2010 Vocabulary Learning Strategies and ELT Materials

Vocabulary Learning Strategies and ELT Materials

A Study of the Extent to Which VLS Research Informs Local

Coursebooks in Iran

Ali Bastanfar (Corresponding author)

Department of English, Faculty of Humanities, Islamic Azad university-Khoy Branch

Khoy, Province of West Azarbaijan, Iran

Tel: 98-461-225-3623 E-mail: alibastanfar@https://www.wendangku.net/doc/e012407536.html,

Toktam Hashemi

Islamic Azad university-Khoy Branch

E-mail: hashemi5toktam@https://www.wendangku.net/doc/e012407536.html,

The research is sponsored by Islamic Azad University-Khoy Branch

Abstract

Lexical competence is now regarded to be at the heart of communicative competence. This is endorsed by psycholinguistic research and corpus linguistics which show more use of prefabricated chunks than rule-based constructions. The change has been embraced in ELT. But lexical needs are unique to the individuals, personally, professionally and academically. Research demonstrates that vocabulary learning strategies make learning more self-directed and transferrable to new situations but there is a need for training learners in the use of VLS. ELT coursebooks are agenda for classroom practices; hence a good place to incorporate learner training. This study analyzed local ELT materials to study to what extent insights from VLS research and learner training have informed the sampled coursebooks. The results show the new edition of Pre-University coursebook is a significant step in incorporating such insights however there is a long way before the treatment is adequate in the whole series.

Keywords: Vocabulary learning strategies (VLS), Learner training, ELT materials, Lexical needs

1. Introduction

A good knowledge of vocabulary is essential for communication. Although grammar and vocabulary are complementary, with a bit of negligence Wilkins (1972) asserts that "without grammar, very little can be conveyed, without vocabulary, nothing can be conveyed." In many instances, people deal with a particular situation by learning specific words related to that context while they have hardly any mastery of grammatical structures e.g. airport taxi drivers in EFL countries. These people have concluded that words have more communicative value considering the amount of time, attention and energy spent to learn. The common experience of teachers and learners also demonstrates that lack of a specific word cannot be compensated by circumlocution. In an example, a student remembers being caught in a situation where he had forgotten the word 'CHARGE'. The person was shopping from a hotel supermarket in an Asian country. He did not have cash on him so wanted to ask the cashier to 'charge' his room account. He fell back on different words and sentences to fill the gap but with no success. Finally, he decided to show his room card and make the context more relevant. This simple example testifies to the importance of the knowledge of vocabulary. Words are not merely slot-fillers which simply fill in the pre-assigned function slots determined by structures of language. Rather, they are building blocks of a successful communication.

All through the history of ELT, it has never been doubted that a typical language learner has to build up an efficient knowledge of vocabulary to construct sentences conveying his meanings. Nevertheless, in earlier periods of ELT, vocabulary teaching was overshadowed by a focus on grammar because it was thought that vocabulary could simply be left to take care of itself. The wave of change came along with the body of research which demonstrated the necessity of including vocabulary instruction in ELT programs. There is now general agreement that lexical competence is at the heart of communicative competence and learners must systematically build up an efficient knowledge of vocabulary (Coady and Huckin, 1997, as cited in Decarrico, 2001). Evidence from psycholinguistic research and corpus linguistics suggests that prefabricated chunks are the foundation of fluency and account for more of the choices speakers make than do novel constructions based on the application of grammatical rules (Decarrico, 2001; Ranalli, 2003).

Ranalli (2003) observes that a look at the practices in ELT suggests the field has resonated to this change and has tried to account for the new tendency by modifying its approaches and methodologies. The movement has gone so far as a controversial call for a lexical approach (Lewis, 1993; 1997). According to this view, words and their collocations, not the rules, will be the foundation for language learning (Willis, 1990). Lewis (1993) believed that language is composed of words connected by rules of language not of grammatical rules filled in by words. Thus, vocabulary was no longer a victim of discrimination in language teaching which, after decades of neglect, recognized lexis as central to any language learning process (Laufer, 1997). The change in the status of vocabulary in language learning has affected teaching and learning practices, as well as materials writing which has become more selective about what vocabulary to include (O'Dell, 1997). However it is truism that a typical instructional program for language learning is unable to provide all the lexis a learner will need (Lewis, 1993; Willis, 1990) since lexical needs are largely unique to the individuals, personally, professionally and academically (Rivers, 1983; Nation, 2001). The question is whether this is an insolvable dilemma in language teaching? A bulk of research on learning strategies continues to grow which can show us a way out. Thus, accompanied with the resurgence of interest in vocabulary, there has been recognition of the importance of equipping learners with how to acquire vocabulary on their own (Ranalli, 2003). This made the studies in the field of LLS relevant to vocabulary learning.

A subcategory of general learning strategies is called language learning strategies which in turn include vocabulary learning strategies (Nation, 2001). Language learning strategies are certain skills, techniques and actions used by the learner to facilitate the learning and recall of one or several components of proficiency (Wenden and Rubin, 1987). A subset of these strategies, called vocabulary learning strategies, is strongly linked to successful vocabulary learning. The success implies making the process of learning more effective, more self-directed, and more transferrable to new situations. In fact, instead of or in addition to giving a few fish to a person we can teach him fishing. The LLS research, and VLS research by the same token, is linked to studies which show that more successful learners, in contrast to less successful learners, employ a group of specific strategies which are related to their success. Research tradition on learning strategies dates back to the 1970s studies which were involved with identifying the characteristics of good language learners. Thus, as LLS have been defined as "the special thoughts or behaviors that individuals use to help them comprehend, learn or retain new information" (O'Malley and Chamot, 1990), VLS have been characterized as any strategy which affects the process by which words are obtained, stored, retrieved and used (Schmitt, 1997).

Although research endorses the benefits of using these strategies, there is evidence to the effect that learners need training to use them efficiently with the ultimate result of improving their vocabulary learning. Left on their own, learners are mostly inclined to use basic vocabulary learning strategies but they "may be willing to try new strategies if they are introduced to them and instructed in them" (Schmitt, 1997). Nation (2001) also asserts that since "learners differ greatly in the skill with which they use strategies, it is important to make training in strategy use a planned part of a vocabulary development program". Thus, presenting vocabulary learning strategies should be the prime concern for coursebook writers, materials developers, syllabus designers, decision-makers and finally teachers. While it may be unimaginable to expect all teachers to unexceptionally include training learners to use VLS in their activities, it is more feasible to incorporate such training in ELT coursebooks as they are agenda for classroom practices for teachers and learners alike. Having this in mind, the necessity of attention to and incorporation of vocabulary learning strategies and training to use them in ELT coursebooks becomes clearer. This concern is even more important than developing a set of principles for selecting a collection of words to be included in a specific language program or coursebook. As a logical result of such discussions, the following questions arise: what measures have been taken in ELT coursebooks to present vocabulary learning strategies and training to use them? Are these attempts realized in the books as they are? These questions boil down to a basic question: have insights from VLS research "filtered down” (Schmitt, 1997) into the ELT materials? This study aims to delve into the research on vocabulary learning strategies and extract insights which can enrich ELT coursebooks. Then an attempt is made to gauge advances in treating VLS in ELT coursebooks. For this purpose, local ELT materials are analyzed to study to what extent insights from VLS research have informed the sampled coursebooks.

2. Taxonomies of Vocabulary Learning Strategies

Empirical research based mostly on learners' self-report of their strategy use is the cornerstone of VLS studies. Among the many studies that have been carried out to determine which strategies learners use and to figure out relationships between strategy use and success in language learning, there have been attempts to develop taxonomies of vocabulary learning strategies. On the whole, the taxonomies proposed by Gu and Johnson (1996), Lawson and Hogben (1996), Schmitt (1997) and Nation (2001) are always cited in the literature on vocabulary

learning strategies. It should be mentioned that other researchers' works should not be downgraded as they have been very influential in giving strategy researchers, including those who have developed the taxonomies, increasingly clearer views of the thoughts, behaviors and tendencies of learners. The studies carried out include but are not restricted to the following: Ahmed (1989), Sanaoui (1995), Stoffer (1995), Moir (1996), Gu and Johnson (1996), Lawson and Hogben (1996), Schmitt (1997), Porte (1988), Kudo (1999), Kojic-Sabo and Lightbown (1999), Lin (2001), Catalan (2003), Fan (2003). Thus, most of these studies resulted in the accumulation of an organized body of knowledge about VLS and allowed a few others to extract a taxonomy based on the existing research and their own empirical study. Nation's (2001) taxonomy is, however, an exception in that it does not derive from empirical research but is purely theoretical. The four taxonomies together with Sanaoui's (1995) general classification of the structured and unstructured approach to vocabulary learning and Nielsen's (2003) contextualized/decontextualized distinction will be dealt with in the following. Sanaoui (1995) identified two distinctive approaches to vocabulary learning of adult learners: those who structured their vocabulary learning and those who did not. Structured learners engaged in independent study, did self-initiated learning activities and recorded the lexical items they were learning, reviewed such records, and practiced using vocabulary items outside the classroom. Structured Learners were shown to be more successful than those who followed an unstructured approach.

Gu and Johnson (1996) identified six types of strategy - guessing, dictionary, note-taking, rehearsal, encoding, and activation - together with two other factors: beliefs about vocabulary learning and metacognitive regulation. Metacognitive regulation consists of strategies for selective attention and self-initiation. The former allow learners to know which words are important for them to learn and are essential for adequate comprehension of a passage. The latter make the meaning of vocabulary items clear through the use of a variety of means. Guessing strategies, skillful use of dictionaries and note-taking strategies are labeled as cognitive strategies. Rehearsal and encoding categories are classified under memory strategies. Word lists and repetition are instances of rehearsal strategies. Encoding strategies include strategies such as association, imagery, visual, auditory, semantic, and contextual encoding as well as word-structure. Activation strategies include those strategies through which learners actually use new words in different contexts.

