Middle School Students Productivity 1

Running head: MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS PRODUCTIVITY

Middle School Students and the Simultaneous Use of Microsoft Office 2007 and OpenOffice.org

3: A Study of Productivity in a Multi-platform Setting

Jeffrey M. Yearout

SSLS 891 Methods of Research

Pittsburg State University

Fall 2009
 Middle School Students Productivity 2
Abstract

The expanding use of computers in schools has brought with it the need for students to regularly
learn new applications in order to successfully complete their work. In certain instances, the use
of different applications of the same type is required for various reasons. This adds learning
challenges for the student in addition to the content of the class, which can result in frustration
and dissatisfaction with the applications being used. This study analyzed the experiences and
perceptions of a group of Kansas middle school students who were required to use two different
office application suites during the fall semester of 2009.
 Middle School Students Productivity 3
Middle School Students and the Simultaneous Use of Microsoft Office 2007 and OpenOffice.org

3: A Study of Productivity in a Multi-platform Setting

Introduction and Definitions

The societal notion that computer technology plays an important role in our lives has

been and continues to be very strong, causing demand on school districts to continually strive

toward increased emphasis on technology use. With the advent of the personal computer in the

early 1980s and subsequent push for internet connectivity in the 1990s, most K-12 schools in the

United States did make the very intentional decision to include computer-based technologies

within the school curriculum in some fashion (Scheffler & Logan, 1999). This inclusion ranges

from lower level usage such as word processing to the possibilities of progressive usage that

makes genuinely global learning more feasible than ever. Such expanding use causes the ongoing

introduction of new applications and tools, which are accompanied by the time and effort that is

needed to learn how to make best use of these pieces of software. This creates many challenges

for most districts, as time and fiscal resources are already scarce, even without the additional

pressures of introducing new applications to students and staff.

The strain on budgets for schools due to the economic recession that began in the fall of

2008 has been intense, making the justification for large expenditures on computer technology

more difficult. Most school districts prefer to have an approved standard set of applications for

use on their systems, with the intent being to reduce support costs by managing the number of

applications the support staff will have to service. The common practice in most settings has

been to use proprietary applications and systems, based on the presumption that they will be

more stable in performance and have greater availability of technical support. In theory this

practice should make the benefits outweigh the costs (Drozdik, Kovacs, & Kochis, 2005).

For many years, the most common office application suite, in both enterprise and

scholastic settings, has been Microsoft Office (MSO) (Montalbano, 2009). However, the high

cost of licensing MSO on all the computers within a district has led some to seriously consider

free and open source alternatives, such as OpenOffice.org (OOo), as a means of reducing the
 Middle School Students Productivity 4
annual cost of software licensing. When a district has to license all its computers for MSO, even

at a relatively low hypothetical rate of $60 per computer, it is easy to understand why a budget

manager would consider a free alternative. A district must consider, however, that the initial

reduction in expenditure may not accurately reflect the total cost of ownership in using a “free”

solution. Total cost of ownership is defined by Northwest Educational Technology Consortium

(2005) as “the total price in money, time, and resources of owning and using software.” Total

cost of ownership in this setting can include items such as software support, customization, and

training. While being a Microsoft sponsored case study, making it one of clear bias, the Orange

County Public Schools in Florida recently analyzed the total cost of ownership of switching to a

free and open source solution (Microsoft, 2009). They found that while licensing costs were

reduced, the cost of migrating large amounts of data, along with the ongoing costs of technical

support, training, further data migration, and lost productivity resulted in the total cost of

ownership of MSO being lower. While the study again has clear bias in favor of Microsoft, the

issue of costs beyond just licensing should not be ignored, even with a difficult to measure

element such as lost productivity.

For the purposes of this study, usability is defined as “the ease with which a software

product can be used to perform its designated task by its users at a specific criterion” (Lin,

Choong, & Salvendy, 1997, p. 267). The eight human-computer interaction factors stated in the

study by Lin et al. are compatibility, consistency, flexibility, learnability, minimal action,

minimal memory load, perceptual limitation, and user guidance. These factors were the

framework for their collection of quantitative data about human responses to software usage. The

term intuitive is related to usability, but is placed on the software side of the interaction. It takes

into account issues such as interface design and layout, navigation structures, color selections,

and other textual, visual, and aural cues that assist the user in understanding what the application

is doing (Jacso, 2003).

