Running head: COMPARING METHODS OF INSTRUCTION 1

Comparing Methods of Instruction for Microsoft Office Software

Karen Parker

University of West Georgia

COMPARING METHODS OF INSTRUCTION 2

Comparing Methods of Instruction for Microsoft Office Software

Introduction

Students in the business and technology pathway courses are given the opportunity to

master and become certified in Microsoft Office programs. The State of Georgia provides

various learning opportunities to help prepare the students for certification. The suggested

method is to have the students utilize Microsoft Office Academic Course (MOAC) books,

reading step-by-step instructions and working a few examples. Once the MOAC readings have

been completed the students are able to utilize an online training program, GMetrix, which aligns

with the MOAC instruction. This program allows students to use the training mode which assists

them with step-by-step instructions if they are unsure how to complete a task. The students have

various training modules available and are allowed to work through each module an unlimited

amount of time. When they feel comfortable enough, they may convert the modules in GMetrix

to the testing mode to see how well they actually know the material. If a student can consistently

score above an 80 in the testing mode, they are ready to try for certification using the Microsoft

Office certification platform.

The problem with this method is that many students are reading below grade-level. The

extensive, detailed directions in the MOAC books often confuse the students. The struggle of not

being able to read and understand fully causes the students to become immediately discouraged

and uninterested in learning the steps to master each software program. Generally, the students

can usually meet the standard objectives but they are not able to be fully prepared for mastering

the standard and becoming Microsoft Office certified.

The rationale for this study is to determine if the instructional delivery method suggested

by Microsoft and the State of Georgia is the most beneficial way for students to learn or should

learning be adjusted depending on each student's needs.

COMPARING METHODS OF INSTRUCTION 3

Objectives

In the high school setting, the online instructional program for Microsoft Office products

is similar to a distant-learning program with the students learning at their own pace. Students are

able to answer each question by performing a task in Word, Excel, or PowerPoint. If they are

unsure, there is a help button to assist the student with each step in the task. Using the MOAC

books prior to the online instruction can be a challenge. These books only provide instruction for

two different learning styles – visual and kinesthetic. Learning styles is the way a person prefers

to learn. For the purpose of this study, visual is reading the MOAC books or watching a

demonstration and kinesthetic is working step-by-step in conjunction with the demonstrations or

reading. A student’s preferred learning style may be visual, such as watching videos or a

demonstration, but does not include reading. The learning styles and MOAC instruction books

have not taken into consideration a student’s reading Lexile score. Reading Lexile scores are

used to measure a student’s ability to read materials. Each grade level’s reading scores are

reported as a range. Oftentimes, a student’s reading score is below grade level, thus making it

more difficult for them to understand technical readings.

This research will conducted using the mixed-methods research approach. The mixed-

methods approach uses both quantitative and qualitative approaches which allows researchers to

use multiple methods to gather and analyze data. The quantitative approach deals with numbers

and will be used to gather and analyze data from student learning. The qualitative approach deals

with words and will be used to gather information from students through open-ended questions

in a survey.

The purpose of this study is to examine if 21st century learners actually learn better

through reading and working examples individually, following along with step-by-step visual
COMPARING METHODS OF INSTRUCTION 4

demonstrations, or using online technology tutorials that guides the student and provides

immediate feedback. This study will attempt to answer “Does a student’s reading level affect

their ability to learn and master software programs.” However, the main question of this study is

to determine "Which method of instructional delivery is the best approach for students to master

software programs."

Literature Review

With the development of additional technology tools, several new methods of teaching

technology have evolved. However, many instructors still prefer the older method of utilizing

lectures and demonstrations over allowing students to use programs that help students learn by

doing. The constructivism theory emerged with the increase in hybrid, or blending learning and

online learning environments. This theory describes how people learn and believes that a

person’s prior ideas and experiences helps them to understand new learning. It also believes that

the students should be actively involved in their learning with the teacher being a facilitator.

(Workshop, 2004) This type of learning has been shown to be somewhat effective in higher

education settings.

Many studies have been conducted comparing the effectiveness of traditional courses,

online course, and hybrid courses (Vernadakis, Antoniou, Giannousi, Zetou, &

Kioumourtzoglou, 2011). According to Zubas, Heiss, and Pedersen (2006), as cited in

Vernadakis, et al. (2011) research studies have confirmed that students learn better using self-

paced computer tutorials combined with the traditional lecture methods. However Riffell and

Sibley (2005), as cited in Vernadakis, et al. (2011) believe that online assignments were more

effective when active-learning exercises were incorporated into the learning process. In a

research study conducted by Vernadakis, et al. (2011), the researchers concluded that students
COMPARING METHODS OF INSTRUCTION 5

who participated in a hybrid class consisting of lecture and e-learning activities scored higher

than the students who were in the traditional lecture course (Vernadakis, et al, 2011).

Other research conducted regarding online learning include a study examining the

benefits of providing instructional explanations prior to providing actual example-based learning.

This study, conducted by Roelle, Hiller, Berthold & Rumann (2016) found that learners rarely

attempted to engage in independent, deeper learning without prior instructional directions. They

determined that overall effectiveness of using examples in learning would be higher if the

content included explanations or demonstrations (Roelle, et al., 2016).

Similar results were found in other research studies. Phillips (2015), conducted research

comparing live lectures and online learning modules. The students in Phillips’ (2015) study

performed better through the online learning modules but felt that the modules should

supplement, not replace live lectures. Phillips concluded from this study that blended learning

seemed to work best. (Phillips, 2015).

Most studies seemed to be focused on comparing higher-education students’ learning in a

lecture-type class versus a total online delivery module or blended learning assignments. The

study conducted by Vernadakis, et al. (2011) was specifically directed towards a Microsoft

Office product, but was compared to a lecture-type study, not one where students worked at their

own pace reading directions and working through examples.

