1. IMPROVING TEACHING STRATEGIES FOR MICROSOFT OFFICE SBEA 2011 Presented by: Dr. Leane Skinner Dr. Elisha Wohleb Dr. Christal Pritchett Auburn University

3. BACKGROUND

4. MICROSOFT OFFICE SPECIALIST CERTIFICATION (MOS) The Policies Commission for Business and Economic Education (PCBEE, 2003) stated “Industry certification is one approach to assessing and demonstrating the technical competence demanded by employers.” Continuous Program Improvement Initial teacher certification students must pass all MOS exams prior to internship Ensures preparation in both content and pedagogy Data management system developed to collect and analyze student feedback via a survey and MOS exam score reports.

5. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

6. The research problem for this study was to determine the common areas of strengths and weaknesses in specific teaching strategies based on the Microsoft Office Specialist exam results and data collected via a researcher-developed survey.

7. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

8. The purpose of this study was to provide information that may improve overall teaching strategies of Microsoft Office at the secondary and postsecondary levels.

9. RESEARCH QUESTIONS

10. The following research questions were designed to address the statement of the problem: 1. What is the relationship between the sub scores on each of the Microsoft Office Specialist Certification exams and the overall score? 2. To what extent does a student’s perceived helpfulness of specific class assignments influence Microsoft Office Specialist Certification exam results? 3. Is there a significant relationship between the use of electronic commercial practice software and the Microsoft Office Specialist Certification exam results?

11. REVIEW OF LITERATURE THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

12. While Microsoft Office Specialist certification is not a guarantee of occupational competence (PCBEE, 2003), industry certification when part of a more comprehensive academic program, provides value to all stakeholders. Obtaining industry certification, in addition to a post- secondary education, provides a strong theoretical foundation to build upon, may increase marketability, and therefore may lead to an enhanced career (Randall, & Zirkle, 2005).

13. Before Microsoft Office can be used as a decision-making tool, the user must have a thorough understanding of the software capabilities. Microsoft Office Specialist certification is a method by which the users’ understanding of the software capabilities is tested and validated (Skinner, 2006).

14. DIRECT INSTRUCTION MODEL The Direct Instruction Model consists of five phases that allow teachers to scaffold instruction and therefore allow students to gradually take additional responsibility for their own learning. Although Direct Instruction may imply a lecture approach, it is an instructional model that focuses on student and teacher interaction. Curriculum is broken down into small chunks and arranged in sequential order (Magliaro, Lockee, & Burton, 2005).

15. FIVE PHASES 1.Orientation/ Introduction  instructor assists the students in making the link to prior knowledge and explains the lesson objectives 2.Presentation  Instructor demonstrates how to complete a project centered on lesson objectives 3.Guided Practice  instructor’s initial effort of transferring the responsibility for learning to the student and provides students with the opportunity to practice each step. Using new, but related projects, the students complete assignments with step by step instructions 4.Practice  moves the student one more step toward independence and includes structured assignments but without the step by step instructions. At this phase, the student is introduced to commercial electronic practice software 5.Independent Practice  students independently work on a creative project applying their new knowledge. This project is an authentic project selected individually by each student. Following the theory of Constructivism and the Project-Based Model, the “Creative Project” allows the student to construct their own learning by completing a self-selected authentic project

16. METHODOLOGY

17. Based on the purpose of the study, the related literature, and as part of the original data management system, the MOS participant score reports and a researcher-designed survey were used for analysis. The population for this study consisted of post-secondary business/marketing education students, in-service business/marketing educators, and a small number of high school students participating in a special project, who completed the MOS certification exam (N=99) from 2007-2011.

18. DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

19. DEMOGRAPHICS

20. RESEARCH QUESTION 1 STUDENT SCORES FOR MICROSOFT OFFICE CERTIFICATION EXAMS-WORD Microsoft Office Word Overall Score Mean = 765.04SD = 202.168 Microsoft Word Sub Scores:MeanSD Creating & Customizing Documents 80.9323.964 Formatting Content78.4621.424 Working with Visual Content79.6426.350 Organizing Content68.9622.244 Reviewing Documents73.9325.110 Sharing & Securing Content75.0433.207

21. STUDENT SCORES FOR MICROSOFT OFFICE CERTIFICATION EXAMS-PPT Microsoft Office PowerPoint Overall Score Mean = 833.37SD = 115.977 Microsoft PPT Sub Scores:MeanSD Creating & Formatting Presentations77.2120.154 Creating & Formatting Slide Content77.8911.822 Working with Visual Content91.3211.348 Collaborating On & Delivering Presentations87.3722.321

22. STUDENT SCORES FOR MICROSOFT OFFICE CERTIFICATION EXAMS-ACCESS Microsoft Office Access Overall Score Mean = 625.52SD = 169.943 Microsoft Access Sub Scores:MeanSD Structuring a Database79.0527.185 Creating & Formatting Database Elements61.9018.606 Entering & Modifying Data66.6725.413 Creating & Modifying Queries41.9019.905 Presenting & Sharing Data60.7125.704 Managing & Maintaining Databases71.4329.881

23. STUDENT SCORES FOR MICROSOFT OFFICE CERTIFICATION EXAMS-EXCEL Microsoft Office Excel Overall Score Mean = 706.61SD = 182.412 Microsoft Excel Sub Scores:MeanSD Creating & Manipulating Data68.5523.101 Formatting Data & Content80.8719.155 Creating & Modifying Formulas68.1630.725 Presenting Data Visually67.4820.998 Collaborating & Securing Data73.7422.326

24. STUDENTS WHO PASSED & FAILED MICROSOFT OFFICE CERTIFICATION EXAMS Passed Failed Exam n %n % Microsoft Office Word 2278.6621.4 Microsoft Office PowerPoint 1789.5210.5 Microsoft Office Access 1257.1942.9 Microsoft Office Excel 1961.31238.7

25. RESEARCH QUESTION 2 (ANOVA DESIGN) SIGNIFICANT Project Reinforcements [F (3, 94) = 4.211, p =.008] Chapter Projects [F (3, 95) = 7.474, p <.001] In The Labs [F (3, 95) = 6.344, p =.001] Cases & Places [F (3, 94) = 7.261, p <.001] NOT SIGNIFICANT Creative Projects [F (3, 91) = 2.134, p =.102] *Alpha level of.05 for all analyses.

26. RESEARCH QUESTION 3 Majority of respondents (83.7%) reported using electronic practice software in preparation for the Microsoft Office Certification exams. 31% completed the practice test one time. 36.6% completed the practice test two times. 9.9% completed the practice test three times. 22.5% completed the practice test four or more times. Most of the participants (66.7%) reported feeling somewhat prepared to pass the Microsoft Office Certification exams, while 22.2% felt very prepared and 11.1% stated they did not feel prepared to pass the exams.

27. RESEARCH QUESTION 3 (T-TEST DESIGN) SIGNIFICANT The effect of the electronic practice software on the Microsoft Certification exam scores : Microsoft Word t (28) = 2.305, p =.029 Microsoft Access t (20) = 4.581, p <.001 NOT SIGNIFICANT The effect of the electronic practice software on the Microsoft Certification exam scores : Microsoft PowerPoint t (19) = 1.558, p =.138 Microsoft Excel t (31) = -.772, p =.447 *Alpha level of.05 for all analyses.

28. DEGREE OF PERCEIVED HELPFULNESS IN PREPARATION FOR EXAMS Class Assignments a b c M SD Project Reinforcement3.12.815 Chapter Project3.76.648 In the Labs3.66.709 Cases and Places3.54.785 Creative Project2.841.223 a n = 99 for each class assignment. b Shelly Cashman books. C 4=Very Helpful, 3=Somewhat Helpful, 2=Not Very Helpful, 1=Not Applicable.

29. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

30. MICROSOFT WORD Although the average overall score of the participants on the MOS for Microsoft Word was above the required passing score, sub scores for Organizing Content and Reviewing Documents were the lowest scores. The MOS Word exam objectives for the sub category of Organizing Content include quick parts, tables, references, and merging. The sub category of Reviewing Documents includes navigating documents, compare and merge documents versions, managing tracked changes, and utilizing the comment feature. When developing and designing curriculum, instructors should creatively design assignments and projects to reinforce these skills.

31. MICROSOFT POWERPOINT The MOS average overall passing score for Microsoft PowerPoint was above the required score; however, Creating and Formatting Presentations and Creating and Formatting Slide Content were the lowest scores. The MOS PowerPoint exam objectives for the sub category of Creating and Formatting Presentations include slide masters, create and change presentation elements, and arranging slides. The sub category of Creating and Formatting Slide Content includes inserting and formatting text boxes, adding and linking existing content, and animations. When developing and designing curriculum, instructors should creatively design assignments and projects to reinforce these skills

32. MICROSOFT ACCESS The average overall score for Microsoft Access was below the required passing score. The lowest were in the sub scores of Creating and Modifying Queries, Presenting and Sharing Data, and Creating and Formatting Database Elements. Five out of six sub score areas were below an average of 75%. With the average overall score for the MOS Access exams being below the required passing score, instructors should consider MOS Access to be the most difficult Microsoft Office Software Application for students to master. Therefore, it is important to carefully develop and design effective instructional strategies. This research did indicate that utilizing electronic practice software for Access did significantly improve MOS Access scores.

33. MICROSOFT EXCEL Although the average overall score for Microsoft Excel was slightly above the required scores, four of the five sub score areas were below and average of 75%. The lowest scores were in the sub scores areas of Presenting Data Visually, Creating and Modifying Formulas, and Creating and Manipulating Data. Microsoft Excel appears to also be difficult for students to master. Although the overall average score was slightly above the required score, participants scored below the average on four out of five of the sub sections. Utilizing the electronic practice software did not significantly improve MOS Excel scores. Therefore, it is important to carefully develop and design effective instructional strategies.

34. TYPES OF ASSIGNMENTS Respondents reported “Chapter Projects” (Phase 3 – Guided Practice) and “In the Labs” (Phase 4 - Practice) as the most helpful in preparing for the MOS exams. “Creative Projects” were reported (Phase 5 – Independent Practice) as being the least helpful in preparing for the MOS exams. This result does not indicate that Creative Projects are not an important part of the instructional strategies, but rather that they may not be helpful when specifically preparing for the Microsoft Office Specialist exam. Assignments relating to “Guided Practice” and “Practice” should be a major part of a comprehensive program preparing Business Educators to teach Microsoft Office skills and to pass the Microsoft Office Certification exams.

35. ELECTRONIC PRACTICE SOFTWARE The more times a respondent completed the commercial electronic practice software, the higher the score on the MOS Word and Access exams. There was no significant relationship between the number of times a respondent completed the electronic practice software and the scores on the MOS Excel and PowerPoint exams.

36. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS IN TEACHING STRATEGIES

37. REFERENCES Magilaro, S., Lockee, B., & Burton, J. (2005). Direct instruction revisited: A key model for instructional technology. Educational Technology Research & Development; 2005, 53, 4 41-55. Policies Commission for Business and Economic Education (2003). This we believe about industry certification. (Policy Statement No. 72) Randall, M., & Zirkle, C. (2005). Information technology student-based certification in formal education settings: Who benefits and what is needed. Journal of Information Technology Education. 4, 287-306. Skinner, L.B. (2006). Industry certification credentialing: Perspectives of pre- service business educators. Workforce Education Forum, 33, 1, 43-54.