Perceptions of Technology Use In Schools

Though nearing a decade since its publication, the premise of Larry Cuban’s book
 Middle School Students Productivity 5
Oversold and Underused (2001) still has merit. Cuban asserts that technology is not used often

enough in meaningful ways that enhance student achievement. The challenge seems to lie in the

ways in which the technologies are implemented in the classroom. Many school districts focus

heavily on placing hardware and software in the schools, with too little emphasis on pedagogy

and instructional design. With carefully planned implementation, some research does indicate

that achievement gains are possible, but this statement comes with two major caveats. The first is

the fact that all the variables in a school setting cannot be controlled for research purposes. The

second is the reality that technologies and methods for their use can change so fast that long-term

studies are difficult to carry out and still maintain relevance upon conclusion of the research

(Herman, 1994). It can also be difficult to develop sound research and data collection methods

on higher order thinking skills compared to more basic factual knowledge (Protheroe, 2005).

There is also a divergence between teachers and students regarding the perceived

importance of technology in schools. In general, students tend to be less cautious and hesitant

about increased technology use in school than teachers. This may not be a surprising statement to

most educators, but some of the reasons are enlightening and even surprising. The reasons

students wish to see greater use of technology in schools goes beyond their high levels of

technology usage outside of school. Spires, Lee, and Turner (2008) found four major themes in

their research on middle school student perceptions about technology.

The first theme focused on the students’ perception that teachers to a large degree did not

understand the importance of technology in their lives outside school and the belief that teachers

would include more technology if they did understand that fact. The fact that students

differentiated between “fun” usages outside of school (e.g., social networking, listening to music,

gaming) and “boring” usages in school (e.g., word processing, testing, research) was interesting.

That notion seemed rooted in their perception that in school you are told what to do, while

outside of school you get to do what you want.

The second theme indicated that students do want to be actively engaged in school and

realize that technologies can help make that possible. Though project-based learning certainly
 Middle School Students Productivity 6
does not require computer technology to be feasible, such technology can have high impact.

Students in the study realized that the power of information availability coupled with the need to

find information independently combines into a powerful vehicle for engagement. Students also

realized other benefits of technology, such as eliminating the problems of poor penmanship with

writing assignments. They also understood certain limitations such as software usability and

access restrictions on a school network.

The desire to be prepared for the future emerged as the third theme. Students expressed a

desire to have school experiences that have greater direct relation to potential careers. Their

observation of use of technologies in many professions even allowed many of them to identify

specific types of hardware and software tools used in a various careers. Additionally, many

wanted to be able to use the internet to find information about potential careers.

The final theme extends out of the third to a certain extent. It relates to the students’

realization that they need exposure to these technologies if they are to be prepared for life

beyond school and to that end want their school to look like the world in which they live. The

students in the study shared some creative ideas for schools, such as using cell phones and

laptops to gather information on demand and using digital recording technology to create an oral

history of their hometown.

Teachers, on the other hand, have a more mixed perception of technology in the schools,

with issues rooted both in and out of the realm of pedagogy and curriculum. It is not surprising to

find that teachers who make greater personal use of computers, and thus are more at ease with

the technology, are also more likely to make greater use of technology in their classrooms.

Reluctance to use available technologies related to issues such as concern about decreased

student understanding due to technology dependence and the lack of finding any software that

enhanced learning. Additionally, items such as hardware availability, inadequate training,

difficulty with integrating technology into instruction, and lack of technical support have been

stated as obstacles (Li, 2007).