Lawson and Hogben (1996), in a classification which is more a reflection of the strategies actually exploited during one particular word-learning task than an overview of all vocabulary learning strategies at learners' disposal, distinguish four categories of strategies: repetition, word feature analysis, simple elaboration and complex elaboration. Repetition includes reading of related words, simple rehearsal, writing of word and meaning, cumulative rehearsal and testing. Word feature analysis contains spelling, word classification and suffix. Simple elaboration consists of sentence translation, simple use of context, appearance similarity, sound link and complex elaboration includes complex use of context, paraphrase and mnemonic. They found that learners who had used a greater range of learning strategies recalled more of the learned words later. However, all the learners alike tended to favor simple repetition strategies over more complex elaboration strategies, despite the fact that the latter yielded higher recall. Hence the researchers concluded that there is a need to present strategies more directly during language teaching since students are not aware of the advantages of these procedures.

Schmitt (1997) devised his taxonomy, self-reportedly, in response to the lack of a comprehensive list of vocabulary learning strategies. He organized 58 strategies under five types: determination, social, memory, cognitive and metacognitive. His categories were inspired by Oxford's (1990) inventory of general language learning strategies but included some modifications. Thus, social, memory, cognitive and metacognitive strategies have been adopted from Oxford (1990). The modification was that he made a distinction between discovery and consolidation strategies. The former helps learners to find out the meaning of new words when encountered for the first time, and the latter allows them to memorize, practice and retain the word after it has been introduced. The categories adopted from Oxford are included within consolidation strategies while discovery strategies contain determination and social strategies. Determination strategies are used when "learners are faced with discovering a new word's meaning without recourse to another person's experience" (Schmitt, 1997). For example, learners try to discover the meaning of a new word by guessing it with the help of context, structural knowledge of language, and reference materials. It is also possible to discover the meaning of a word through asking someone for help. Schmitt includes social strategies in both categories since they can be used for both purposes.

Nation's (2001) theoretically-oriented taxonomy makes a basic distinction between the aspects of vocabulary knowledge from the sources of vocabulary knowledge and from learning processes; hence, three general classes: planning, sources, and processes, each covering a subset of key strategies. 'Planning' involves choosing where

and how to focus attention on the vocabulary item and contains strategies for choosing words, choosing aspects of word knowledge and choosing strategies as well as planning repetition. 'Sources' involves finding information about the word from the word form itself, from the context, from a reference source like dictionaries or glossaries and from analogies and connections with other languages. Process means establishing word knowledge through noticing, retrieving and generating strategies.

In his review of research into vocabulary learning, Nielsen (2003) makes a distinction between contextualized and decontextualized vocabulary learning strategies which is inspired by the debate concerning learning words in context versus learning words out of context. Within the decontextualized vocabulary memorization strategies, he distinguishes between mnemonic and non-mnemonic elaboration techniques. Mnemonic techniques involve the use of both visual and verbal mental imagery to relate a word to be memorized with some previously learned knowledge; an example is the keyword method. Non-mnemonic elaboration techniques, such as semantic mapping and ordering, encourage learners to process target words in terms of their semantic properties. There are two versions of the keyword method, one based on the construction of visual images and the other based on the construction of sentences. 'Semantic mapping' involves brainstorming associations that a word has and diagrammatically displaying the results. 'Ordering' is a technique that asks learners to organize scrambled lists of words, forcing them to distinguish differences in meaning during the arrangement process. His contextualized VLS category includes learning words through reading and sentence writing method (Sentence Generate Method) which involves having learners construct a sentence containing the target word to be memorized.

3. Training in Vocabulary Learning Strategies

Learner training helps learners discover the learning strategies that suit them best (Ellis and Sinclair, 1989). It creates awareness of the choices available in language learning and facilitates learning and practice of strategies that encourage independence and enable self-directed learning (Oxford, 1990). Wenden (1991) considers learning strategies, metacognitive knowledge, and attitude as components of learner training. According to Chamot (1999) "learning strategies instruction can help students of English become better learners" since it assists them in becoming independent, confident learners. He continues to say that as learners begin to understand the relationship between their use of strategies and success in learning English they become more motivated. Lotfi (2007) reports Cohen and Aphek (1981) who taught students of Hebrew to remember vocabulary items by making paired mnemonic associations and found that those who made associations remembered vocabulary more effectively than those who did not. Stoffer (1995, as cited in Renalli, 2003) claims that strategy instruction is the single best predictor of use of VLS. Nation (2001) believes that since "learners differ greatly in the skill with which they use strategies, it is important to make training in strategy use a planned part of a vocabulary development program". He basically includes the element of training in the definition of a strategy when he says, to deserve attention from a teacher, a strategy must involve choice, be complex, require knowledge and benefit from training, and increase the efficiency of vocabulary learning and vocabulary use. Lawson and Hogben (1996) concluded that there is a need to present strategies more directly during language teaching since students are not aware of their advantages. However, O'Malley and Chamot (1990) make us aware of the fact that strategy training is a complex process which requires committed and informed teachers who spend an extended period of time working with learners.

Chamot (2004) asserts that strategy instruction should be explicit, that is, the teacher should inform students about the value and applications of the strategies either within regular language course or as a separate course. O'Malley and Chamot (1990) show that an explicit (vs. embedded or implicit) focus on metacognitive knowledge about learning processes is necessary to make them transferable to new learning tasks. Chamot (2004) believes that culture and context influence LLS by determining the demands of the task and the kind of learning strategies deemed effective. Thus, language teachers should help their students use the learning strategies that will best accomplish their instructional goals. This involves taking into account students' level of L2 (English) proficiency (which can affect their ability to understand metacognitive explanations for how and why to use strategies), learning context, learners' cultural backgrounds, previous educational experiences, learning styles, etc (Renalli, 2003). Training must also include opportunities for learners to monitor and evaluate their use of learning strategies (Sinclair and Ellis 1992). This necessitates pairing metacognitive and cognitive (direct) strategies to give students "direction or opportunity to plan their learning, monitor their progress, or review their accomplishments and future learning directions" (O'Malley and Chamot, 1990). On the basis of the findings of research the following results can be extracted:

Vocabulary learning strategies have a wide variety and a typical learner is aware of and uses only a small fraction of them which may not be the most efficient ones.

Learners need instruction to widen their range of strategies and use them. This training has the role of changing knowledge into skill. It is the independent use of these strategies which is the ultimate goal of strategy instruction.

In earlier stages of language learning, decontextualized strategies are necessary and a greater proportion of them is recommended. With progress, the proportion is balanced.

Since students in earlier stages lack metalinguistic information for explicit VLS training, it is better to rely more on presenting VLS implicitly, that is, embedded within other activities and introduce explicit VLS gradually.

Metacognitive strategies should be included in instruction along with the direct strategies.

Learners may show indifference or resistance to strategy training because of their previous learning experience, educational or cultural background, learning style or other factors. So the goals of strategy instruction should be explained and their motivation in terms of positive affective factors should be stimulated and involved.

Explicit instruction is more effective. So, use of L1, that is, the learner's mother tongue or the language which the learner uses for his general academic needs, is better unless learners are advanced.

4. The Role of Materials

Tomlinson (2001) reports that coursebook is the most convenient form of presenting materials; it produces consistency and continuation, gives learners a sense of system, cohesion and progress, and helps teachers prepare and learners revise. Littlejohn (1992) believes that coursebooks today are more influential than ever before in terms of the extent to which they structure what happens in language classrooms. Most of the times, changes in policy are implemented through coursebook revision or change since coursebooks are agenda for classroom teaching and learning practices. While it is possible alternatively to fall back on teacher training and professional development programs to implement a procedure in language teaching, it is more practicable to count on coursebooks. This is the case with presenting VLS and training learners to use them in their activities and is the rationale behind the present study as will be explained presently.

5. The Study

This study attempts to apply criteria extracted from VLS research on local ELT materials to evaluate their treatment of VLS. The purpose is to analyze the specified coursebooks based on the insights gained from VLS research to gauge the extent to which the sampled coursebooks have incorporated VLS and training in using them. Thus, this study can be considered as a micro-evaluation in that a particular teaching task is selected and is subjected to a detailed empirical evaluation (Ellis, 1997). In a similar undertaking, Schmitt (1997) concluded that insights from research and scholarly discussion have been “filtering down” into recently published vocabulary-learning materials. However, a focused and comparative work can be more insightful.

The method of analysis and evaluation was that a set of criteria were derived from the research history on both vocabulary learning strategies and learner training in VLS. Lake's (1997) evaluative framework of learner training was adopted with major modifications according to the goals of the study. The criteria are presented in Table 1. The degree of correspondence of each coursebook with the criteria were recorded in terms of a subjective rating scheme with four points (0-3) to provide the reader with a mental framework and to facilitate comparisons among the coursebooks in this study. The zero (0) in this scheme means that the book in question has not dealt with the specified strategies or it has dealt with them in a disorganized manner and sporadically; it also represents a lack of correspondence with the criteria. One (1) means dealing with strategies in small scale and weak correspondence. Two (2) means moderate dealing with strategies and correspondence. And three (3) means almost perfect treatment. The rating was repeated independently by the researcher’s colleague on two coursebooks chosen randomly from among the coursebooks under analysis in order to ensure inter-reliability. The coursebooks analyzed and evaluated in this study were coursebook series used to teach English in local General Education in Iran. The series include seven coursebooks. Three books belong to Guidance School level of General Education which has three levels and begins after primary school. This is where English is introduced for the first time in local General Education. All students have to study Guidance School to be qualified to enter High School. Thus, they take three English courses during the three-year period of the Guidance School. High School has three levels and takes three years. Here again students have to take one English course each year. After students finish High School, they have to continue studying for another one year to be qualified to take University Entrance Exam to enter university. This one-year period is called Pre-University. So every Iranian student takes seven English courses before he enters university. The English coursebooks used in these levels have been arranged as a series and they claim to have one ultimate goal which is the improvement of students'

English proficiency. The three Guidance School books have mostly a structural basis sporadically interspersed with some dialogues and functions which are always misused through treating them as Grammar-Translation activities. The three High School books are reading-oriented but the structural basis of the books is in evidence. However, they are a relative improvement compared to the three former ones. This being said, it is very interesting that the new edition of English coursebook of Pre-University level proves to be a quite different attempt in developing local English coursebooks. However, the efficiency of learning English in local General Education is notoriously low. One reason for this among many other reasons is the structural basis of the coursebooks. Even the overemphasis on reading skill in these coursebooks has been overshadowed by being structurally-oriented (Jahangard 2007). This being known, no study has ever tried to realize the status of vocabulary learning strategies in these books, specifically the new edition of Pre-University coursebook. This study is an attempt to gain an understanding in this regard.

