Let me guess: Walbaum-Fraktur: Viktor jagt zwölf Boxkämpfer quer über den Sylter Deich. 1234567890. (Poor guess: had to look B and x up and almost made a mess of Sylt! Is this supposed to be a pangram, like The quick brown fox jumps over a lazy dog?).
As an aside: Then there was Sütterlin, which is like what you posted, but handwritten. It was an artificial attempt to make a Germanic looking handwritten standard. It was created only in 1911, I read.
I do find I can write faster in cursive. But the same level of sloppiness in cursive is a whole lot harder to read than in print. So ultimately, if I want to be able to read back what I wrote, my printing is now faster.
I actually suspect this is why a lot of people would wind up printing even if cursive was faster. They found it took less time to make their print legible than their cursive (both for themselves and for their teachers.) Heck, I know some people wind up using small caps because that is even easier to read when it gets messy.
I remember how, back in grade school, writing took me forever as I was obsessed with having it look perfect. I spent hours on classwork that others didn’t. Fortunately, I got my first OCD medication around that time and was able to put up with being more sloppy and not getting those perfect grades on my handwriting.
Thanks for that, I was literally able to read every word but ‘Sylter’, I couldn’t get my brain around that somehow.
Our kids briefly learned cursive, but they’ve forgotten it, and often they can’t read it. Sadly, they will never have the kinds of gaudy signatures my generation loved. 
And some day they will go back to hieroglyphs and then to cuneiform signatures. We will have gone full circle! O
(Did I just invent the empty emoji? The only hand written emoji I see is a smile with two dots for eyes.)
American, who attended elementary school in the 1970s: “cursive” was the term that was always used for “script writing.” As others have noted, for us, it was something that was taught several years after we learned “print” writing; looking at the example of “Zaner-Bloser” cursive letters earlier in this thread, that’s the style that we were taught.
Once we learned cursive writing in school, that was the style of writing we were expected to use when writing reports and such; I seem to remember kids who continued to use print writing were made to redo their work in cursive.
50 years later, and about the only time I ever use cursive writing is when I’m writing in a greeting card – and, even then, I have to go slowly and carefully, to make sure that it’s readable. My cursive writing was never great to start with, and it’s even worse now.
Add me in to the “what a waste of my time” camp, regarding learning cursive in the 80s. I am perfectly capable of writing/reading cursive script, but aside from my signature (which would probably make my elementary school writing teacher weep), if I must put pen to paper (which, outside of my signature and sketching quick diagrams, might happen once a year at most), I use a perfectly-legible-to-all all-caps/small-caps block letter writing.
I never found cursive especially complicated with flourishes and such. It was fairly simple. I also am faster with cursive (synonymous with script). The only thing I’ve changed is the captial ‘Q.’ I never write the one that looks like a ‘2.’ That was only when doing the exercises when I was a kid.
Over the course of decades, my signature has mutated, from a straightforward cursive writing of my name, to a very quick series of pen strokes – if one squints a lot, one can still make out shapes that look kinda-sorta like the cursive versions of each of my initials.
This is my cursive, and no, I do not have a fair hand:
I normally write this way but can also print. The faster I write the more it looks like chicken scratch. If I write slow it becomes more respectable.
I was taught cursive (cursive script) and “print”, as in you are given a form to fill out by hand and it says “please print your name and address”.
We were not taught block lettering but picked that up along the way. I prefer block lettering when writing on a vertical surface such as a whiteboard.
Some students are over dependant on typing and neglect basic handwriting. They’re in for a nasty surprise when stubborn professors refuse to allow laptops etc in class for notes.
My parents were taught shorthand, which they called “script”. I was not.
~Max, 26
Fraktur-style handwriting, on the other hand…
I don’t know about that; this letter
says “late 19th century” for example. We may compare this letter from 1758
One one hand you have practical business and school hands; on the other you can create arbitrarily ornate “ornamental penmanship”
Yes, but @pulykamell said the cursive he learned had lots of flourishes and curlicues. We didn’t learn anything like that in school…and this would have been in the very early '60s. Our cursive was really pretty straightforward. It certainly wasn’t copperplate!
Mostly in the capital letters. This is Palmer method we were taught:
There’s just all these extra little loops to begin or end capitals that aren’t necessary. I mean, look at a capital “I”. Why is all that needed for a vertical line? The “B” has all sorts of madness behind it when a vertical line will suffice. Why does the “C” need that extra loop on the top? Why does the “P” look like a kidney? Why in blazes is a “Q” a “2”? That’s not confusing at all. Does the “J” really need to look like a bow? The “S” looks like some kind of duck. The lowercase letters are not quite as egregious, though I prefer the printed form for a lot of them, so when I write I mix the printed forms I prefer to the Palmer forms. And, at least for me, it is faster to dot and cross as I go along than after finishing writing the word and going back. (I recall reading somewhere that it was shown to be faster, but, as I don’t have an actual cite, you can take that as anecdotal.)
This is exactly what I do. Maybe my script was faster, but it was really illegible. All caps writing is much more legible when I do it, and I’m pretty efficient now.
LOL. Yeah, I see what you mean taking it letter by letter.
Over the years, I’ve simplified how I write cursive. As I mentioned above, I dropped the Q looking like 2 eons ago.
Kids today will never get the joke from Billy Madison: https://i.gifer.com/SYn5.gif
I’ve occasionally heard the term “longhand” to refer to ‘cursive’ writing.
Basically it’s whatever style of writing that’s taught which doesn’t require the writer to lift the pen off the page very much. Its counterpart is “print”, which is basically writing via drawing a sans-serif typeface.
This article claims that it’s a holdover from the days of quill/fountain pens, where it was the best way to write legibly and quickly with those tools. But ballpoints don’t really work the same way.
How the Ballpoint Pen Changed Handwriting - The Atlantic
Not to be too contrary, but I haven’t found learning cursive to be useless at all. Every time I’ve had to do a lot of writing- like taking notes in college, for example, I’ve found myself extremely glad I can write cursive quickly and legibly, because I can’t print anywhere near that fast or cleanly.
I always thought of “longhand” as writing it out without abbreviations, code, in short hand, typing, etc. I never thought of it having to do with writing in print or script.
No. At the HS I used to work at, we stopped that in '16.
This is due to negative feedback loop. Kids aren’t taught to write cursive, it takes longer time to write block letters. The end result is horrible handwriting, which makes it difficult for teachers to actually read. So they push for exams on computers, which in turn takes away the impetus to teach proper handwriting, and so on and so forth.
n.b. This doesn’t mean that it’s on a computer in every school, everywhere. But from what I read and hear, it’s going to get that way. Another point: yes, it can be done digitally and eliminate any chance of cheating.
Another point: I agree with @pulykamell. It’s better to teach comprehension, vocabulary, composition and a thousand other things, before cursive. If future students can do that well, on some kind of computer, tablet, digital device, I think it will serve them and society much better than having them master cursive, while not being able to articulate things.
Scholars who need to read older documents will learn how to decode archaic handwriting.
I’m 61, former journo and teacher and was taught cursive in school.