Beyond those issues for teachers were others related to pedagogy and practice as well as
 Middle School Students Productivity 7
job security concerns. Students saw technology as a positive tool regardless of academic ability

level, where some teachers thought that using technology was appropriate only for stronger

students. There was also indication that technology would take away from perceived “real

learning” experiences found in traditional methods. This was due in some part to lack of

familiarity with how to engage in teaching practices beyond the production of papers and visual

presentations. Finally, some trepidation was due to the concern that higher technology usage

could result in teachers being fully replaced by computer technology, leading to the loss of one’s

job (Li, 2007). However, this may be rooted in misunderstandings of the key differences between

learning “from” technology, where it serves as a tutor with little or no teacher interaction, and

learning “with” technology, where it is intended to supplement the activities of a live classroom.

Ringstaff and Kelly (2002) indicate that while tutorial style use of technology can lead to

improvements in basic skills, it is less clear that such gains in higher-order skills are also feasible

in the same framework.

Technical Issues

The use of free and open source software typically presents some risks and challenges, as

would be the case of any major change of application platforms. One of the more prominent

concerns centers on security as it relates to exposure to viruses, malware/spyware, and other

exploits when working in a networked environment. Open source software development has

matured, thanks to the growth and availability of digital community web sites for these

applications. For these reasons, open source software is often as well managed as proprietary

software. Similar advancement regarding technical support and maintenance issues has also

taken place with open source software (Drozdik, Kovacs, & Kochis, 2005).

Challenges with interoperability and portability between MSO and OOo are more

apparent to the user than security and maintenance issues. Problems in this area are found when

users suffer loss of data and information due to formatting problems between differing

applications. Even when such loss is relatively minor, it can lead to lost productivity and

increased frustration on the part of the user. These frustrations are also exposed when users are
 Middle School Students Productivity 8
transitioning to new applications, though this can be difficult to accurately and consistently

quantify for calculating total cost of ownership (Rossi, Scotto, Sillitti, & Succi, 2005).

Human-Computer Interaction Issues

While all the above items certainly have impact on the usability of an application, the

user-specific issues are typically the most easily noticed. It is important to keep the broader

issues in mind when trying to improve usability challenges, but ultimately issues must be

addressed at the user level.

One issue with attempting to transition from one application to another that has the same

purpose, as with MSO and OOo, is the interference caused by negative transfer of learning.

Perkins and Salomon (1992) identify negative transfer of learning as occurring “when learning in

one context impacts negatively on performance in another” (p. 6455). They do state that this

issue is typically only relevant in the early stages of learning something new, as the learner at

this stage is still attempting to fit new understanding within an older framework. This paradigm

fits well with the concept of the J-curve, a visual model used across a variety of disciplines (Erb

& Stevenson, 1999). The J-curve as applied to learning indicates that a dip in performance in the

early stages of learning is expected before performance increases, as it takes time for the learner

to adapt to new skills and concepts.

Finally, the attitudes of middle school students toward technology have an impact on how

well the challenge of learning new software is met. Middle school students have a clear interest

in technology and do indicate an interest in greater use in school. However, their interest

emerges out of personal usage for entertainment, communication, and social purposes. This can

cause their perception of using technology for academic purposes to be swayed by the mindset

that technology for schoolwork is something they are being required to do and not something

they want to do (Spires, Lee, & Turner, 2008).

There is little literature regarding the specific issue of challenges found in transitioning

from MSO to an open source solution such as OOo. More generalized material, however, does

exist that focuses on the challenges of transitioning from one piece of software to another. As
 Middle School Students Productivity 9
school districts wrestle with the consideration of adopting open source software, further

understanding of the issues beyond pure fiscal concerns is warranted if students are to be

provided a quality learning experience.

Data Collection

Intervention Description

Due to a budgetary issue, the launch of a new middle school curriculum in this particular

classroom did not include placing the district standard Microsoft Office 2007 product on the

classroom computers, where there is a 1:1 student/computer ratio. The Technology Department

installed the free and open source Open Office as the alternative solution for the classroom,

despite the fact that students use the Microsoft product everywhere else in the school.

The research questions posed in this study were:

• What is the effect of the mixed use of Microsoft Office 2007 and Open Office 3 on

students' abilities to complete their classwork in a timely and efficient manner?

• Are students able to transfer global skills within an office applications suite between

Microsoft Office 2007 and Open Office 3 in a mixed-use environment?