6. Results and Discussion

The final scores in table 2 show the degree to which each coursebook within this series has incorporated the criteria. While the six coursebooks all through the Guidance School and High School levels show a weak attention to research base, there is a considerable gain in the case of Pre-University coursebook. This is because the new edition of the book has moved a long way in incorporating vocabulary learning strategies and the elements of learner training. Not only has the book changed the long established direction of the earlier books in the series, but also it has introduced elements which were sort of taboo in General Education coursebooks. An important difference is that earlier books did not address learners all through the book; rather they addressed the teacher by including regular recommendation notes on how to teach various parts of the book. This is quite against the aims and methods of learner training. Catering for self-directed learning and independence entails trusting in the learner as a person who can take the responsibility of his learning and providing a system of necessary notes for him/her which make for increasingly independent learning. This is embodied in the inclusion of an informative nine-page preface as well as regular notes through the new edition of the book which draw students' attention to strategies and give them practice in using the strategies. It should, however, be pointed out that even in Pre-University book the treatment of vocabulary learning strategies is not adequate when a comparison is made to the treatment of other kinds of strategies, e.g. reading strategies. This shows a general tendency in General Education English coursebooks to place more emphasis on specific components and skills of language, that is, grammar and reading. Nevertheless, inadequate treatment of VLS is a general deficiency which most coursebooks suffer from. What is noticeable in all books of this series is a widespread lack of attention to metacognitive strategies including strategies providing both for self-direction and self-assessment and monitoring. This is not a minor problem as strategies and learner training can be realized only when cognitive strategies are complemented with metacognitive ones as organizing factor. Even in the case of direct (cognitive) strategies, as the rating for 'Breadth' shows, not a wide range of vocabulary learning strategies have been presented all through the series. On the whole, the analysis shows that although the Pre-University coursebook is a significant step in absorbing the insights from research on VLS, the entire series suffer from a widespread lack of attention to VLS presentation and learner training. There is no explicit teaching of cognitive and metacognitive strategies, a problem which undermines a systematic approach to vocabulary. The range of VLS which are presented, of course implicitly, is so limited that important strategies such as resource use and note-taking are not dealt with. There is no extended and long-term plan for generalizable and personalized vocabulary construction and strategy instruction, instead single and isolated activities are used. Metacognitive strategies are neglected and there is scarce attention to learner attitude. On the whole, the Pre-University book has taken good steps in incorporating VLS but there is a long way before we can evaluate the treatment of VLS in the entire series as efficient and adequate.

7. Conclusion

The new edition of Pre-University book proved to obtain higher scores with regard to vocabulary learning strategies and learner training. This is rewarding since by improving General Education coursebooks it is possible to exert a positive influence on students' proficiency. Because of their wide range of audience, General Education coursebooks can be a suitable point of departure to launch innovations and implement improvements in ELT. One more advantage that local coursebooks have is the possibility of using L1 to present VLS explicitly and metacognitive knowledge about them. The research recommends use of L1 when students' level of proficiency is not high enough to understand metalanguage. It can also summon the element of attitude which is a very important factor in VLS training.

References

Ahmed, M. O. (1989). Vocabulary learning strategies. In P. Meara (Ed.), Beyond Words (pp. 3-14). London: CILT.

Carter, R. (2002). Vocabulary. In R. Carter, & D. Nunan (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages (pp. 42-47). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Catalan, R. M. (2003). Sex differences in L2 vocabulary learning strategies. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 54-77.

Chamot, Anna Uhl, (1999), Learning strategy instruction in the English classroom. The Language Teacher Online, 23(6). [Online] Available: https://www.wendangku.net/doc/e012407536.html,/tlt/articles/1999/06/chamot (January 7, 2009) Chamot, Anna Uhl, (2004), Issues in language learning strategy research and teaching. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, Vol. 1, No. 1. [Online] Available: https://www.wendangku.net/doc/e012407536.html,.sg (October 21, 2008) Coady, J. & Huckin, T. (Eds.). (1997). Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cohen, A.D. (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language. London: Longman.

Cohen, A.D. & Aphek, E. (1981). Easifying second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 3(2), 221-36.

Decarrico, J. S. (2001). Vocabulary learning and teaching. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language (3rd ed.). London: Thomson Learning.

Ellis, R. (1997). The empirical evaluation of language teaching materials. ELT Journal, 51(1), 36 - 42. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ellis, G. & Sinclair, B. (1989). Learning to learn English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fan, Y. (2003). Frequency of use, perceived usefulness, and actual usefulness of second language vocabulary strategies: A study of Hong Kong learners. The Modern Language Journal, 87(2), 222-241.

Gu, Y. (2002). Gender, academic major, and vocabulary learning strategies of Chinese EFL learners. RELC Journal 33(1), 35-54.

Gu, Y. & Johnson, R. K. (1996). Vocabulary learning strategies and language learning outcomes. Language Learning, 46(4), 643-679.

Harris, Vee. (2003). Adapting classroom-based strategy instruction to a distance learning context. TESL-EJ, 7(2). [Online] Available: https://www.wendangku.net/doc/e012407536.html,/wordpress/past-issues/volume7/ej26/ej26a1/ (October 21, 2008) Hunt, A. & Beglar, D. (2002). Current research and practice in teaching vocabulary. In J. C. Richards & W. Renandya. (Eds.). Methodology in language teaching. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.

Jahangard, Ali. (2007). Evaluation of EFL materials taught at Iranian public high schools. Asian EFL Journal, 9(2) [Online] Available: https://www.wendangku.net/doc/e012407536.html, (March 21, 2009)

Kojic-Sabo, I. & Lightbown, P. M. (1999). Students' approaches to vocabulary learning and their relationship to success. Modern Language Journal, 83(2), 176-192.

Kudo, Yongqi. (1999). L2 vocabulary learning strategies. Unpublished MA Thesis, University of Hawai'i. [Online] Available: https://www.wendangku.net/doc/e012407536.html,/NetWorks/NW14.pdf (March 21, 2009)

Lake, N. (1997). Survey review: learner training in EFL coursebooks. ELT Journal 51(2), 169-182.

Laufer, B. (1997). What's in a word that makes it hard or easy: some intralexical factors that affect the learning of words. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 140-155). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lawson, J. M. & Hogben, D. (1996). The vocabulary learning strategies of foreign language students. Language Learning, 46(1), 101-135.

Lessard-Clouston, M. (1997). Language learning strategies: An overview for L2 teachers. The Internet TESL Journal. [Online] Available: https://www.wendangku.net/doc/e012407536.html,/Articles/Lessard-Clouston-Strategy.html (October 21, 2008) Lewis, M. (1993). The lexical approach: the state of ELT and a way forward. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.

Lewis, M. (1997). Implementing the lexical approach. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.

Lin, L. (2001). Taiwanese children's EFL vocabulary learning strategies. Unpublished MA Thesis, Chin-Hwa University, Taipei, Taiwan.

Littlejohn, A. P. (1992). Why are English language teaching materials the way they are? Lancaster: Lancaster University.

Lotfi, Ghazal. (2007). Learning vocabulary in EFL contexts through vocabulary learning strategies.

Novitas-ROYAL, 1(2). [Online] Available: https://www.wendangku.net/doc/e012407536.html,/Ghazal.html (October 21, 2008)

Moir, J. (1996). Task awareness and learning effectiveness: a case study of ten learners' perceptions of a vocabulary learning task. LALS, Victoria University of Wellington.

Nation, P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Nielsen, B. (2003). A review of research into vocabulary learning and acquisition. [Online] Available:

http://www.kushiro-ct.ac.jp/library/kiyo/kiyo36/Brian.pdf (October 21, 2008)

O'Dell, F. (1997). Incorporating vocabulary into the Syllabus. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy(Eds.), Vocabulary: description, acquisition and pedagogy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

O'Malley, J. M. & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Oxford, R. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House.

Porte, G. (1988). 'Poor language learners and their strategies for dealing with new vocabulary'. ELT Journal,

42(3), 167-172.

Ranalli, James M. (2003). The treatment of key vocabulary learning strategies in current ELT coursebooks: repetition, resource use, recording. Unpublished MA Thesis, University of Birmingham. [Online] Available:

https://www.wendangku.net/doc/e012407536.html,/resources/essays/RanalliDiss.pdf (October 21, 2008).

Rivers, W. (1983). Communicating naturally in a second language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rubin, J. (1987). Learner strategies: theoretical assumptions, research history and typology. In A. Wenden & J.

Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies in language learning. New York: Prentice Hall.

Ruutmets, Kristel. (2005). Vocabulary learning strategies in studying English as a foreign language. Unpublished

MA Thesis, Tartu University. [Online] Available: http://www.utlib.ee/ekollekt/diss/mag/2005/b17557100/ruutmets.pdf (October 21, 2008).

Sanaoui, R. (1995). Adult learners' approaches to learning vocabulary in second languages. The Modern Language Journal, 79 (1), 15-28.

