Prepositional phrases

Prepositional phrases can follow adjectives, nouns and verbs and consist of a preposition + noun/-ing verb/a clause.

Dependent prepositions with adjectives, nouns and verbs

We can use prepositions after:

adjectives: accustomed to, angry about/with, annoyed about/with, aware of, amazed at/about, ashamed of, based on, certain of/about, committed to, concerned about, conducive to, confident of/about, conscious of, convinced of/about, eligible for, guilty of, horrified at/by, indicative of, justified in, keen on, mindful of, terrified of/about, proud of, typical of, upset about/at.

nouns: necessity of, talent for, motivation for, hope of, a consequence of, the risk of, hesitation in, implications for, anger about, a/no/little chance of, a course in, a hint of, an increase in, no justification in, the likelihood of, a possibility of, a reason for, a regret about, the thought of, a focus on.

There’s no hint of the strike being called off.
The figure is based on recent research.
He is guilty of not giving detectives the full story.

When an adjective, noun or verb has a dependent preposition, the same preposition is usually used with all word classes, e.g. rely on, a reliance on, be reliant on.

adjectives + for + object: essential, vital, crucial, important, (im)possible, normal, common.
It’s common for people who can’t sleep to use relaxation techniques.

verbs: believe in, benefit from, compliment on, decide on/against, depend on, dream of/about, insist on, plan on, pride yourself on, result from, struggle with, specialise in, succeed in.

I think the soup would benefit from more salt.
Mum prided herself on how she brought up us kids to have good manners.

Fixed prepositional phrases

We also use fixed prepositional phrases which can act as adjectives and adverbs, e.g. out of work, at an advantage, at the beginning of, at the scene of, by mistake, within limits, in the face of.

Is your brother out of work?
Give me a ring when you’re at a loose end.
At present, there are twenty students in the group.

Fixed prepositional phrases cannot be changed, but some verbs with objects will split the verb and preposition.
He complimented me on my talk.

In an era where smartphones have become extensions of our fingertips and digital keyboards have largely supplanted the humble pen, a fundamental question emerges: are we inadvertently sacrificing cognitive development on the altar of technological convenience? The debate surrounding handwriting versus typing in educational settings has reached fever pitch, with educators, neuroscientists, and policymakers grappling with whether to preserve this ancient art or embrace the digital revolution wholeheartedly. The stakes could hardly be higher—we may be witnessing the twilight of a skill that has shaped human civilization for millennia.

The pendulum of educational reform has swung decisively toward digital literacy, with schools across the globe rushing to equip classrooms with tablets, laptops, and interactive whiteboards. This technological tsunami has swept away many traditional practices, leaving handwriting instruction increasingly marginalized in curricula. Yet, beneath the surface of this digital transformation, a growing body of neuroscientific research suggests we may be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. The implications of this shift extend far beyond mere nostalgia for fountain pens and careful penmanship—they strike at the very heart of how our brains develop, process information, and form memories.

## The Neuroscience Revolution: When Brain Meets Pen

Recent groundbreaking studies have turned the spotlight on what happens inside our heads when we pick up a pen versus when we tap away at a keyboard. The findings are nothing short of revolutionary. Research conducted at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology has revealed that handwriting activates far more extensive and interconnected brain networks compared to typing, particularly in regions linked to memory and sensory processing. Using high-density electroencephalography (EEG) with 256 sensors, scientists have been able to peer into the neural orchestra that performs when we write by hand.

The results paint a striking picture: when college students handwrote words using a digital pen, their brains lit up like Christmas trees, showing increased connectivity across multiple brain regions. The connectivity patterns were especially pronounced in central and parietal areas—regions responsible for motor control, sensory input, and higher-order cognitive functions. In stark contrast, typing produced far less synchronized activity across these areas, suggesting that the simple act of pressing keys engages the brain in a fundamentally different and less comprehensive way.

Dr. Audrey van der Meer, one of the leading researchers in this field, emphasizes that "handwriting is probably among the most complex motor skills that the brain is capable of." This complexity isn't just about finger dexterity—it's about the intricate dance between multiple brain systems working in perfect harmony. When we write by hand, our visual system continuously monitors the emerging letters, comparing them to mental templates, while our motor system makes minute adjustments to finger pressure and pen movement. Meanwhile, our sensory system processes the tactile feedback from the pen against paper, creating a rich, multisensory experience that typing simply cannot replicate.