Subject and Setting Description

The subjects for this study were students enrolled in the fall semester of 2009. The

subject pool totaled 151 students, with 79 seventh graders and 72 eighth graders. Of the 79

seventh graders, 55 were male and 24 were female, with the eighth grade gender division being

55 male and 17 female. The students in this subject pool were generally considered academically

average or better, as a prerequisite for enrolling in this particular course was that a student not be

concurrently enrolled in a remedial math or language arts class. This course, with a total of

twelve sections taught by two teachers, was an elective course at this 7th/8th grade middle school

building and part of a wider implementation of this curriculum within the district. The school at

the time of this study had approximately 1,000 students, with a minority population of

approximately 20% and a free/reduced lunch population of approximately 40% in the fall of

2009.
 Middle School Students Productivity 10
Data Collection Procedure

This was a mixed methods study involving the use of a survey to collect quantitative data

regarding student perceptions of ease and/or difficulty of usage and a questionnaire with follow-

up clarification interviews to gather qualitative data about student perceptions of the software

(see Appendices A and B).

The survey was administered to the entire subject pool during normal class time

approximately halfway through the fall semester of 2009. The survey was delivered using

Google Forms from the Google Apps tool set. All survey questions were designed to be

answered using a Likert scale, with the exception of the final survey question. That question was

a simple choice of preference for either the MSO or OOo suite. The questionnaires and follow-up

interviews were administered within one month of the completion of the surveys. The

questionnaire was delivered using Google Forms, with the follow-up interviews being done face-

to-face during class time. For the questionnaires, a representative group of approximately 20% of

the entire pool was selected, with care given to represent the grade and gender demographics of

the full subject pool as accurately as possible.

Data Analysis and Interpretation

One of the risks of making anecdotal observations regarding software usability is the

challenge in separating one’s own skills, experiences, and the preconceived notions that follow

from the experiences of others. The intent of this study was to attempt to ensure that the data

represented student perceptions only. This is critical because imposing an adult perception can

lead to faulty understanding, especially when making informal anecdotal observations. While it

is likely that at least a few students did not take the survey and/or questionnaire seriously, there

should be sufficient amounts of data collected to mitigate this issue, as extreme outliers were

relatively few in number.

What is the effect of the mixed use of Microsoft Office 2007 and Open Office 3 on students'

abilities to complete their classwork in a timely and efficient manner?

 Middle School Students Productivity 11
While both the survey and questionnaire data have relevance to this question, the fact that

the survey data is drawn from a wider pool makes it more reliable for answering this question.

The survey data was collected from twelve different sections of classes, with Likert scale

responses being asked about ease and/or difficulty of use of both office application products.

The responses clearly show more favorable responses towards Microsoft Office (MSO)

than OpenOffice (OOo). Regardless of the nature of the comparative questions asked about MSO

and OOo applications, the preference for using MSO is clear (see Table 1). Measured on a Likert

scale (1 as strongly disagree to 5 as strongly agree), the mean score for the MSO application

question is always at least 0.85 higher than the comparative one for the OOo application. The

standard deviations for the questions did show a wider dispersal of responses for the OOo

applications as compared to MSO applications.

 Middle School Students Productivity 12

Table 1

Comparative Survey Questions Summary

Summarized Question Mean SD

MSO Word is easy to use 4.44 0.75

OOo Writer is easy to use 3.40 1.23

MSO PowerPoint is easy to use 4.25 0.92

OOo Impress is easy to use 3.11 1.12

Learn new tasks in MSO easily 4.10 1.00

Learn new tasks in OOo easily 3.25 1.25

Interface in MSO is easy to understand 4.20 0.98

Interface in OOo is easy to understand 3.23 1.24

The data from graphing the actual number of responses for each Likert number is even

more revealing (see Figure 1-4). The number of responses for the MSO applications increases as

the Likert scale progresses from 1 to 5, with dramatic increases for the most favorable responses.

