lossage from backspacing. I backspace a lot, which is why an input tool that makes backspacing fail to operate the way it naturally should gives me a low score. Not only does the backspacing itself penalize me (understandable), but the cognative dissonance that breaks my stride when the interface behaves in a crippled fashion wrecks my speed far more than that.).
Typing of the Dead (Score:2, Informative)
Unsolicited advertising aside, when I first learned to type (back as a little kid, probably somewhere around 1st grade), I remember learning the keyboard as a series of word-pictures. I knew that "print" involved kind of a lasso picture on the keyboard as you hit the keys. Ditto with things like "goto" or "input." (Yes, I made my start with BASIC. Please, look away from my shame...) Anyone else find themselves learning this way? You know, seeing the words as chunks to type rather than parsing it as letters initially?
Dilbert's Scott Adams and typing (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Some online typing tests (Score:3, Informative)
This test does not allow you to just go forward and leave an error in place. It *requires* that you fix up the error before continuing, and every keypress which is not the right letter for the current cursor position is counted as an additional error. It is most certainly NOT a manual typewriter typing test for that reason, and it is NOT just counting the whole word as a single error. For example, If I am supposed to type:
It was the best of times.
and instead I screw up one letter and type this:
It was the bust of times.
That ends up getting counted as 11 errors instead of just one, because the cursor stopped on the 'e' in 'best' when I hit 'u', and expected me to try again until I got it before it would go on, so it ends up looking like this:
It was the b I(type 'u')
It was the b I(type 's')
It was the b I(type 't')
It was the b I(type ' ')
It was the b I(type 'o')
It was the b I(type 'f')
It was the b I(type ' ')
It was the b I(type 't')
It was the b I(type 'i')
It was the b I(type 'm')
It was the b I(type 'e' - now it accepts because it's the letter 'e'.)
It was the be I(type 's' - another error.)
When in reality I only typed one letter wrong. (Now, in reality I would be looking at the screen and catch it before it got that far, but the test messes up because what I am physically typing is actually something like this:
It was the bust ofest of times.
(because when I see the cursor has not moved, I have to type from that point on, and NOT use the backspace either, which is the natural reflex.
So the test only tests how good I am at typing into an interface that works like NO word processer or text editor out there.
Re:typing is absolutely necessary (Score:2, Informative)
---
"Capitalization? I always thought comma's did better job of keeping your message clear. For example: Helping your uncle, jack, off a horse."
Well, first of all, "commas" has no apostrophe. That's elementary. Second, if you're trying to use commas to signify that you are referring to an uncle named Jack, the word must indeed be capitalized as all proper nouns are.
---
"Yes, but with proper punctuation that sentence is: 'Helping your uncle, Jack, off a horse.'"
Nope, not quite.
Visit the following websites to get a better understanding on just why it's better NOT to use commas there:
- http://www.ucalgary.ca/UofC/eduweb/grammar/course
- http://www.english.uiuc.edu/cws/wworkshop/grammar
- http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/g_
The first website uses the following example:
"My sister Jane studies in England."
The restrictive appositive "Jane" implies that I have one specific sister who studies in England, while my other sisters (Marta and Suzanne) study elsewhere. Therefore, "Jane" is essential to the meaning of the sentence.
Because there is an implication that the uncle in question is not the only uncle and the clarification of his name is for the sole purpose of identifying him rather than describing him, commas are best omitted.
That's why my original sentence ("I had to help my uncle Jack off a horse") is perfectly correct. I know my grammar pretty well, whether I always use it or not.