Schmitt, N. (1997). Vocabulary learning strategies. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: description, acquisition and pedagogy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Segler, T. M. (2001). Second language vocabulary acquisition and learning strategies in ICALL environments.

PhD Research Proposal. [Online] Available: https://www.wendangku.net/doc/e012407536.html,/s9808690/newprop.pdf (October

21, 2008)

Sinclair, B. & Ellis, G. (1992). Survey: learner training in EFL coursebooks. ELT Journal, 46(2), 209-244.

Stoffer, I. (1995). University foreign language students' choice of vocabulary learning strategies as related to individual difference variables. Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis, University of Alabama.

Tomlinson, B. (2001). Materials development. In R. Carter & D. Nunan (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to

teaching English to speakers of other languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wenden, A. (1991). Learner strategies for learner autonomy. Hemel Hepstead: Prentice Hall.

Wenden, A. & Rubin, J. (1987). Learner strategies in language learning. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Wilkins, D. A. (1972). Linguistics and language teaching. London: Edward Arnold.

Willis, D. (1990). The lexical syllabus. London: Collins.

Table 1. Criteria derived from VLS and learner training research adopted and adapted from Lake (1997)

Criteria Definition

Scope of Learner Training Presenting learning strategies, metacognitive knowledge and attitude altogether

Type of VLS Training Awareness-raising activities, one-off activities, or long-term training; the latter is preferred Language of VLS Presentation L1 (the learner's mother tongue or the language which the learner uses for his general academic needs),

L2 (English) or a combination of the two is used for presenting strategies and learner training; the latter

is preferred

Presentation of Metacognitive Strategies Self-direction: opportunities for individual choice of activities, the method of completing the activity, and the mode in which it is done

Self-assessment and Monitoring: to enable students to assess and evaluate their performance and progress

Method of Presentation of Metacognitive Strategies Explicit (using explanation, teacher modeling and separate work for strategy instruction) or implicit (integrating the instruction into regular work); the former is preferred

Presentation of Direct (Cognitive) Strategies Explicit Implicit Contextualized Decontextualized

Balancing The extent to which Metacognitive and Direct (cognitive) Strategies are balanced

Breadth Range and Combination of different strategies

Suitability The extent to which activities are suitable to the Academic Level of the students

Motivation Variety and Flexibility: range of approaches and activity types to suit different interests and learning

styles

Balance of Psychological and Technical Preparation

Feedback Providing explanations for tests

Table 2. The results of applying criteria on local general education coursebook series

Criteria/Values GS1 GS2 GS3 HS1 HS2 HS3 PU Scope

of

Learner

Training 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 Type

of

VLS

Training 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 Language

of

VLS

Presentation 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

Presentation of Metacognitive Strategies Self-direction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Self-assessment and Monitoring

1 2 2 2 2 2 1

Method of Presentation of Metacognitive Strategies 1 1 1 1 1 1 2

Presentation of Direct Strategies Explicit 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Implicit 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 Contextualized 0 1 2 2 2 2 3 Decontextualized 1 1 1 2 2 2 2

Balancing Metacognitive and Direct

Strategies 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Breadth 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 Suitability of Activities to Level 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 Motivation Variety

and

Flexibility 0 1 1 1 1 1 2 Balance of Psychological and Technical

Preparation

0 0 0 1 1 1 2 Feedback 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 Total 11 13 14 18 17 17 31 GS= Guidance School HS= High School PU=Pre-University

浙江省高校计算机等级考试办公软件高级应用技术

浙江省高校计算机等级考试办公软件高级应用技术 （二级）考试大纲 基本要求 1. 掌握Office各组件的运行环境和视窗元素。 2. 掌握Word高级应用技术，能够熟练掌握页面、样式、域的设置和文档修订。 3. 掌握Excel高级应用技术，能够熟练掌握工作表、函数和公式，能够进行数据分析和外部数据的导入导出。 4. 掌握PowerPoint高级应用技术，能够熟练掌握模版、配色方案、幻灯片放映、多媒体效果和演示文稿的输出。 5. 熟练掌握Office公共组件的使用。 考试范围 （一）WORD高级应用 1．WORD页面设置 正确设置纸张、版心、视图、分栏、页眉页脚、掌握节的概念并能正确使用。 2．WORD样式设置 1)掌握样式的概念，能够熟练地创建样式、修改样式的格式，使用样式。 2)掌握模板的概念，能够熟练地建立、修改、使用、删除模板。 3)正确使用脚注、尾注、题注、交叉引用、索引和目录等引用。

3．域的设置 掌握域的概念，能按要求创建域、插入域、更新域。 4．文档修订 掌握批注、修订模式，审阅。 （二）EXCEL高级应用 1. 工作表的使用 1)能够正确地分割窗口、冻结窗口，使用监视窗口。 2)深刻理解样式、模板概念，能新建、修改、应用样式，并从其他工作薄中合并样式，能创建并使用模板，并应用模板控制样式。 3)使用样式格式化工作表。 2．函数和公式的使用 1)掌握EXCEL内建函数，并能利用这些函数对文档进行统计、处理。 2)掌握公式的概念，能创建和应用数组公式。 3．数据分析 1)掌握数据列表的概念，能设计数据列表，利用自动筛选、高级筛选，以及数据库函数来筛选数据列表，能排序数据列表，创建分类汇总。 2)了解数据透视表的概念，能创建数据透视表，在数据透视表中创建计算字段或计算项目，并能组合数据透视表中的项目。 4．外部数据导入与导出 与数据库、XML和文本的导入与导出。

浙江省计算机二级办公软件高级应用技术(教学大纲)

《浙江省计算机二级办公软件高级应用技 术》课程教学大纲 课程名称:浙江省计算机二级办公软件高级应用技术 课程编码： 5506001 课程类别：通识选修课 适用专业；各专业（除计算机专业） 总学时：48 理论学时：24 实践课时：8（实验）+16（上机练习）先修课程：无 基本教材：李永平主编，信息化办公软件高级应用（第二版），科学出版社，2013年8月 参考书目: 1、吴卿，办公软件高级应用实践教程，浙江大学出版社，2010年第1版 2、吴卿，办公软件高级应用office2010，浙江大学出版社，2012年第1版 一、课程的性质、目的和任务 （一）课程的性质 《浙江省计算机二级办公软件高级应用技术》是面向各专业（除计算机专业）学生通识选修课，它是随着实际工作中计算机应用技术的要求不断提高发展而产生的，是对具有一定计算机基础的大学生开设的一门课程。 （二）课程的目的 本课程的目的旨在提升大学生的计算机实际操作能力和应用水平，为学生在实际公安工作中应用计算机打下坚实的基础。 （三）课程的任务 本课程着重介绍office办公软件word、excel和power point的高级应用和操作，讲授与计算机二级考试（办公软件高级应用技术）相关的计算机基础知识、基本概念和基本操作技能，同时兼顾计算机应用领域的前沿知识，并按照浙江省高校计算机等级考试办公软件高级应用技术（二级）考试大纲的要求，在扎实基础，熟练操作的基础上，帮助学生完成通过计算机二级等级考试（办公软件高级应用技术）任务。

二、课程的基本要求 （一）课程教学的基本要求 本课程是在具有一定计算机文化基础之上，着重进行办公软件高级应用技术的讲授和训练的课程，教学内容以浙江省高校计算机等级考试办公软件高级应用技术（二级）考试大纲为准，要求学生熟练掌握办公软件高级应用的技能，以达到通过办公软件高级应用技术（二级）考试的教学要求。 1、熟练掌握Word高级应用 1）掌握Office文档模板的建立和应用； 2）熟练掌握样式和标题样式的应用； 3）熟练掌握域的设置； 4）熟练掌握题注和交叉引用的设置； 5）熟练掌握分页和节的应用； 6）熟练掌握页码设置和页眉页脚设置； 7）熟练掌握目录和索引的自动生成方法； 8）掌握文档批注、审阅和修订。 2、熟练掌握Excel高级应用 1）熟练掌握复杂函数和公式应用； 2）熟练掌握不同工作表之间的单元格引用和计算； 3）熟练掌握多关键字排序和高级筛选； 4）熟练掌握数据透视表和数据透视图的建立方法； 5）掌握常用财务函数的应用方法。 3、熟练掌握PowerPoint高级应用 1）熟练掌握应用演示文档模板建立电子演示文稿的方法； 2）熟练掌握幻灯片版式的应用方法； 3）熟练掌握幻灯片的配色； 4）熟练掌握幻灯片动画等多媒体效果的设置方法； 5）熟练掌握幻灯片放映和演示文稿的输出方法。 4、熟练掌握二级考试基础操作与二级模拟考试训练

2011云南省一级一等、一级二等、一级三等中学名单

一、一级一等：（共13所） 玉溪市第一中学（1996） 简称：玉溪一中 玉溪市第一中学坐落在富饶美丽、滇中腹地云烟之乡、聂耳故乡的云南玉溪市，学校是一所市办的省重点中学“云南省一级一等完全中学”，是国家教育部确认的“全国现代教育技术实验学校”。1986年被国家教委命名为"全国教育系统先进集体"，1988年被命名为"全国德育先进校"，自1984年以来连续16年保持“云南省文明单位”光荣称号，1999年9月，被中央精神文明建设指导委员会命名为“全国精神文明建设先进单位”。 云南省玉溪第一中学座落在美丽的玉溪州大河畔，学校始建于1925年，是云南省重点中学，是云南省1996年首批认定的两所一级一等完全中学之一，是一所历史悠久、人才辈出的名校。 昆明市第一中学（1997） 简称：昆一中（1997） 昆明市第一中学是云南省一级一等高级中学。学校创建于1905年，是云南兴办新学成立最早的一所中学。前身为云南省会中学堂，1908年与师范传习所合并，设立云南府中学堂。1911年与高等学堂（前身为方言学堂）及其附设实科中学合并，称省会中学校。1912年称云南省立第一中学校。1932年合并省立五中（前身为私立承德中学），更名为云南省立昆华中学，1950 年与龙渊中学、昆师附中及南箐中学并校，改名为云南省昆明第一中学，1984 年定名为昆明市第一中学。 昆明市第三中学（1997） 简称：昆三中(1997) 个旧市第一中学（1999） 简称：个旧一中 云南省个旧市第一中学创办于1938年10月3日，1957年、1963年、1980年三次被云南省教育厅确定为省重点中学。1999年晋升为云南省一级一等完全中学，成为云南省首批办学水平最高的一级一等高完中之一。学校现有116名教职工，其中，特级教师7人，