In comparison, the responses for the OOo applications peak at 3, following a bell-curve pattern.
 Middle School Students Productivity 13
Figure 1. MSO Word – Ooo Writer Ease of Use Questions

Figure 2. MSO PowerPoint – Ooo Impress Ease of Use Questions

 Middle School Students Productivity 14
Figure 3. MSO-OOo Perception of Learnability Questions

Figure 4. MSO-OOo Interface Ease of Use Quesitons

Are students able to transfer global skills within an office applications suite between Microsoft

Office 2007 and Open Office 3 in a mixed-use environment?

It is almost always more challenging in making determinations with qualitative data, and

this study is no exception. The answers regarding what the subjects found easy or difficult with

both application suites were less critical than what would be expected from such clear

quantitative data, though there was identification of certain specific tasks that were more

challenging in OOo. The most commonly mentioned of these centered on tasks involving the

insertion and manipulation of images in OOo Writer, due to it being dramatically different from

the related feature in MSO Word.

The answers regarding the challenges of using both suites at the same time were more

clearly oriented on usability issues. Of those, the most common statements focused on the

difficulty in finding tools in OOo applications and challenges with remembering differences

between the interface layouts of the two suites. The subjects clearly recognized that they knew

what task they needed to do, the problem was in finding and using the appropriate tool. There

was occasional mention of a desire for a simpler interface. While such a sentiment is

understandable, its relevance to this study is limited, as both the MSO and OOo suites are

complex and robust applications by design.

Discussion

Summary of Findings

The preference toward the MSO applications was quite clear in both the quantitative and

qualitative data collected for the study. In the survey data, the vast majority of responses toward

MSO was 3, 4, or 5, while for OOo the dispersal of possible responses was wider, a fact
 Middle School Students Productivity 15
supported by the larger standard deviation figures for OOo. In addition to the strong preference

for MSO, this would also indicate that the perceptions and attitudes toward OOo vary to a greater

degree. The preference for MSO was also well supported by the fact that 3 was the mode for

OOo responses as compared to 5 for the MSO questions.

The qualitative data collected also supports the assertion that MSO is the clear favorite of

the subjects. While there was some mention of challenges and difficulties with MSO

applications, the number and tone of such statements were greater in reference to OOo

applications. The mention of some specific tasks that were difficult to perform in OOo also

illustrates greater usability problems when compared to MSO.

The primary question that can be drawn from this information is one that would require

more thorough research. The difficulties presented by OOo applications are clear in this study –

the underlying causes are not. One possibility has to do with the problems related to transitioning

from one application to another and the concept of negative transfer of learning. The statements

made by the subjects would support this, as there were numerous remarks about difficulty in

finding and using tools in OOo that were stated as being relatively easy tasks in MSO. The

deeper question would be whether this is just an issue of negative transfer or also one of interface

and tools design as a major factor in the lower usability scores. Typically the problems related to

negative transfer are resolved over time as the user becomes more familiar with the application.

Conversely, usability problems due to interface design and layout will usually persist to some

degree regardless of the level of familiarity with the software. The scope of this study is not

sufficient to provide adequate answers to this question.

The original intent of the study posed an interesting issue to contend with as the process

of research developed. Due to my personal dismay with the fact that we were forced to use the

OOo suite in my classroom, I had to be careful to guard against letting those biases have either

direct or indirect influence on my research. I have tried to be as neutral as possible in both how I

spoke to my class regarding either application suite and in how the survey and questionnaire

were worded and constructed. Just before students took the survey or questionnaire, I
 Middle School Students Productivity 16
emphasized the confidentiality and anonymity of the process, with the hope that such statements

would help improve the level of honesty with their answers.

The particular situation of having to make simultaneous use of software with identical

purposes might be somewhat rare, but one that could happen more frequently in the future. With

the rapid expansion of web-based applications, currently referred to as “Web 2.0” or sometimes

“cloud computing” (Vaquero, Rodero-Marino, Caceres, & Lindner, 2009), the likelihood of

frequent transitions between application platforms will probably increase. The focus of this study

was to determine the challenges middle school students faced as they transitioned between two

specific applications. Despite this focus, I believe that the research findings can be used to make

some limited generalizations, in addition to the specific recommendations for my classroom.

