There's a difference between handwriting and caligraphy here.
As has been mentioned in this thread already, writing in cursive is just.... I don't know. Part of me thinks that people still write in cursive, and so we should teach reading in cursive. And certainly, learning a signature is still very important to us. But at the same time, most people forget cursive writing. I know that when the SAT asked you to write a statement in cursive as part of a bureaucratic process, it was probably the most annoying part for me, because I didn't know certain characters in cursive. I had used basic letters for fucking forever to that point. And certainly, with most work being computerized, cursive is becoming less important.
Now, the article in the OP is on China. And let me tell you, that class is necessary. It's not just handwriting, it's their fucking alphabet. The question that should be raised from that article isn't if we need to continue teaching handwriting, but whether the Chinese should adapt a more convenient alphabet - after all, the whole world is computerizing here, and the Chinese alphabet is highly inefficient for such work - yet, their written language is spreading just as fast, if not faster than English. Certainly, you may find Chinese in very popular use all over Southeast Asia and certain parts of Africa, and you'll find it spreading through Africa, Pakistan, Russia. It'll be interesting to see the economic consequences of this cultural shift.