浙江省办公软件高级应用office单选题

---------------------word部分------------------------- 1.以下哪一个选项卡不是Word2010的标准选项卡（B）。 (A)审阅(B)图表工具(C)开发工具(D)加载项 2.Word2010插入题注时如需加入章节号，如“图1-1"，无需进行的操作是（C）。 (A)将章节起始位置套用内置标题样式 (B)将章节起始位置应用多级符号 (C)习务章节起始位置应用自动编号 (D)自定义题注样式为“图” 3.在同一个页面中.如果希望页面上半部分为一栏，后半部分分为两栏，应插入的分隔符号为（C）。 (A)分页符 (B)分栏符 (C)分节符(连续) (D)分节符(奇数页) 4.通过设置内置标题样式，以下哪个功能无法实现（C）。 (A)自动生成题注编号 (B)自动生成脚注编号 (C)自动显示文档结构 (D)自动生成目录 5.以下( D )是可被包含在文档模板中的元素。 ①样式②快捷键③页面设置信息④宏方案项⑤工具栏 (A)①②④⑤ (B)①②③④ (C)①③④⑤ (D)①②③④⑤ 6.关于Word2010的页码设置，以下表述错误的是（B）。 (A)页码可以被插入到页眉页脚区域 (B)页码可以被插入到左右页边距 (C)如果希望首页和其他页页码不同必须设置“首页不同” (D)可以自定义页码并添加到构建基块管理器中的页码库中 7.在Word中建立索引，是通过标记索引项，在被索引内容旁插入域代码形式的索引项，随后再根据索引项所在的页码生成索引。与索引类似，以下哪种目录，不是通过标记引用项所在位置生成目录（B）。 (A)目录 (B)书目 (C)图表目录 (D)引文目录

浙江省计算机二级办公软件高级应用技术考试真题题库

省计算机二级办公软件高级应用技术考试真题题库 二级Word试题 题目要求 文档：Adobe简介 1、对正文进行排版，其中： （1）章名使用样式“标题1”，并居中；编号格式为：第X章，其中X为自动排序。 （2）小节名使用样式“标题2”，左对齐；编号格式为：多级符号，X.Y。 X为章数字序号，Y为节数字序号（例：1.1）。 （3）新建样式，样式名为：“样式”+号后4位；其中： a.字体：中文字体为“楷体_GB2312”，西文字体为“Times New Roman”，字号为“小四”。 b.段落：首行缩进2字符，段前0.5行，段后0.5行，行距1.5倍 c.其余格式：默认设置。 （4）对出现“1.”、“2.”…处，进行自动编号，编号格式不变；对出现“1）”、“2）”…

处，进行自动编号，编号格式不变。 （5）将（3）中的样式应用到正文中无编号的文字。 注意：不包括章名、小节名、表文字、表和图的题注。 （6）对正文中的图添加题注“图”，位于图下方，居中。 a.编号为“章序号”-“图在章中的序号”， （例如第1章中第2幅图，题注编号为1-2） b.图的说明使用图下一行的文字，格式同标号， c.图居中。 （7）对正文中出现“如下图所示”的“下图”，使用交叉引用，改为“如图X-Y所示”， 其中“X-Y”为图题注的编号。 （8）对正文中的表添加题注“表”，位于表上方，居中。 a.编号为“章序号”-“表在章中的序号”，（例如第1章中第1表，题注编号为1-1） b.表的说明使用表上一行的文字，格式同标号。 c.表居中。

（9）对正文中出现“如下表所示”的“下表”，使用交叉引用，改为“如表X-Y所示”，其中“X-Y”为表题注的编号。 （10）为正文文字（不包括标题）中首次出现“Adobe”的地方插入脚注，添加文字“Adobe系统是一家总部位于美国加州圣何赛的电脑软件公司”。 2、在正文前按序插入节，使用“引用”中的目录功能，生成如下容： （1）第1节：目录。其中： a.“目录”使用样式“标题1”，并居中； b. “目录”下为目录项。 （2）第2节：图索引。其中： a. “图索引”使用样式“标题1”，并居中； b. “图索引”下为图索引项。 （3）第3节：表索引。其中： a. “表索引”使用样式“标题1”，并居中； b. “表索引”下为表索引项。 3、对正文做分节处理，每章为单独一节。 4、添加页脚。使用域，在页脚中插入页码，居中显示。其中：

办公软件高级应用教学大纲

办公软件高级应用教学 大纲 -CAL-FENGHAI-(2020YEAR-YICAI)_JINGBIAN

《办公软件高级应用》教学大纲适用专业：全院各专业课程性质：必修 总学时数：72 其中实验学时：36 开课学期：2 大纲执笔人：大纲审核人： 一、课程的性质 本课程的主要教授对象是学院所有专业的学生，它是一门公共必修课程，该课程是让学习者在已经学习了《计算机应用基础》课程的基础下，来进一步学习Office办公软件的高级应用，了解掌握三个领域（Word、Excel、PowerPoint）的深层次知识。本课程着重于办公软件Office的应用，强调了实用性和可操作性，也强调了知识性和系统性。其任务是使学生更进一步的掌握Microsoft Office套装软件的熟练运用，提高计算机的实际操作能力。 二、教学目标 随着日常工作信息化程度的日益提高，文档、数据处理已经成为高校毕业生应当具备的一项基本技能。开设《办公软件高级应用》课程，主要目的是让学生能够与时俱进地在实际办公环境中开展具体应用，更贴近岗位实际应用操作，让学生掌握更加专业、娴熟的办公技能和具备较强的信息处理能力，增强学生职场竞争力，为培养适应我省经济社会发展需要的高素质应用技能型人才奠定基础。使学生掌握Office办公软件的高级操作和应用，在已学的计算机知识下，能更进一步的去提高自身的计算机操作能力和办公软件综合运用能力。 三、课程教学学时分配与结业标准

四、课程教学内容 第一章计算机基础知识（4学时） 1、课程内容 ⑴计算机的发展简史。 ⑵计算机的特点及应用。 ⑶计算机系统的组成。 ⑷微型计算机及操作系统。 ⑸计算机的基本工作原理。 ⑹计算机内部表示信息的方法。 ⑺多媒体技术。 ⑻信息安全及计算机病毒。 ⑼程序设计与程序设计语言。 2、重点、难点 ⑴教学重点：微机系统构成 ⑵教学难点：数制和信息编码 3、基本要求 ⑴了解计算机的发展史、硬件配置、外部设备的使用方法及软件系统的基本概念。 ⑵理解计算机中数制和编码的特点、二进制、八进制、十六进制的进位、位权的概念 ⑶理解和掌握微型计算机的系统构成。 (4) 掌握二进制、八进制、十六进制间的转换规则及方法。 第二章 Word 2010高级应用（20学时） 1、课程内容 （1）认识 Word 2010 (2) 导航窗口 （3）长文档编辑 （4）域 （5）宏 （6）邮件合并

办公软件高级应用教案

《Office高级应用教案》 时间：2011-2012学年度 第二学期 班级：2010级计算机动漫 课时：2节/周 教师：方春华

Office高级应用教案 目录 第一讲中文Office基础?Word基本操作 第二讲Word基本格式编排 第三讲Word文档页面设置与打印 第四讲复杂表格的创建与编辑 第五讲图文混排 第六讲文档高级排版技术 第七讲处理长文档 第八讲工作表的美化和工作簿的管理第九讲公式与函数的使用 第十讲数据处理 第十一讲数据透视表和图表 第十二讲运用假设、统计分析数据 第十三讲综合设计PowerPoint幻灯片 第十四讲Office文档的打印 第十五讲综合实例讲解

第一讲中文Office基础?Word基本操作教学目的和要求： –掌握Office的安装方法； –掌握Office根据模板或向导的方法创建文档； –掌握Office的撤销、恢复和重复的操作； –能够利用Office的帮助获得系统的有关帮助内容； –掌握Word文档文本输入的方法； –能够控制Word文档的显示； –了解Word文档的多种视图； –掌握Word文档区域的选择、复制、删除和移动； –掌握Word文档的查找与替换的高级功能； –掌握Word文档的保护设置。 教学重点和难点： –根据Office模板向导创建文档； –利用Office的帮助获得系统的有关帮助内容； –Word文档的查找与替换的高级功能； –Word文档的保护设置。 教学方法及手段： –实例教学，讲授与演示结合。 教学内容： Office的安装 –在计算机中要使用Office，首先必须安装Office，其操作步骤如下：?将Office的安装光盘放入光驱，安装程序会自动运行，在打开的“用户信息”对话框中的相应位置输入个人信息、公司名称和产品序号。单击“下一步”按钮，打开“许可和支持 信息”对话框。 ?在“许可和支持信息”对话框，单击“我接受”按钮，打开“安装准备就绪”对话框。 ?在“安装准备就绪”对话框中选择安装方式。如果要使用Office的高级功能，如数学公式等，用“自动安装”的方法这些组件是没有安装的，所以最好使用“自定义安装”的方法， 将相应的组件安装进去。 创建新文档的方法 –利用Word的日历向导的方法创建年历 –利用PowerPoint模板向导制作卡片 查看和设置文档属性 操作的撤销、恢复和重复 –撤消与恢复操作： ?单击“常用”工具栏上“撤消”按钮旁边的箭头。Word 将显示最近执行的可撤消操作的列表，单击