In general, I believe it is important that more emphasis be made on developing the skills

of learning new software. The tendency is to spend most or all of the time allotted for application

skill training on how to use specific tools and functions, and too little on how to use contextual

clues, help features, and online resources to solve usage challenges independently. A notion

exists that today’s K-12 students are all “digital natives” (Prensky, 2001) and can learn all they

need regarding how to use technology on their own. This notion, in my opinion, is misguided

and a myth. What I have observed is that my students are more willing to try things and are less

fearful of “breaking” the computer than adults, but often are not much better at using help

systems than the typical adult. The development of activities that intentionally focuses on the

skills of using existing help systems for applications, regardless of the type, has the potential for

long-term and globalized benefit to the technology user. The development of greater independent

learning capacity can eventually become a time saver, despite the initial time investment needed.

The first specific recommendation for my classroom is a request that would require

approval and financing from the district level. For major applications, such as an office

application suite, the use of a specific selected choice district-wide is strongly recommended. I

realize this conflicts to a certain degree with the generalization that improved skill in learning

new software is also recommended. The difference lies in that major applications tend to be
 Middle School Students Productivity 17
much more complex than the typical web-based application, and as a result have a longer and

more difficult learning timeline. The time resources necessary to give adequate depth of training

would seem to dictate that a single selection would promote greater productivity in the long term.

The subjects noting the difficulty in remembering how to perform certain tasks when using the

applications simultaneously supports this assertion.

The second recommendation is one that can be put into action immediately and, with

documentation, could be of benefit to others who are using the OOo suite. I intend to begin

screening through lessons more closely for items that are likely to cause difficulties for students.

As I observe what challenges students the most, this task should get easier over time. In my

particular case, the fact that I repeat the curriculum on a semester basis allows me the

opportunity to more quickly determine if my assessments of what is difficult is accurate. By

keeping a log of the nature of the difficulties and the approaches I take in their resolution, I

should be able to have a record of information that can be shared with others. This information

could also be used as rationale for the selection of one office application suite over another.

The third recommendation dovetails out of the second to a certain extent. While I hope to

anticipate problems as often as possible, my experience tells me that problems will arise that I

did not anticipate. The solution for this is to always be ready to implement “just-in-time”

learning, a tactic I find very useful, especially with computer applications. This approach means

I have to be prepared to pause at any time if my observation of what the students are doing

indicates they are struggling with an application usage problem. Ideally, I will be familiar with

the situation and able to lead a brief mini-lesson on how the task is performed. If that is not the

case, I need to be comfortable with telling the students that I do not know the solution and lead

them in the process of using help systems to determine one. While the pausing of a lesson to deal

with an application task does interfere with the lesson flow, I believe the insertion of the mini-

lesson in the context of its use makes it more relevant to the student and is therefore more likely

to be retained. This is just conjecture on my part and perhaps would be a topic worthy of future

research.
 Middle School Students Productivity 18
While the results of the research were not surprising to me, the details I have gleaned

should prove to be of value in the future. It is one thing to know that students struggle with

something; it is an entirely different matter to gain an understanding as to why they struggle.

Computer technologies are likely to continue their growth in usage in K-12 schools for the

foreseeable future. It is vital that we as professional educators continue to closely analyze how

these technologies are implemented and be ready and willing to adjust our practices for the

benefit of our students and their learning experiences.

 Middle School Students Productivity 19
Appendix A: Office Applications Usability Survey

SURVEY QUESTIONS

This survey is to help assess the ease or difficulty in using the word processing and presentation
applications from Microsoft Office and OpenOffice.
I think Microsoft Word is easy to use.
1 2 3 4 5

Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

I think OpenOffice Writer is easy to use.

1 2 3 4 5

Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

I think Microsoft PowerPoint is easy to use.

1 2 3 4 5

Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

I think OpenOffice Impress is easy to use.

1 2 3 4 5

Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

I am able to learn how to do new tasks in Microsoft Office and PowerPoint easily.
1 2 3 4 5

Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

I am able to learn how to do new tasks in OpenOffice Writer and Impress easily.
1 2 3 4 5

Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

The interface of Microsoft Word and PowerPoint is easy to understand.