## The Cognitive Benefits: More Than Meets the Eye

The superior brain activation patterns observed during handwriting translate into tangible cognitive advantages that extend well beyond the writing process itself. Studies have consistently demonstrated that students who take notes by hand show better comprehension and retention of material compared to their keyboard-wielding counterparts. This phenomenon, dubbed the "generation effect," occurs because handwriting requires active engagement with information rather than passive transcription.

When we write by hand, we're forced to process and synthesize information in real-time. The physical constraints of handwriting—its slower pace compared to typing—actually work in our favor, compelling us to be more selective about what we record and how we phrase it. This cognitive filtering process leads to deeper understanding and better long-term retention. It's as if the hand serves as a gateway that ensures only the most important information passes through to our memory banks.

The benefits extend to letter recognition and spelling accuracy as well. Children who learn to write letters by hand show superior letter recognition skills compared to those who only practice on keyboards. The motor memory created through handwriting appears to strengthen the visual representation of letters in the brain, creating multiple pathways for retrieval. This explains why many people, when trying to recall a word's spelling, will trace letters in the air or on a surface—they're accessing the motor memory laid down through handwriting practice.

Perhaps most intriguingly, handwriting seems to enhance creativity and problem-solving abilities. The slower, more deliberate nature of putting pen to paper allows for what researchers call "embodied cognition"—the idea that physical movements can influence thinking processes. Many writers and thinkers have intuitively understood this connection, reporting that they think differently when writing by hand versus typing. The physical act of forming letters and words appears to create space for reflection, leading to more nuanced and creative expression.

## The Digital Counterargument: Speed, Accessibility, and Modern Demands

Advocates for digital-first education make compelling arguments that cannot be dismissed lightly. In our interconnected world, keyboard proficiency has become as essential as basic literacy. Students who cannot type efficiently find themselves at a significant disadvantage in higher education and the workplace, where rapid digital communication is the norm rather than the exception. The argument for speed is particularly persuasive—a skilled typist can capture thoughts at the speed of speech, while even the most accomplished handwriter struggles to keep pace with rapid-fire ideas or lecture content.

Accessibility considerations add another layer to the debate. For students with dysgraphia, fine motor skill difficulties, or other learning differences, keyboards can be liberating tools that remove barriers to expression. These students may possess brilliant ideas but struggle to communicate them through the physical demands of handwriting. Digital tools can level the playing field, allowing these learners to focus on content rather than the mechanics of letter formation.

The modern classroom also demands efficiency and flexibility that handwritten work cannot always provide. Digital documents can be easily shared, edited, and integrated into multimedia presentations. Teachers can provide real-time feedback through digital annotations, and students can collaborate on projects across distances. The environmental argument is also compelling—digital note-taking eliminates the need for countless sheets of paper, aligning with sustainability goals that resonate with environmentally conscious students and educators.

Furthermore, the digital native generation has grown up with touchscreens and keyboards as natural interfaces. For these students, digital tools feel more intuitive than pen and paper. Forcing them to use "outdated" methods might seem as anachronistic as requiring students to use slide rules instead of calculators. The argument goes that we should meet students where they are rather than clinging to traditional methods that may no longer serve their needs.

## The Middle Ground: Synthesis Rather Than Substitution

As the evidence mounts on both sides of this debate, a more nuanced picture emerges—one that suggests the answer isn't an either-or proposition but rather a thoughtful integration of both approaches. The key insight from recent research is that handwriting and typing serve different cognitive functions and excel in different contexts. Rather than viewing them as competitors, we should consider them as complementary tools in the educational toolkit.

For tasks requiring deep processing, creativity, and memory consolidation, handwriting appears to hold clear advantages. The research suggests that students should handwrite when taking notes during lectures, brainstorming ideas, or working through complex problems. The slower pace and enhanced cognitive engagement make handwriting ideal for learning new concepts and developing understanding.

Conversely, typing excels when speed, volume, and efficiency are priorities. Writing lengthy essays, conducting research, or collaborating on group projects may be better suited to digital tools. The key is matching the tool to the task rather than adopting a one-size-fits-all approach.

Some innovative educators are pioneering hybrid approaches that harness the benefits of both methods. Students might handwrite initial notes and then type up refined versions, combining the cognitive benefits of handwriting with the organizational advantages of digital tools. Others use digital pens and styluses that preserve the motor patterns of handwriting while offering some digital conveniences.

## The Developmental Imperative: Protecting Growing Minds

The handwriting debate takes on particular urgency when considering young children whose brains are still developing. During critical periods of neural development, the rich sensorimotor experiences provided by handwriting may be essential for establishing optimal brain connectivity patterns. Research suggests that children who learn to write by hand show enhanced brain development compared to those who rely primarily on keyboards from an early age.