浙江省计算机二级办公软件高级应用技术考试真题题库

浙江省计算机二级办公软件高级应用技术考试真题题库 二级Word试题 题目要求 文档：Adobe简介 1、对正文进行排版，其中： （1）章名使用样式“标题1”，并居中；编号格式为：第X章，其中X为自动排序。 （2）小节名使用样式“标题2”，左对齐；编号格式为：多级符号，。 X为章数字序号，Y为节数字序号（例：）。 （3）新建样式，样式名为：“样式”+准考证号后4位；其中： a. 字体：中文字体为“楷体_GB2312”，西文字体为“Times New Roman”，字号为“小四”。 < b. 段落：首行缩进2字符，段前行，段后行，行距倍 c. 其余格式：默认设置。 （4）对出现“1.”、“2.”…处，进行自动编号，编号格式不变；对出现“1）”、“2）”… 处，进行自动编号，编号格式不变。 （5）将（3）中的样式应用到正文中无编号的文字。 注意：不包括章名、小节名、表文字、表和图的题注。 （6）对正文中的图添加题注“图”，位于图下方，居中。 a. 编号为“章序号”-“图在章中的序号”， （例如第1章中第2幅图，题注编号为1-2）

b. 图的说明使用图下一行的文字，格式同标号， ： c. 图居中。 （7）对正文中出现“如下图所示”的“下图”，使用交叉引用，改为“如图X-Y所示”， 其中“X-Y”为图题注的编号。 （8）对正文中的表添加题注“表”，位于表上方，居中。 a. 编号为“章序号”-“表在章中的序号”，（例如第1章中第1张表，题注编号为1-1） b. 表的说明使用表上一行的文字，格式同标号。 c. 表居中。 （9）对正文中出现“如下表所示”的“下表”，使用交叉引用，改为“如表X-Y所示”，其中“X-Y”为表题注的编号。 （10）为正文文字（不包括标题）中首次出现“Adobe”的地方插入脚注，添加文字“Adobe系统是一家总部位于美国加州圣何赛的电脑软件公司”。 2、在正文前按序插入节，使用“引用”中的目录功能，生成如下内容： / （1）第1节：目录。其中： a.“目录”使用样式“标题1”，并居中； b. “目录”下为目录项。 （2）第2节：图索引。其中： a. “图索引”使用样式“标题1”，并居中； b. “图索引”下为图索引项。 （3）第3节：表索引。其中： a. “表索引”使用样式“标题1”，并居中；

办公软件高级应用学生实验报告

公选课：办公软件高级应用学生实验报告 学号：201002030117_____ 姓名：殷建明_________ 班级：工业设计101______ 指导教师：叶甫泉_________ 学年：2012–2013–18__ 2012年12月18日

浙江农林大学实习报告 实验项目名称：办公软件高级应用实验成绩：.实验起止时间：第1周-16周实验地点：学10207. 一、实验目的和要求: 为了加强计算机实践教学，不断更新计算机基础教学内容，充分利用实验室现有设备及AOA系统应用软件，通过技能训练，使学生能掌握Office办公软件中word、excel、PPT、Visio和VBA等办公软件高级应用的操作技能，让学生能得到实训。要求学生独立完成一份实验报告，其中包括文字、表格、图片、数据透视表、组织结构图和Visio流程图等，字数在3000汉字以上，并按我校本科生毕业论文的格式（见附件）进行排版。（word毕业论文排版实验题的内容要求结合自己专业）。 二、实验仪器设备和材料: 1、HP服务器1台、联想服务器1台 2、微型计算机：联想电脑（型号：启天M478E）70台 三、实验项目内容：（只写出名称） 1.Word高级应用 1)招生宣传实践 2)新生入学导航手册 3)技术转让合同素材 4)邀请函 5)毕业论文 2.Excel高级应用 1)超市休闲食品销售 2)房产中介信息 3)网络歌手大赛评分表 4)食品公司销售分析 3.PowerPoint高级应用 1)商务计划 2)论文答辩

4.VBA宏案例应用Excel需求量统计 5.文档的安全与VBA实验指导 6.安全设置及VBA应用 四、实验过程及步骤：（写出主要实验项目的实际操作过程） (一)招生宣传实践 方法步骤： （1）正文撰写 （2）插入图片： 用绘图画布插入二张图片。 （3）表格绘制与运算 按样稿做 （4）绘制图表 选择“插入”→图片→图表→输入相应数据→选择菜单栏“图表”→图表选项 （5）插入时间和日期 （6）硬回车（段落标记）和软回车（手动换行符：“↓”）： 选择“插入”→分隔符→换行符→选择分节类型→确定。多个软回车替换成硬回车：单击“编辑”→替换→高级→特殊字符→手动换行符→段落标记→输入替换后内容→确定。 1、样式和格式 （1）样式设置 1单击“格式”→样式和格式→在“显示”右侧选“有效格式”→选某样式→修改→ 2单击“格式”→样式和格式→新样式→输入名称→格式→编号→多级符号→一般选右下角这个→自定义→更改所需要的章节编号形式→确定 （2）列表样式设置（列表：1.1/1.1.1） 选中→单击“格式”→样式和格式→所有样式→找到所需要的样式→点击运用 （3）图片格式设置 （4）正文样式设置 单击“格式”→样式和格式→选择正文 2、注释的引用设置 （1）添加脚注 将光标置于“黄蓉”右侧，选择“插入”→引用→脚注和尾注→勾选“脚注”或“尾注”，并选择所需要的形式→光标置于“郭靖”右侧，选择“插入”→引用→交叉引用→引用类型：脚注→引用内容：脚注编号（带格式）→选择引用内容→确定 （2）添加题注

《办公软件高级应用》课程标准

《办公软件高级应用》课程标准 课程名称：办公软件高级应用 学分：4 计划学时：64 适用专业：计算机应用技术 1．前言 1.1课程性质 本课程是计算机应用技术专业的一门专业基础课。办公软件是建立在办公室工作基础上的计算机技术应用和推广，计算机办公软件的应用与推广将直接推动社会信息化的发展，满足广大学生的信息处理的需求，提高学生的实际应用能力。本课程旨在培养能够熟练操作办公软件，具备较强的文字处理、报表打印、图形编辑、表格处理等技术能力，能够从事软件技术文档撰写、产品(技术)汇报、产品设计演示等职业技能工作岗位的高素质技能型人才，为今后能迅速地适应社会各方面管理工作的需要奠定基础。 本门课程的后续课程是Photoshop图像处理、网站前端设计、AI图形制作、网页动画设计、网店装修设计与编辑、网页设计实训、移动Ｗeb开发实训、动态网站设计实训、淘宝美工实训，为以后的学习奠定了基础。 1.2设计思路 本课程是以学到实用技能、提高职业能力为出发点，注重提高学生综合应用和处理复杂办公事务的能力。在行业专家的指导下，以实际工作中办公需要的设计任务为引领，通过大量的案例和练习，着重于对学生实际应用能力的培养，并将职业场景引入课堂教学，让学生提前进入工作的角色中，培养学生初步具备办公自动化的基本职业能力。 在教学内容的选择上，从办公软件实际应用的角度出发，以学生为主体，主要通过微软office办公组件中Word、Excel、PowerPoint软件的学习，使用以实际需求为题材制作的各种经典案例，采用启发式教学——从提出问题，找出解决方案，到解决问题的操作步骤的任务驱动教学法组织全部教学过程。全部教学在电脑机房上

教育部办公厅关于公布2010年认定的国家级重点中等职业学校名单的通知

教育部办公厅关于公布2010年认定的 国家级重点中等职业学校名单的通知 教职成厅函[2011]25号 各省、自治区、直辖市教育厅（教委），新疆生产建设兵团教育局： 2010年12月，我部组织专家组对各地2010年申报的国家级重点中等职业学校备选学校进行了评审，北京市卫生学校等175所学校达到了国家级重点中等职业学校标准，现将名单予以公布。 希望各省级教育行政部门和学校主管部门进一步重视国家级重点中等职业学校建设工作，加强对学校的建设和管理，进一步提高中等职业教育办学水平。被认定的国家级重点中等职业学校要再接再厉，坚持以服务为宗旨、以就业为导向的办学方针，深化改革，锐意创新，将学校建设成为适应社会和经济发展需要，办学条件好，教育质量与办学效益高，社会声誉好，能够在办学和改革各个方面起骨干和示范作用的高水平的中等职业学校。 附件：教育部2010年认定的国家级重点中等职业学校名单.doc 教育部办公厅 二〇一一年五月十一日 —3 —

附件： 教育部2010年认定的国家级 重点中等职业学校名单 北京市 1 所 北京卫生学校 河北省 13所 成安县综合职业技术学校 河北省高碑店市职教中心 馆陶县职业技术教育中心 河北巨鹿职教中心 平泉县综合职业技术教育中心 秦皇岛市卫生学校 清河县职业技术教育中心 河北曲阳雕刻学校 唐山市对外经济贸易学校 唐山市开平区综合职业技术学校 邢台县职业技术教育中心 张北县职教中心 赵县综合职业技术教育中心 山西省 7所 大同市卫生学校 长治市第一职业高级中学校 大同市财会学校 山西省经贸学校 山西省潞城市职业高中 襄汾县职业技术教育中心 山西省城乡建设学校 内蒙古自治区 4所 内蒙古大兴安岭林业学校 —4 —

