Abstract:

Time has proved that teaching text editing, word processing is one of the most demanding among the various topics of information technology. Both the teaching process and the real application are burdened with false presumptions.
1. everyone can do word processing
2. everyone think that others can do it
3. easy to learn
4. easy to apply the learned techniques
5. users perform better in word processing than in programming
6. teachers of informatics are exquisitely responsible
7. no connection to algorithmic thinking
8. text editing is limited to text editors, word processors, publishers, and has no connection with other subjects of computer sciences
9. has no connection with other non-computer-related subjects
The first and most misleading assumption is that everyone can do word processing – presumptions #1 and #2. It is thus because there is a great difference between “performing something” on a rather arbitrary way and “creating something” on well established knowledge. This misunderstanding is rooted from not being familiar with the concept of the “properly formatted text”, which states that a text should be invariant to modification.
We have to note however, that in this context “can” and “able to” carry a well distinguishable meaning. Everyone is “able to” do word processing, but it does not necessarily include that everyone “can” do it. There might be various reasons why the ability to do something are not materializing.
If word processing was easy to learn and to use presumptions #3, #4 and #5 would have never appeared on the list. Just the other way around, word processing is a very demanding process, where several subfields of computer sciences and other – originally not computer related – subjects and sciences have to be integrated. Those who teach programming have serious problems to reach a satisfactory level of the students. However, it is still easier to find a well structured program than a correctly formatted text, which fact falsifies presumption #5. In most of the national curriculums teachers of informatics are exquisitely responsible for teaching word processing, which led us to wrong presumptions – #6, #8 and #9.
Teachers of informatics should have a great responsibility in the followings to reach a satisfactory level in text editing.
1. Adapting the already proved methods of other subfields of computer science education
2. Introducing the algorithmic concept to text editing.
3. Like in programming, being able to think in algorithms not necessarily enough, practice is also needed in a real environment.
4. Building bridges between the various subjects of informatics, especially those which require text editing knowledge: presentations, web pages, spreadsheets, etc.
5. Building bridges between the various sciences: languages, typography, marketing, etc. The non-computer-based subjects should be left to other professions. Teachers of informatics should “only” play the role of a mediator by adapting the knowledge of other subjects to the text editing process.
We can conclude that word processing seems a lot more complicated than programming, because both require a well-established basic knowledge, but to do word processing correctly a huge self-control must also be developed. Unlike in programming, where the code is evaluated by a compiler or an interpreted, there is no such control in word processing. The user has to decide on the correctness of an edited text.

Keywords:

Word processing, properly formatted text.