This research study is necessary to determine the benefits of online instruction for

Microsoft Office software products specifically for high school students, especially those with

lower reading Lexile scores. The research should determine if a student’s learning of software

products is hindered by their reading level. It should also answer the main question of this study

of “Which method of instructional delivery is the best approach for students to master software

programs."
COMPARING METHODS OF INSTRUCTION 6

Methods

For this study a mixed-methods research approach was conducted. The qualitative

approach was used to gather information about each participant and the quantitative approach

used to gather data from the participants’ learning. The study method used in this research was a

combination of an independent variable experimental research and an action research. This

combination was selected due to the purpose and sampling method of the research. The

participants were given various methods of learning techniques to determine which approach

helped them best master the software program used. All students were grouped together and

completed both methods of instruction during the research process.

Sample

The students used in this study are a group of students in a business and technology class

at Paulding County High School in Dallas, GA. The sampling plan used was convenience

sampling and all students in this class participated in the study. The sample group were 18

students, in the 10th – 12th grade, ranging in age from 15 to 18. The gender of the sample size was

equally divided between males and females. The ethnicity makeup of the participants was 12

white students, three African-American, and three Hispanic students. The gender, age, and

ethnicity is a typical representation of this class each semester. Additionally, the students’ grade

point average (GPA) ranges from 1.13 to 4.00, with the class average being 2.84 and the

students’ Reading Lexile level ranges from 955 to 1318, with the average being 1139. Generally,

the average range for 11th and 12th grade students is 1185 – 1385. There was no exclusion criteria

for participation in this study. All students were in my class and participated in the study.

Instrumentation

To collect data for this study, a survey of the participants was conducted using an open-
COMPARING METHODS OF INSTRUCTION 7

ended questionnaire. The students took a short learning-styles inventory and then were asked

how the results related to their beliefs in how they learned best. Since the students have prior

knowledge of both methods of data collection being used for this research, the survey included

questions on their preferred method for learning Microsoft Office.

The instrument used for data collection was a software program, GMetrix, used to help

train and assess student learning with Microsoft Office products. This software product is used as

a stand-alone tool and in conjunction with Microsoft instructional books. GMetrix was used as a

pretest and as a posttest for both instructional methods. The program was also used in the

training mode as one method of instruction delivery for the purpose of this research.

Data Analysis

Mixed-methods study.

Determining the best method of instructional delivery was the primary focus of this

study. Within the instruction delivery, the question arose concerning the relationship between a

student’s reading level and their scores. In comparing the test results with the student survey, no

definite answer was determined concerning a student’s reading level affecting their ability to

learn this material. Throughout the study the participants were observed reading and working

examples independently. Eleven percent or two students, who had lower reading Lexile’s, passed

the test while 39%, or 7 students, with above average Lexile scores did not pass. The results from

the observations and the survey questions indicated that the students with higher Lexile scores

preferred not to read the lessons. The independent variable in this study was the method of

testing used to determine the best way of delivering software instruction.

Descriptive analyses.

In analyzing the test data from both methods of instruction, it was determined that

students learn the software program more thoroughly using online tutorials that guided and
COMPARING METHODS OF INSTRUCTION 8

provided immediate feedback. The mean of the test scores with students reading the instructions

and working examples was 52.22% while the mean Comparison of Testing
Method Results
of the test scores using the online tutorials and 150

Test Score
100
having immediate feedback was 83.06%. In 50
0
comparing the mean of both test scores, the null Lowest Mean Highest
Grade

hypothesis of either instructional method being Test #1 Test #2

equal is rejected (Chart 1). The standard deviation for Chart 1

Method #1 is independent reading results.
Method #2 is software program results.
test Method #1 was 29.83% and Method #2 was

18.37%. This indicates that there was a wide range of both high and low scores on each test.

Looking at the histogram comparison chart

Histogram Comparison Chart
(Chart 2), there was a greater frequency of
6
Frequency

4
higher passing scores with test Method #2.
2
0
0 20 40 60 70 80 90 95 100 This data reinforces the conclusion that the
Grade
students learned more using the online
Method 1 Method 2
tutorials.

Chart 2
Method #1 is independent reading results.
Method #2 is software program results.

Scholarly Significance and Limitations

The practical contributions of this study will be used in future instruction for the business

and technology classes at my school. The limitations of the study was the small sample size. The

findings of this study will be useful in future classes at the research school due to the

demographics being representative of the school population. However, the limitations of this

action research make it difficult to generalize the external validity of the findings to other
COMPARING METHODS OF INSTRUCTION 9

schools and districts. Therefore one cannot assume that the preferred instructional delivery

method would be as effective with student populations in other schools.

COMPARING METHODS OF INSTRUCTION 10

References

Phillips, J. A. PharmD, (2015, November/December). Replacing traditional live lectures with

online learning modules: Effects on learning and student perceptions. Currents in

Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 7(6), 738-744. doi: 10.1016.j.cptl.2015.08.009

Roelle, J., Hiller, S., Berthold, K., & Rumann, S. (2016). Example-based learning: The benefits

of prompting organization before providing examples. Learning and Instruction, 49, 1-

12. Elsevier Ltd. ScienceDirect. doi: 10.1016/j.leaerninstruc.2016.11.012

Vernadakis, N., Antoniou, P., Giannousi, M., Zetou, E., Kioumourtzoglou, E. (2011, January).

Comparing hybrid learning with the traditional approaches on learning the Microsoft

Office Power Point 2003 program in tertiary education. Computers & Education, 56(1),

188-199. doi: 10.1016/j/compedu.2010.08.007

Workshop: Constructivism as a Paradigm for teaching and learning. (2004). WNET Education.

Educational Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved from

https://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/constructivism/