云南大学生态学真题剖析

云南大学生态学真题 2004年 一、名词解释 1、小环境与大环境 2、密度制约因子 3、耐受性法则 4、生态位 5、标志重补法 6、渐变群 7、稳定选择 8、优势种 二、简答题 1、北方植物引种到南方和南方引种到北方植物常不能正常生长发育，其原因是什么？ 2、为什么说“群落”是生物种群有规律的组合体？ 3、说明全球水循环模式（不要求具体数据），指出各储库的运作状况，是否平衡？为什么会有城市水资源缺乏的现象？ 4、牧食食物链（捕食食物链）与碎屑食物链有何差异？它们在生态系统中的作用如何？ 5、举生态学一个例子说明什么是反馈调节？ 三、回答问题 1、举例说明什么是“适应组合”，为什么会形成“适应组合”？ 2、请举例说明野外自然种群种间竞争的可能结果，并以种间竞争的概念和种间竞争模型来分析这些自然种群的种间竞争。 3、以进化对策假说（生活史对策假说）为基础讨论为什么人类在控制有害生物（保护重要生物—可选择回答控制有害生物或保护重要生物）方面常常遭遇极大困难？

一、概念及术语理解（英文先翻译成中文，在作解释。5分/个） 1、Fitness 2、Constructive Species 3、Metapopulation 4、Homeostasis 5、增长型年龄结构 6、-3/2自疏规律 7、生态入侵 8、营养级 二、比较分析 1、主导因子和限制因子 2、生态幅和生态位 3、种群和群丛 三、简要回答下列问题 1、什么是最小可存活种群？它在生物保护中具有什么意义？ 2、什么叫最大持续产量？如何获得最大持续产量？ 3、演替理论对当前的生态建设具有哪些指导作用？ 4、陆地植被及生态系统分布呈现怎样的基本规律？为什么？ 四、论述题 1、请您论述一个区域具有很高的生物多样性水平的可能成因。 2、为什么水热配置较好的陆地生态系统的稳定程度较高？

2010年上饶市中学高级教师通过人员名单公示

2010年上饶市中学高级教师通过人员名单公示 2010年上饶市中学高级教师通过人员名单公示 2011-01-09 14:23:08| 分类：综合要闻篇| 标签：|字号大中小订阅一、信州区：55人 （一）城市类35人 甘莉萍缪卿余卿兰小红孙燕诸葛靖 袁爱红童洁姚爱民颜素玉潘民王丽萍 林楠张婕李军旭张瑞冰黄颖张勍 汤卫东郑丽琴姚晨刘水忠陈华敏徐桃亮 苏晓芬黄书汉赵敏吕晓娟刘爱美吴星宇 刘嫣向桦付玉斌暨炜萍徐辉 （二）乡镇类20人 郑时雨朱峰凌郑本东何志富徐彬徐树财 林华英祝晓英郑晓天刘在庆徐启华娄丽琴 刘旭林余秀华徐学伟占美枝汪大威方雪飞 鲁国亮郑晓飞 二、上饶县：124人 （一）城市类57人 张禹剑刘裕旺丁德锋石志宏徐汤彪周福兰 李剑萍汪怀锋潘群英丁丽华徐奀仙杨吉福 辜仙凤吴在茂郑承文郭大东郑文章吴国建

梅泽亮余红张军年杨学武杨凤平谢雯莉 林颖夏锡兴刘军芳苏烨徐成祥史海英 方艳丽胡俊秀翁翠英胡玲玲揭元慧王建华余爱民何堂勋程黎萍王春华徐华荣刘晓宙 李时忠郭谣贵徐厚金姜红英张土金郑尚阳 邱继军郑岚何志刚林吉森王登芳徐强 徐云军徐晓艳宁德平 （二）乡镇类67人 姜清宏姜永红郑增国阮龙好占志雄程爱蓉 王义忠仇少红祝建新徐新训平武生王波 严忠泉郑道林刘跃进严宽河庄园李三平 全国元罗来谊郑承烈叶瑞洲尤少兵李克金 郑禄璞谭利锋陈明蒋卫英裴丽琳周肖辉 陈贤友黄周钏王志宏王文泉邹贤良郑晖 张赛忠张上英方绍鸿黄良火张晓英罗嗣显 吴永清方向明郭大勇姜永丰管嘉昀潘小红 山美红姜松华黄圣裕郑厚芳周元河徐林 徐昌晋黄树清蔡冬菊郭大富郑福标余芝灵 谢锦龙黄晓苓邱仕清李显龙吴剑宏姚丽飞 宋正勇 三、广丰县：147人 （一）城市类67人

全国计算机二级office办公软件高级应用总结归纳考试基础知识

精心整理计算机二级 office 高级应用考试基础知识 计算机的发展、类型及其应用领域。 1. 计算机(computer)是一种能自动、高速进行大量算术运算和逻辑运算的电子设备。其特点为：速度快、精度高、存储容量大、通用性强、具有逻辑判断和自动控制能力。

精心整理 5. 主要特点：运算速度快、精确度高、具有记忆和逻辑判断能力 6. 计算机的主要应用 科学计算：例如：气象预报、海湾战争中伊拉克导弹的监测 数据处理：例如： 理，计算机控制 计算机辅助系统：例如：用 CAI 演示化学反应 办公自动化系统中的应用：例如：Internet 发 CBE: 计算机辅助教育 CAI: 计算机辅助教学 CMI: CAD: CAT: 7. 1） 2） 3）

内部存储器按其存储信息的方式可以分为只读存储器 ROM(Read Only Memory) 、随机存储器RAM(Random Access Memory)和高速缓冲存储器 Cache RAM：随机存储器能读能写，断电后信息丢失 DRAM:动态 RAM，相当于 CACHE(高速缓冲存储器) CACHE:CPU 与内存之间速度不匹配的问题

SRAM：静态 RAM ROM：只读存储器能读不能写，断电后信息不丢失 输入设备：键盘、鼠标、扫描仪、光笔 输出设备：显示器、音箱、打印机、绘图仪 总线：数据总线、地址总线、控制总线 (1) 操作系统：是管理、控制计算机的软、硬件和数据资源的大型程序，是用户和计算机之间的接口，并提供了软件的开发和应用环境。 微机操作系统当前主流是 Microsoft 公司的 DOS （单用户单任务）操作系统和 Windows （单用户多任务）操作系统 (2) 语言处理程序 机器语言是用二进制代码编写，能够直接被机器识别的程序设计语言。高级语言编写的程序（称为“源程序”）翻译成机器语言程序（称为“目的程序”），然后计算机才能执行。这种翻译过程一般有

2011云南省一级一等、一级二等、一级三等中学名单

云南省一级一等、一级二等、一级三等中学名单 一、一级一等：（共13所） 玉溪市第一中学（1996），昆明市第一中学（1997），昆明市第三中学（1997），个旧市第一中学（1999），曲靖第一中学（2003），云师大附属中学（2004），建水县第一中学（2006），大理州下关一中（2006），楚雄州第一中学（2007），昆明市第十中学（2009），保山市第一中学（2009），大理（州）一中（2011），昭通市第一中学（2011） 二、一级二等完中（共13所） 昆明八中（1993），官渡五中(铁三中1933)，昆十二中（1993），昆十四中（1993），玉溪三中（1997），思茅二中（1997），丽江市一中（1998），临沧市一中（2000），文山州第一中（2005），宣威一中（2006），宣威五中（2006），大理洲民族中学（2007），蒙自高级中学（2010），云天化中学(2010) 三、一级三等完中（共64所） 云南民中昆明实验官一中官二中官六中(铁一中) 北师大昆明附中安宁中学安宁一中石林一中东川高中曲靖二中曲靖民中麒麟一中宣威三中(云峰子弟学校)宣威六中宣威七中会泽一中师宗二中 楚雄紫溪(楚雄二中)楚雄东兴楚雄民中大姚一中 玉溪民中玉溪师院附中峨山一中澄江一中江川一中通海一中易门一中 个旧二中个旧三中(三中、四中合并)开远一中开远四中(开远铁中)石屏一中弥勒一中泸西一中 文山县一中砚山一中丘北一中广南一中富宁一中马关一中 思茅一中普洱中学镇沅一中景东一中 景洪四中允景洪中学 鹤庆一中鹤庆三中祥云一中 昌宁一中龙陵一中腾冲一中 德宏民中瑞丽一中 古城一中玉龙一中永胜一中宁蒗一中 怒江民中 迪庆民中香格里拉一中 凤庆一中

《办公软件高级应用》课程教学大纲

《办公软件高级应用》课程教学大纲 一、课程名称 二、课程性质 （一）修读对象 国际交流学院的应用韩语专业，基础教育学院的小学教育专业，蒙古学学院的蒙古语言文学、蒙汉双语专业，民族艺术学院的舞蹈学、音乐表演、民族民间音乐表演、产品设计、服装与服饰设计、绘画、美术学专业，体育学院的社会体育、体育教育、运动训练专业，网络技术学院的动漫创意、游戏设计专业，音乐学院的音乐表演、舞蹈学、作曲与作曲技术理论、音乐学专业。使用汉语进行授课。 （二）课程特点 《办公软件高级应用》是全校学生的一门公共必修课程，学分为2学分，其先修课程为《大学计算机基础I》。《办公软件高级应用》主要内容为office办公软件的高级功能应用技巧，具有较强的实践性，需要学生自己动手，强化练习。通过学习本课程可以帮助学生掌握办公自动化的基本概念以及办公集成软件的高级应用技术，进而理解计算思维在本专

业领域的典型应用，为后续专业课程提供必要的基础；同时针对我校报考全国计算机等级考试二级《MS Office 高级应用》的学生较多但过关率较低的的情况，本门课程教学内容与全国计算机等级考试二级《MS Office 高级应用》考试内容紧密结合，可以帮助学生掌握考试内容，提高学生全国计算机等级考试通过率。 《办公软件高级应用》课程的主要内容为office办公软件的高级功能应用技巧，与《大学计算机基础I》课程内容接轨，围绕全国计算机等级考试二级《MS Office 高级应用》考试大纲设置内容，分为6个模块，第1模块主要介绍计算机基础知识，第2个模块主要介绍word高级应用，第3个模块主要介绍PowerPoint高级应用，第4个模块主要介绍EXCEL 高级应用，第5个模块主要介绍VBA编程基础，第6个模块主要围绕前五个模块进行综合练习。 （三）与其它课程关系 1先修课程 该课程的先修课程是大学计算机基础（一）。 2后续课程 该课程的后续课程为专业相关的计算机应用课程。

