There is a widely held belief that uppercase letters should be taught first because they are easier to write. This assumption is often repeated in early education, yet it deserves closer examination. When we look carefully at how letters are formed, how children read and write, and how motor patterns develop, the case for teaching lowercase letters first becomes clear.
To provide the best instructional outcomes for students, handwriting instruction must be guided by how the brain and body learn movement patterns most efficiently. Research on foundational letter formation consistently shows that instructional sequence matters, not just for legibility, but for long-term fluency, automaticity, and cognitive efficiency.
Lowercase Aligns More Closely With Reading and Writing
Lowercase letters make up approximately 98 percent of the letters children read and write in connected text; uppercase letters account for only about 2 percent.[1] Teaching lowercase first allows students to apply handwriting skills directly to meaningful reading and writing experiences.
Lowercase letters such as b, d, p, g, and q share visual similarities that often cause confusion. When handwriting instruction is aligned with reading instruction, students build stronger differentiation skills through repeated visual motor exposure. This alignment is particularly beneficial for students who learn best through kinesthetic and multisensory input.
Lowercase words are also easier for the brain to process. Lowercase letters vary in height, with ascenders rising above the body of the word and descenders dropping below it, while text set in capitals is uniform in height. Legibility research has long found that text set entirely in capitals is read measurably more slowly than the same text in lowercase, though researchers continue to debate exactly why.[2]
Are Uppercase Letters Really Easier to Write?
Even granting all of this, one objection remains: surely uppercase letters are easier for small hands to write. The idea that uppercase letters are easier is usually based on simplified assumptions that they are bigger, straighter, and start in the same place. A closer analysis of letter formation reveals a more complex and more instructive picture.
Letter Size
Uppercase letters are often described as easier because they are larger. However, size is not an inherent property of letter type. Lowercase letters can be written just as large by increasing line height, while still reinforcing the correct motor patterns needed for fluent writing.
Motor difficulty is determined by stroke sequence, continuity, and lift demands, not letter size. Writing a large lowercase a still builds the same efficient motor plan required for automatic handwriting.
Starting Points
It is true that uppercase letters are commonly described as all starting at the top. However, while they all begin on the top line, uppercase letters do not share a single, consistent starting location.
In practice, uppercase letters begin from three distinct starting points along the top line:
- Top middle: A, I, J, T
- Top left: B, D, E, F, H, K, L, M, N, P, R, U, W, V, X, Y, Z
- Below the top, to the right: C, G, O, Q, S
Because uppercase letters still require multiple motor entry points, simply compressed onto the same line, the instructional benefit of a single starting rule is significantly diminished.
Lowercase letters also begin from a small number of distinct starting locations, but these are functionally grouped and teachable, supporting motor planning rather than rote memorization:
- Top left: b, h, k, l
- Middle left: m, n, p, r, u, v, w, x, y, z
- Below the middle, to the right: a, c, d, g, o, q, s
- Middle: i, j
- Exceptions: e, f, t
The difference is not the number of groups but what the groups do. Uppercase entry points must be memorized letter by letter. Lowercase groups share a single starting movement, so learning one letter in a group teaches the beginning of every other letter in it.
This structure allows students to reuse movement patterns across letters, reducing cognitive load and supporting faster motor learning.
Pencil Lifts
Pencil lifts require precise visual monitoring and motor control to accurately reposition the pencil for the next stroke. Each lift increases task demands and interrupts motor flow.
Seventeen uppercase letters require two or more strokes, compared to only seven lowercase letters. Every additional stroke means another pencil lift.
For example, uppercase A requires three separate strokes with careful placement between each. Lowercase a, by contrast, is formed with one continuous movement. Fewer lifts reduce motor complexity and support smoother, more automatic writing.
Letter Strokes and Motor Complexity
Letters are built from basic strokes that develop in a predictable order: vertical lines, horizontal lines, circles, and finally diagonal lines. Diagonal strokes are the most complex.
It is true that uppercase letters include more straight-line-only forms. Six uppercase letters (E, F, H, I, L, T) are composed entirely of straight strokes, compared to three lowercase letters (l, i, t). This gives uppercase a numerical advantage in this area.
However, straight-line simplicity is not exclusive to uppercase, and it does not eliminate the need to learn curved and diagonal strokes for functional writing. In fact, eleven uppercase letters require diagonal strokes, compared to only seven lowercase letters, increasing overall motor complexity in uppercase writing.
