{"references": ["M. Ben-Ari, \"Bricolage Forever! PPIG 1999\". 11th Annual Workshop.\n5\u20137 January 1999. Computer-Based Learning Unit, University of Leeds,\nUK. Retrieved April 12, 2014 from http://www.ppig.org/papers/11thbenari.\npdf.", "P. Bir\u00f3, and M. Csernoch, \"Deep and surface structural metacognitive\nabilities of the first year students of Informatics.\" 4th IEEE International\nConference on Cognitive Info-communications, Proceedings, Budapest,\n2013, pp. 521\u2013526.", "P. Bir\u00f3, M. Csernoch, K. Abari, and J. M\u00e1th, \"First year students'\nalgorithmic skills in tertiary Computer Science education.\" KICSS 2014.\nSpringer Series: Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing\n(AISC), 2014, ISSN 2194-5357. Accepted.", "P. Bir\u00f3, M. Csernoch, J. M\u00e1th, and K. Abari, \"Measuring the level of\nalgorithmic skills at the end of secondary education in Hungary.\"\nProcedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences (2015), IETC 2014.\nAccepted. www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia.", "S. Booth, \"Learning to program: A phenomenographic perspective.\"\nGothenburg, Sweden: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis, 1992.", "J. M. Case, and R. F. Gunstone, \"Metacognitive development as a shift\nin approach to learning: an in-depth study.\" Studies in Higher Education,\n27(4), 2002, pp. 459\u2013470.", "Computer Science Curricula, \"The Joint Task Force on Computing\nCurricula Association for Computing Machinery\" (ACM) IEEE\nComputer Society. 2013, http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2534860. Retrieved\nApril 18, 2014.", "M. Csernoch, and P. Bir\u00f3, \"Digital Competency and Digital Literacy is\nat Stake.\" ECER 2014, The Past, the Present and the Future of\nEducational Research. Porto, 2\u20135 September 2014. http://www.eeraecer.\nde/ecer-programmes/conference/19/contribution/31885/", "M. Csernoch, and P. Bir\u00f3, \"Spreadsheet misconceptions, spreadsheet\nerrors.\" Oktat\u00e1skutat\u00e1s hat\u00e1ron innen \u00e9s t\u00fal. HERA \u00c9vk\u00f6nyvek I., ed.\nJuh\u00e1sz Erika, Kozma Tam\u00e1s, Publisher: Belvedere Meridionale, Szeged,\n2014, pp. 370-395.\n[10] M. Csernoch, and P. Bir\u00f3, \"The power in digital literacy and algorithmic\nskill.\" International Conference on New Horizons 2014. Paris, France\n25-27 June, 2014, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 2014,\nINTE 2014. Accepted, www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia.\n[11] M. Csernoch, and Gy. Bujdos\u00f3, \"Quality text editing.\" Journal of\nComputer Science and Control Systems. 2/2, 2009, pp. 5\u201310.\n[12] M. Csernoch, \"Teaching word processing \u2013 the theory behind.\"\nTeaching Mathematics and Computer Science. 2009/1. pp. 119\u2013137.\n[13] M. Csernoch, \"Teaching word processing \u2013 the practice.\" Teaching\nMathematics and Computer Science. 8/2, 2010, pp. 247\u2013262.\n[14] M. Csernoch, \"Clearing Up Misconceptions About Teaching Text\nEditing\", Proceedings of ICERI2011 Conference, ICERI 2011, 4th\nInternational Conference of Education, Research and Innovation, 11-14\nNovember 2011, Madrid, ISBN 978-84-615-3324-4.\n[15] R. Panko, and S. Aurigemma, \"Revising the Panko-Halverson taxonomy\nof spreadsheet errors.\" Decision Support Systems 49, 2, 2010, pp. 235\u2013\n244.\n[16] S. G. Powell, K. R. Baker, and B. Lawson, \"Impact of errors in\noperational spreadsheets.\" Decision Support Systems, 47(2), 2009, pp.\n126\u2013132.\n[17] R. Lister, B. Simon, E. Thompson, J. L. Whalley, and C. Prasad, \"Not\nseeing the forest for the trees: novice programmers and the SOLO\ntaxonomy\", in Proceedings of the 11th annual SIGCSE conference on\nInnovation and technology in computer science education, New York,\nNY, USA, 2006, pp. 118\u2013122.\n[18] A. Van Deursen, and J. Van Dijk, \"CTRL ALT DELETE. Lost\nproductivity due to IT problems and inadequate computer skills in the\nworkplace.\" 2004, Enschede: Universiteit Twente. Retrieved May 18,\n2014. http://www.ecdl.ch/fileadmin/ECDL/CH/Dokumente/\nStudie_CTRL-ALT-DELETE-en.pdf.\n[19] P. Warren, \"Learning to program: spreadsheets, scripting and HCI\", in\nProceedings of the Sixth Australasian Conference on Computing\nEducation \u2013 vol. 30, Darlinghurst, Australia, 2004, pp. 327\u2013333.\n[20] J. M. Wing, \"Computational Thinking.\" Communications of the ACM,\nMarch 2006/Vol. 49, No. 3.\n[21] M. Gove, \"Michael Gove speech at the BETT Show 2012\". Published\n13 January 2012. Retrieved 15 July 2014 from https://www.gov."]}

The legends about “user-friendly” and “easy-to-use” birotical tools (computer-related office tools) have been spreading and misleading end-users. This approach has led us to the extremely high number of incorrect documents, causing serious financial losses in the creating, modifying, and retrieving processes. Our research proved that there are at least two sources of this underachievement: (1) The lack of the definition of the correctly edited, formatted documents. Consequently, end-users do not know whether their methods and results are correct or not. They are not aware of their ignorance. They are so ignorant that their ignorance does not allow them to realize their lack of knowledge. (2) The end-users’ problem solving methods. We have found that in non-traditional programming environments end-users apply, almost exclusively, surface approach metacognitive methods to carry out their computer related activities, which are proved less effective than deep approach methods. Based on these findings we have developed deep approach methods which are based on and adapted from traditional programming languages. In this study, we focus on the most popular type of birotical documents, the text based documents. We have provided the definition of the correctly edited text, and based on this definition, adapted the debugging method known in programming. According to the method, before the realization of text editing, a thorough debugging of already existing texts and the categorization of errors are carried out. With this method in advance to real text editing users learn the requirements of text based documents and also of the correctly formatted text. The method has been proved much more effective than the previously applied surface approach methods. The advantages of the method are that the real text handling requires much less human and computer sources than clicking aimlessly in the GUI (Graphical User Interface), and the data retrieval is much more effective than from error-prone documents.