办公软件高级应用技术之Word试题素材(Microsoft Excel)

题目要求： 1、对正文进行排版，其中： （1）章名使用样式“标题1”，并居中；编号格式为：第X章，其中X为自动排序。（2）小节名使用样式“标题2”，左对齐；编号格式为：多级符号，X.Y。X为章数字序号，Y为节数字序号（例：1.1）。 （3）新建样式，样式名为：“样式”+准考证号后4位；其中： a.字体：中文字体为“楷体_GB2312”，西文字体为“Times New Roman”，字号为 “小四”。 b.段落：首行缩进2字符，段前0.5行，段后0.5行，行距1.5倍 c.其余格式：默认设置。 （4）对出现“1.”、“2.”…处，进行自动编号，编号格式不变；对出现“1）”、“2）”… 处，进行自动编号，编号格式不变。 （5）将（3）中的样式应用到正文中无编号的文字。注意：不包括章名、小节名、表文字、表和图的题注。 （6）对正文中的图添加题注“图”，位于图下方，居中。 a.编号为“章序号”-“图在章中的序号”，（例如第1章中第2幅图，题注编号为1-2） b.图的说明使用图下一行的文字，格式同标号， c.图居中。 （7）对正文中出现“如下图所示”的“下图”，使用交叉引用，改为“如图X-Y所示”，其中“X-Y”为图题注的编号。 （8）对正文中的表添加题注“表”，位于表上方，居中。 a.编号为“章序号”-“表在章中的序号”，（例如第1章中第1张表，题注编号为1-1） b.表的说明使用表上一行的文字，格式同标号。 c.表居中。 （9）对正文中出现“如下表所示”的“下表”，使用交叉引用，改为“如表X-Y所示”，其中“X-Y”为表题注的编号。 （10）为正文文字（不包括标题）中首次出现“Excel”的地方插入脚注，添加文字：“Excel 是微软Office的组件之一”。 2、在正文前按序插入节，使用“引用”中的目录功能，生成如下内容： （1）第1节：目录。其中： a.“目录”使用样式“标题1”，并居中； b. “目录”下为目录项。 （2）第2节：图索引。其中： a. “图索引”使用样式“标题1”，并居中； b. “图索引”下为图索引项。 （3）第3节：表索引。其中： a. “表索引”使用样式“标题1”，并居中； b. “表索引”下为表索引项。 3、对正文做分节处理，每章为单独一节。 4、添加页脚。使用域，在页脚中插入页码，居中显示。其中： （1）正文前的节，页码采用“i,ii,iii,……”格式，页码连续； （2）正文中的节，页码采用“1,2,3，…”格式，页码连续，并且每节总是从奇数页开始；（3）更新目录、图索引和表索引。 5、添加正文的页眉。使用域，按以下要求添加内容，居中显示。其中： （1）对于奇数页，页眉中的文字为“章序号”+“章名”； （2）对于偶数页，页眉中的文字为“节序号”+“节名”。

云南大学生命科学学院《普通生态学》期末考试题

云南大学生命科学学院期末考试 《普通生态学》试卷(GC001)参考答案及评分标准 一、解释下例术语（本题5小题，每题3分，共15分） ●参考答案： 1、Ecological Amplitude：生态幅，每一种生物对每一种生态因子都有耐受一个范围，其范围就称为生态辐。 2、Dominant Species：优势种，指群落中对群落的结构和群落环境的形成有明显控制作用的物种。 3、Niche：生态位，指生物在群落或生态系统中的地位和角色，是物种所有生态特征的总和。 4、Biodiversity：生物多样性。生物多样性是指生命有机体及其赖以生存的生态综合体的多样性和变异性。生物多样性可以从三个层次上描述，即遗传多样性、物种多样性、生态系统与景观多样性。 5、Biosphere：生物圈；地球上的全部生物和一切适合生物栖息的场所，包括岩石圈的上层、全部水圈和大气圈的下层。 ●评分标准： （1）英文需翻译成规范的中文名词，不能正确给出的扣1分； （2）要求给出概念的内涵和外延，只简单给出概念本义而未能扩展的扣1分。 二、比较分析以下各组术语（本题3小题，每题5分，共10分） ●参考答案 1、趋同适应与趋异适应 趋同适应：不同物种在相似的大环境条件下，可能在生理、行为和形态等方面会表现出相似性。这样导致了不同物种相同的生活型。 趋异适效应：指在不同的环境条件下，同一个物种面对不同的生态压力和选择压力，在生理、行为和形态等方面会有不同的调节，这导致了生态型。 趋同适应与趋异适应都是物种为适应环境条件的而表现出的特性。 2、层片与层次 层片：每一层片均由相同生活型和相似生态要求的不同植物所构成的机能群落。 层片作为群落的结构单元，是在群落产生和发展过程中逐步形成的。层片具有如下特征： ⑴属于同一层片的植物是同一个生活型类别。 ⑵每一个层片在群落中都具有一定的小环境，不同层片的小环境相互作用的结果构成了群落环境。

办公软件高级应用技术(二级)考试大纲

办公软件高级应用技术（二级）考试大纲 基本要求 1．掌握Office各组件的运行环境和视窗元素。 2．掌握Word高级应用技术，能够熟练掌握页面、样式、域的设置和文档修订。 3．掌握Excel高级应用技术，能够熟练掌握工作表、函数和公式，能够进行数据分析和外部数据的导入导出。 4．掌握PowerPoint高级应用技术，能够熟练掌握模版、配色方案、幻灯片放映、多媒体效果和演示文稿的输出。 5．熟练掌握Office公共组件的使用。 考试范围 一、WORD高级应用 1．WORD页面设置 正确设置纸张、版心、视图、分栏、页眉页脚、掌握节的概念并能正确使用。 2．WORD样式设置 1）掌握样式的概念，能够熟练地创建样式、修改样式的格式，使用样式。 2）掌握模板的概念，能够熟练地建立、修改、使用、删除模板。 3）正确使用脚注、尾注、题注、交叉引用、索引和目录等引用。 3．域的设置 掌握域的概念，能按要求创建域、插入域、更新域。 4．文档修订 掌握批注、修订模式，审阅。 二、EXCEL高级应用 1．工作表的使用 1）能够正确地分割窗口、冻结窗口，使用监视窗口。 2）深刻理解样式、模板概念，能新建、修改、应用样式，并从其他工作薄中合并样式，能创建并使用模板，并应用模板控制样式。 3）使用样式格式化工作表 2．函数和公式的使用 1）掌握EXCEL内建函数，并能利用这些函数对文档进行统计、处理。 2）掌握公式的概念，能创建和应用数组公式。 3．数据分析 1）掌握数据列表的概念，能设计数据列表，利用自动筛选、高级筛选，以及数据库函数来筛选数据列表，能排序数据列表，创建分类汇总。 2）了解数据透视表的概念，能创建数据透视表，在数据透视表中创建计算字段或计算项目，

计算机二级办公软件高级应用技术真题

第1题 1、对正文进行排版，其中： (1)章名使用样式“标题1”，并居中；编号格式为：第X章，其中X为自动排序。操作步骤： a. 选择第一章标题（整行）；

b. 在样式工具栏中选择“标题1”，并将第一行设置为居中； c. 保持选中状态，执行菜单“格式”—“项目符号和编号”，打开项目符号和编号 的对话框，按下图选择多级符号项，再单击“自定义”按钮，打开自定义多级符号列表，按图设置为1级目录设置为“第1章”，单击“确定”按钮； d. 将第一行选中，双击格式刷，将其他三章用格式刷完成，并删除多余的“第二章、 第三章、第四章”。 (2)小节名使用样式“标题2”，左对齐；编号格式为：多级符号，X.Y。 X为章数字序号，Y为节数字序号（例：1.1）。 操作步骤： a. 选择第一章下第一小节标题（整行）； b. 在样式工具栏中选择“标题2”，并将第一行设置为左对齐； c. 保持选中状态，执行菜单“格式”—“项目符号和编号”，打开项目符号和编号 的对话框，按下图选择多级符号项，再单击“自定义”按钮，打开自定义多级符号列表，按图设置为2级目录设置为“1.1”，单击“确定”按钮； d. 用格式刷完成其他的二级目录，并删除多余的“节目录，如1.2、1.3………”。 (3)新建样式，样式名为：“样式”+准考证号后4位；其中： a.字体：中文字体为“楷体_GB2312”，西文字体为“Times New Roman”，字号为“小四”； b.段落：首行缩进2字符，段前0.5行，段后0.5行，行距1.5倍；

c.其余格式：默认设置。 操作步骤： a. 打开“格式”菜单——单击“样式和格式”打开右侧边栏——“新样式”； b. 在“新建样式”对话框中，输入名称“样式XXXX”（XXXX为准号证号后4位）； c. 打开对话框左下方“格式”下拉框中的“字体”，根据题目要求设置字体格式； (4)对出现“1.”、“2.”…处，进行自动编号，编号格式不变；对出现“1）”、“2）”… 处，进行自动编号，编号格式不变。 操作步骤： a. 将光标定位在正文第一个“1.”处，执行菜单“格式”—“项目符号和编号”，打 开项目符号和编号的对话框，按下图选择编号，单击“确定”按钮；其它连续编号用格式刷完成即可。 b. 注意系统所编的顺序号是连续的，因此，在新的编号顺序处，需要在编号位置单 击右键，选择“重新开始编号”； 5)将(3)中的样式应用到正文中无编号的文字。 注意：不包括章名、小节名、表文字、表和图的题注。 操作步骤：