The Cost of Teaching Uppercase First
When students learn uppercase letters first, strong motor patterns are established for those letter forms. Later, when lowercase letters are introduced, students must override those existing motor plans and devote additional working memory to learning a new system.
This transition is similar to learning to type using the hunt and peck method. While it may feel functional at first, it becomes inefficient over time and difficult to unlearn. Lowercase first instruction avoids this unnecessary cognitive detour and supports earlier automaticity.
What Research and Experts Say
Experts in handwriting development consistently emphasize the advantages of teaching lowercase first.
Dave Thompson is a prominent American font designer and the president of Educational Fontware, Inc., which he founded in 1992. He has designed and digitally implemented over 1,000 specialized handwriting and instructional fonts used extensively in K-6 classrooms and by major curriculum publishers. Thompson notes that lowercase letters require fewer pen lifts, share more consistent stroke patterns, and support continuous movement through retracing rather than repeated lifts.[3]
Educational psychologist Virginia Berninger has shown that lowercase letters should be taught first because they appear more frequently in text and support earlier automaticity. She recommends limiting extended writing demands until lowercase formation is functional.[4]
Researcher Steve Graham reinforces this position, noting that teaching lowercase letters is more economical and efficient for developing fluent writing.[5]
Implementation: What This Looks Like in Practice
Teaching lowercase first does not mean eliminating uppercase letters. Instead, it means prioritizing lowercase instruction until students develop legible, automatic formation. Uppercase letters can then be introduced strategically for names, sentence beginnings, and specific instructional purposes.
This approach reduces cognitive load, supports reading alignment, and accelerates writing fluency without sacrificing accuracy.
Conclusion
Teaching lowercase letters first is not a matter of preference or tradition. Uppercase letters account for about 2 percent of what children read and write, yet they often consume the first months of handwriting instruction. In that time, students could be learning the letters that make up nearly everything they will ever read.
The motor evidence points the same direction. Seventeen uppercase letters require two or more strokes, compared with seven lowercase. Eleven require diagonals, compared with seven. And the uppercase letters that seem to start in the same place do not: their entry points must be learned one at a time, while lowercase letters arrive in groups that share a single movement.
When instruction reflects how children actually read and write, students build stronger foundations that support fluent, confident communication.
Uppercase First vs Lowercase First
| The Uppercase-First Claim | The Lowercase-First Response |
|---|---|
| Uppercase letters are larger and often easier for young children to copy. | Lowercase letters can be written just as large by increasing line height while preserving correct motor patterns. |
| Uppercase letters are uniform in size and placement. | Lowercase letters vary in height, with ascenders and descenders. Text set entirely in capitals is read measurably more slowly than the same text in lowercase. |
| Six uppercase letters are formed using only straight lines (E, F, H, I, L, T), which can reduce early motor demands. | Three lowercase letters are also formed using only straight lines (l, i, t), so straight line simplicity is not exclusive to uppercase. |
Uppercase letters are often described as all starting at the top, but in practice they begin from three distinct starting locations along the top line:
|
Lowercase letters begin from a small number of predictable, teachable starting point groupings that support motor planning:
|
| Eleven uppercase letters require diagonal strokes, increasing motor complexity. | Only seven lowercase letters require diagonal strokes (v, w, x, y, z, q, k), reducing early motor load. |
| Seventeen uppercase letters require two or more strokes, interrupting motor flow and increasing task demands. | Only seven lowercase letters require two or more strokes, supporting smoother, more automatic writing. |
Sources
- Berninger, V. W., & Wolf, B. J. (2016). Teaching Students with Dyslexia and Dysgraphia: Lessons from Teaching and Science (2nd ed.). Brookes Publishing.
- Tinker, M. A. (1963). Legibility of Print. Iowa State University Press.
- Thompson, D. President, Educational Fontware, Inc. Personal communication with the author.
- Berninger, V. W. Professor Emerita of Educational Psychology, University of Washington. Personal communication with the author.
- Graham, S. Regents Professor, Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College, Arizona State University. Personal communication with the author.
About the Author: Cheryl Bregman, OT, M.S.
Cheryl Bregman is an occupational therapist with 25+ years helping children overcome handwriting challenges and the founder of Handwriting Heroes. She holds a Master’s in Technology in Special Education from Johns Hopkins University.