1 2 3 4 5

Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

The interface of OpenOffice Writer and Impress is easy to understand.
1 2 3 4 5

Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

 Middle School Students Productivity 20
I find it easy going back and forth between using Microsoft Office applications and OpenOffice
applications.
1 2 3 4 5

Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

Overall, I prefer:
Microsoft Office (Word and PowerPoint) OR OpenOffice (Writer and Impress)
Bottom of Form
 Middle School Students Productivity 21
Appendix B: Office Applications Usability Questionnaire

QUESTIONNAIRE QUESTIONS

1. What tasks do you find easy to do in Microsoft Word and PowerPoint?

2. What tasks do you find difficult to do in Microsoft Word and PowerPoint?
3. What tasks do you find easy to do in OpenOffice Writer and Impress?
4. What tasks do you find difficult to do in OpenOffice Writer and Impress?
5. Describe your self-perception of your computer skills in general.
6. Describe the challenges you face in having to use both Microsoft Office applications and
OpenOffice applications at the same time in school. For example, describe the things that
you found confusing or caused you to work more slowly than normal.
7. Have you found the amount of extra instruction in using OpenOffice applications to be
satisfactory? If not, what additional instruction would be most helpful?
 Middle School Students Productivity 22
References

Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and Underused: Computers in the Classroom. Cambridge, MA:

Harvard University Press.

Drozdik, S., Kovács, G. L., & Kochis, P. Z. (2005). Risk assessment of an open source

migration project. Proceedings of First International Conference on Open Source

Systems, 246-249.

Erb, T.O., & Stevenson, C. (1999, May). Middle school reforms throw a J-Curve: Don’t strike

out. Middle School Journal, 45-47.

Herman, J. (1994). Evaluating the effects of technology in school reform. In B. Means (Ed.),

Technology and Education Reform. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Jacsó, P. (2003, January). Digital librarianship: search software usability issues. Computers in

Libraries, 23(1), 53-54.

Li, Q. (2007). Student and teacher views about technology: A tale of two cities. Journal of

Research on Technology in Education, 39(4), 377–397.

Lin, H.X., Choong, Y.Y., & Salvendy, G. (1997) A proposed index of usability: A method for

comparing the relative usability of different software systems. Behaviour and

Information Technology, 16(4), 267–278.

Microsoft. (2009). Orange County Public Schools: Large School District Weighs TCO of

Microsoft [case study]. Retrieved from http://www.microsoft.com/CaseStudies

/Case_Study_Detail.aspx?casestudyid=4000005095

Montalbano, E. (2009, June 4). Forrester: Microsoft Office in no danger from competitors.

NetworkWorld, Retrieved from http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/060409-

forrester-microsoft-office-in-no.html

NETC. (2005). Total Cost of Ownership. NETC open options glossary. Retrieved from

http://www.netc.org/openoptions/appendices/glossary.html

Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1994). Transfer of learning. In T. Husen & T. N. Postelwhite

(Eds.). International Handbook of Educational Research (Second Edition, Vol. 11; pp.
 Middle School Students Productivity 23
6452-6457). Oxford, Pergamon Press.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. Retrieved from

http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/default.asp

Protheroe, N. (2005). Technology and student achievement. Principal, 85(2), 46-48.

Ringstaff, C. & Kelley, L. (2002). The learning return on our educational technology investment:

A review of findings from the research. Retrieved from

http://www.wested.org/online_pubs/learning_return.pdf

Rossi, B., Scotto, M., Sillitti, A., and Succi, G. (2005). Criteria for the non invasive transition to

OpenOffice. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Open Source Systems,

250–253.

Scheffler, F. L. & Logan, J. P. (1999). Computer technology in schools: What teachers should

know and be able to do. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31 (3), 305-

322.

Spires, H., Lee, J., Turner, K., & Johnson, J. (2008). Having our say: Middle grade

students' perspectives on school, technologies, and academic engagement. Journal of

Research in Technology & Education, (40) 497-515.

Vaquero, L., Rodero-Marino, L., Caceres, J., & Lindner, M. (2009). A break in the clouds:

towards a cloud definition. SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 39.