The concern among neuroscientists is that we may be conducting an inadvertent experiment on an entire generation of children. Dr. van der Meer warns against using children as "guinea pigs to see how their brains end up without any handwriting." The plasticity of developing brains means that early experiences have lasting impacts on neural architecture. If handwriting provides unique developmental benefits, depriving children of these experiences could have consequences we won't fully understand for years to come.

The evidence suggests that handwriting instruction should remain a priority in early elementary education, even as digital skills are introduced. The goal isn't to resist technological progress but to ensure that children develop the full range of cognitive capabilities. Just as we wouldn't eliminate physical education because cars have replaced walking as our primary mode of transportation, we shouldn't abandon handwriting simply because keyboards are more efficient.

## Cultural and Social Dimensions: More Than Just Mechanics

The handwriting debate extends beyond cognitive science into cultural and social territory. Handwriting carries emotional and personal significance that digital text cannot replicate. A handwritten letter conveys intimacy and thoughtfulness in ways that email cannot match. The physicality of handwriting creates a tangible connection between writer and reader—we can literally feel the pressure and rhythm of the writer's thoughts.

Many cultures view handwriting as an art form deserving of preservation. In East Asian countries, calligraphy is considered both a practical skill and a spiritual practice, embodying principles of patience, focus, and aesthetic appreciation. The potential loss of handwriting skills threatens not just cognitive development but cultural heritage and artistic expression.

There's also something to be said for the contemplative qualities of handwriting. In our hyperconnected, always-on digital world, the slow, deliberate act of putting pen to paper can serve as a form of mindfulness practice. The physical constraints of handwriting force us to slow down, reflect, and be present in ways that rapid digital communication rarely allows.

## The Economic Reality: Balancing Ideals with Resources

While the neuroscientific evidence favors preserving handwriting instruction, educational systems must grapple with practical constraints. Teaching handwriting requires time, specialized instruction, and materials that many schools struggle to provide. Teachers need training to effectively teach handwriting skills, and class time devoted to handwriting means less time for other subjects.

The economics of education often drive decisions toward digital solutions. A single tablet can replace textbooks, notebooks, pens, and pencils, potentially reducing long-term costs while providing access to vast digital resources. For cash-strapped school districts, the choice between maintaining handwriting instruction and investing in technology that appears more future-focused may seem obvious.

However, this short-term economic thinking may prove penny-wise and pound-foolish if handwriting truly provides cognitive benefits that improve learning outcomes across all subjects. The cost of remedial education or cognitive deficits later in life could far exceed the investment required to maintain handwriting instruction.

## Looking Forward: Shaping the Future of Learning

As we stand at this educational crossroads, the path forward requires wisdom, nuance, and a commitment to evidence-based decision-making. The accumulating research suggests that completely abandoning handwriting would be a mistake—one that could compromise the cognitive development of future generations. Yet we cannot ignore the legitimate advantages of digital tools or the realities of modern communication demands.

The solution lies not in choosing sides but in crafting educational approaches that honor both our neurobiological heritage and our technological future. This means preserving handwriting instruction, particularly in early childhood, while also ensuring students develop the digital literacy skills they need for success in the modern world.

Educational policymakers should resist the either-or mentality that has characterized much of this debate. Instead, they should invest in research to better understand how handwriting and typing can complement each other and develop curricula that strategically employ both methods. Teacher training programs should prepare educators to make informed decisions about when to use handwriting versus typing based on learning objectives and student needs.

The goal should be to raise a generation of learners who are equally comfortable with pen and keyboard, who understand the unique strengths of each tool, and who can choose the appropriate method for any given task. In doing so, we preserve the cognitive benefits of handwriting while embracing the efficiencies of digital communication.

The question isn't whether we should take the "hand" out of handwriting—it's how we can honor the hand's contribution to learning while preparing students for a digital future. The answer requires nuance, research, and a commitment to the full development of human potential. Our children's minds—and our collective future—may depend on getting this balance right.

In the end, the debate over handwriting versus typing reflects a broader tension between honoring our past and embracing our future. The wisdom lies in recognizing that progress doesn't always mean replacement—sometimes it means integration. As we navigate this digital age, we would do well to remember that the most powerful tools are often those that combine ancient wisdom with modern innovation. The humble pen may yet prove to be one of our most sophisticated technologies.